You are truly bloodthirsty. :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:

Look it up on the web:

http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mathijs/brainte..._solution.html



But that's wrong.

They approach the vote backwards which means that the proposal which
should be first is actually last. That's why my proposal was to eliminate
#1 and #2.

The problem can be solved by approaching the vote in the right order:
Perhaps #3 and #4 might want a larger cut to vote in favor, but then #4
faces the prospect of his proposal getting deadlocked, which means he's
shark food.

Then #3 gets to propose the same deal as I did for #5, namely a bigger cut
to #2 to get him to go along with voting against #1.

So with all due respect to Mathijs den Burger, his solution is wrong. Why
would Pirate #2 and #3 vote for his proposal which gives them little or
nothing? By voting no & waiting, they satisfy both bloodthirstiness &
greed.

DSK