[extropy-chat] three coins in a fountain, part 3: the test

[Dirk Bruere]

On 10/22/05, spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike
> ...
> >
> > Here's another interesting twist: the test answers
> > *might* be wrong. The proles could send me a
> > wrong answer, and if I don't catch it, well... too
> > bad. ... Remember this is just a game, an experiment. spike
>
>
> Another idea occurred to me. I could include a
> question that has no perfectly right answer, but
> rather one to which confidence levels must be
> assigned. For instance:
>
> Assign confidence levels to these scenarios
>
> a) OJ did it and Fuhrman planted the glove
> b) OJ did it and Fuhrman did not plant the glove
> c) OJ did not do it and Fuhrman planted the glove
> d) All other possible scenarios
>
> You can see that no one can know the right answer,
> not even OJ or Fuhrman. OJ cannot be 100% certain
> that Fuhrman was the glove planter, Fuhrman cannot
> be 100% certain that OJ was the Nicole slayer.
> The only theoretical person who could be 100%
> certain is one who both slew Mrs Simpson
> and planted the glove, and OJ is on his trail
> I can assure you.


Given that Furman took the fifth when asked if he planted the glove, I'd say
he planted the glove.
Or is it routine, when US police are asked in court whether they planted
evidence, to say "I do not wish to answer that on the grounds I may
incriminate myself"?

Dirk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20051022/72118db7/attachment.html>