https://twitter.com/MrSantosNY/status/1784353770924613873?t=_pBQvkoBJcxY1_vKy2nzJA&s=19
Man this would be a great bit if it were a bit
https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1784240300061261928?t=-1SJ0qIERWijFZUnODL4Ng&s=19
1 Like
This is just proof of how unfairly Republican patriots get treated.
1 Like
Christianity has been on the subscription model for 2000 years. If you forget to cancel after your free trial baptism its 10% of your income in perpetuity. And they purposely make it so hard to cancel with things like inquisitions and crusades to keep you locked in. Itâs a tech investors dream service.
I mean they were one of the first to market (though they kind of just tweaked an earlier product called judaism) and they went the Uber route of focusing hard on market share around the 4th century with the intention of jacking up the price once people had moved all their friends over.
3 Likes
Lmao you can pray along side Mark Wahlberg
If he had been there, Good Friday wouldâve gone down different
3 Likes
lol my dad is in town so he is watching Price is Right and some kid just bid $1 as first bidder, and won!
5 Likes
Decoding the Gurus podcast has done some stuff on Brand.
Lol. How did the other bidding play out? If the third bidder just bid $1 more than the second bidder, it would kind of make sense, but any other scenario would be truly 
Everyone else just bid normally and all went over. lol
1 Like
Is starting with $1 even bad?
Obviously it can work sometimes, but just going off feels it seems like there are enough situations where you end up drawing dead because the other players completely box you out that it seems suboptimal.
All anyone has to do is bid $2 and you are drawing dead.
All someone has to do is bid $2 and youâre done.
Also, if someone bids $2 youâre out of luck.
lol
(post deleted)
I think a better question is how often the last person bidding should be one upping another contestantâs bid.
Obviously 100% of the time. Why wouldnât you?
This argument applies to any bid you make.
Sure but what could possibly be the value of betting $1 first?
I think it probably is bad, because it makes you a target. If you were bidding on a uniform random number between 1 and 100, I think opening 1 loses, because 2 and 3 can bid 67 and 34, making 4âs optimal bid 2. But I feel like player 1 always loses in the ideal game, because it has to be in someoneâs best interest to top them.
EDIT: That last part isnât true. If you make a high enough bid, the other 3 players do better by splitting up the value below you than they do by topping you.
??? Itâs the same as for anyone else. You think your competitors will overvalue the prize, so you bet low.