Dark Mousy Analysis - Version 2

[Dark Mousy]

[spoiler=Disclaimer]

I spent like 45 minutes preparing an introduction that did not sound Elitist to Icyblue. The analysis of the Realistic Card section itself is a homework for me. Keep in mind that it is a social science.

 

 

 

[spoiler=[u]Section 1: Introduction[/u]]

Let’s start with the basic Qs and As of economics, and this model that I am trying to build.

What is Economics?

Economics is a social science (study of human behaviour) that determines how we deal with the problem of scarcity. This problem arises because humans, by nature are infinitely selfish, and have infinite demand, whereas there are only limited ‘goods’ that satisfy our demands.

 

What defines a ‘market’?

A market is comprised of a place, where people try to trade commodities, or ‘goods’. By definition, any good is a ‘good’ has a ‘utility’ value. By trade, both sides (Supply-side, and Demand-side) must agree on a specific price and quantity.

 

Consequences

 

Based on our above to definitions, we can say that: Economics focuses on 3 questions that deal with these ‘goods’:

1) For whom to make these ‘goods’ for?

2) How do we make these ‘goods’?

3) What type of ‘goods’ do we make?

 

Now, we need a formal definition of a ‘good’ that is being ‘traded’ in the Realistic Card section, actually, two goods, 1) Cards themselves, 2) Card Critiques that Card Critics offer. For simplicities sake, we will look at 1) being the demand side, as Card Makers demand 2) from Card Critics.

But what are Cards themselves, and what are Card Critiques and what properties do they have?

 

Formalities

 

1) An agreeable definition of cards themselves can be: A medium in which it is based on an idea, which has an undefined utility value. This medium itself has a specific quality factor, which has a defined utility value.

 

What are defined or undefined utility values? Since for everyone, the usefulness of a ‘good’ is different, being undefined means that it is impossible to quantify, or unknown. However, the quality factor can be quantified, which we can attempt to assign a value, although everyone’s will be different.

 

2) Card Critiques can be defined as: A constructive phrase that has utility value based on how constructive the critique is.

 

This is an application of ‘utility’, obviously a critique is more useful, if it has detail and is constructive, precise, etc, etc. Of course everyone’s ‘value’ for the actually constructiveness of the critique is different. Keep in mind that an actual number CAN be assigned, whereas in ideas, an actual number cannot be assigned.

 

These are the foundation statements where we build our model on. As I had mentioned before, for simplicity’s sake, the implications of analysing a good that has an ‘undefined’ value or ‘undefined’ cost are enormous. So since card critiques have a real value, that we can assign, we will look at that as the demanded and supplied ‘good’ in question.

 

Ceteris Paribus

Simply a Latin Phrase that means, with everything on parity, or with everything held equal. In this model, we are operating in Ceteris Paribus. This means that regardless of what happens (including something that makes this model obsolete), are valid arguments made in this article remain valid, within this model only.

 

In Conclusion of This Section

These are the building blocks that we use to build our model. They are all assumptions. Remember the bottom line: Economics is a Social Science, economists can be as exact as possible, but at the end of the day, it’s all estimation, nothing is correct.

 

 

[spoiler=[u]Section 2: The Circular Flow[/u]]

The idea

 

In this market, or in any market for that matter, there are 3 ‘entities’ that exist. These entities can be classified as 1 or more of the following:

1) Card Raters, or as I will call in this analysis, “Suppliers”, this entity can either be a group of Card Raters, or just one Card Rater. They supply the good ‘Card Rating’ depending on the ‘Quality’ value of the card in question.

2) Card Makers, or as I will call in this analysis, “Demand Entity” or “Demanders”. This entity can be big or small, like Suppliers, and they “demand” a specific quantity of card rating or “constructive feedback” based on what they need. They will need more feedback at a lower quality, and they will need less at a higher quality.

3) Moderators, or as I will call in this analysis, “Intervention Entity” or “Government”. Government can impact entities 1) and 2) by means of intervention.

 

Now, we see clearly, a circular flow occurs. As illustrated by the diagram.

 

 

There is an exchange between ‘goods’ that flows in the market. Like a scientist, we would like to quantify it.

 

Demand Side Quantification

If we want to quantify the demand side, we must know what the ‘cost’ of the good in question. Constructive Criticism will only be given to you if you can offer them cards and ideas, and possibly reps, and points.

The cost of making cards depends on the ‘quality’ factor you want to make. You will make fewer cards, if it has a higher quality, and you will make more cards, if it has a lower quality, as it does not take more effort, to make those cards.

 

In this analysis, this is the relationship between the actual quality, and the amount of critique demanded.

 

Supply Side Quantification

Suppliers, on the other hand, have the choice of whether to offer, or not offer critique. I will explain why later. Each supplier wants to give more critique to a card if the quality is higher, or at least the aggregate ‘utility’ is higher. (Maybe the same amount, but of higher quality)

If we were to chart Supply, we see that it is an upward sloping line.

 

The Model

Remember what the definition of a “market” is. Both sides must agree to the Price, and Quantity. The one point that both sides agree, is where Supply Curve meets the Demand Curve, ceteris paribus.

 

In picture form:

 

Here, the price is the quality of cards. The black dot represents the agreeable price and quantity. That means, the average card quality is completely determinant by the Demand Curve, and the Supply curve, given that there is no intervention.

 

Intervention

 

Government, can intervene in this market by imposing either a Quality Floor, or Quality Ceiling. A quality floor would be saying for example: “All cards must have perfect OCG”, or “All critique must have 100 words”, and strictly enforcing it. While a quality ceiling would be closer to: “Members with x amount of posts or more can not post in Realistic Cards”.

 

 

If we were to introduce a price floor, the original supply line becomes the thick black line. Card makers will have increase to meet supply. The pink dot at the left is the new ‘equilibrium’ point (that determines Quantity and Quality) is higher than the old one.

 

The market here does not function properly, there is no ‘agreeable’ trade between the two resources. Suppliers seeing the increase in quality, will supply more, but the demand-side, they don’t want as much, as their quality is already high, there is little that they can improve, and as a result there is a shortage of cards that require critique.

Very similar thing can be said for price floor.

 

This implies all forms of intervention directly with the Supply and Demand, are ‘artificial’, however, what intervention can do, is to move Supply and Demand, left or right.

 

In Conclusion for this Section

We see there is a circular flow, also the interaction between supply and demand for cards. All 3 entities can affect, or skew the equilibrium either directly or indirectly.

 

 

[spoiler=[u]Section 3: Conclusions[/u]]

This is the real analysis of this model.

 

When the bells and whistles finally come together, or fall apart for that matter. We do not really want to look at the above. Any imposition, forum wide will cause problems.

 

What we want to do, is look at chunks of the market. As the model in Section 2 is just simply an average, if we were to increase the quality of any part of the 'segment' we can increase the entire average for demand. If we increase the demand on either the higher end of the scale or the lower end of the scale, we shift the average.

 

This model has 1 important implication:

 

An increase in demand will lead to increase in Quality from both sides. If demand was to increase, then quality of critiques increases also.

 

Resolutions

Let's take a look at our goals: (These are compiled from YCM interview)

 

We have 2 main ones, 1) Higher grade critiques, 2) Less bias against newer members.

 

Xander Royce:

Nowadays, they only say "OCG error" and then leave. If this is the case in all threads, just get rid of OCG.

 

This is a big complaint, which many other people have stated again and again.

 

I must state an interventionist policy, like the one in Section 2, mods should not instate some OCG ban, like Xander Royce.

 

In fact, according to the model, we want to either increase, at every single quantity level, the quality level in the demand, this pushes the Quality level up.

 

 

On the contrary, more supply will actually drive the quality down as depicted in the model. If people were encouraged to make more critiques, the average quality will actually go down.

 

If you want better critiques, make more cards. Another key is that most people, are both entities. If the average quality was to increase, then then these people would become raters, and increase the average critique level.

 

Another option, is to downplay the importance of OCG. That has the same effect as raising a card's relative quality. If a card was rated 5/10 due to bad OCG, it may have a 9/10 picture, and if OCG was downplayed, the relative quality rises.

 

Killey:

Other times the evaluation of cards are biased and often an evaluation is left out altogether.

 

Bias exists. That is a fact. How is bias represented in our model? Let's take a user called Alpha. Alpha's cards are in low demand due to bias, he is a segment of the market, so let's analyse.

 

 

Alpha can not really influence his demand line. However, he can change his supply line. If he PMs 5 people and gives them +1 if they critique his card, we have changed the supply line to 5 at any given quality level. This means that he will be receiving more constructive critiques compared to the fact if he was to post in RC.

 

This brings to mind an obvious suggestion. A Card-Making School. A separate market that has a few dedicated raters (offered incentive to do so). This becomes a different market, where supply side has been fixed to 3 or 4 raters, this actually increases the quality, and improves the newer member's card making skills.

 

These should be for members under some post level, otherwise a flood in demand may increase the demand so much that there is no market.

 

The Bells and Whistles

Now we come to the bells and whistles of this model. How slanted is the curve?

 

Especially with a market like this it is difficult to come even close to the actual equation of the line.

 

However, if there is an increase in quality of that card maker's card's then there is a relatively small decrease in how many cards there has been made, then that part of the market is called 'elastic'. Where as, if there is a large decrease, then it is elastic.

 

 

As demonstrated by the diagram, we see a card maker with an inelastic demand, by adjusting the supply line, we see that it has helped the inelastic card maker compared to the elastic card maker.

 

Inelastic card makers tend to be newer card makers, who find it difficult to make higher quality cards, where elastic card makers tend to be more experienced ones.

 

Phenomenon of Elitism

 

Elitism can be rationally explained through this model.

 

 

As a card rater gains experience, his critique becomes 'inelastic', like card makers. As clearly shown by the diagram, the card rater is still willing to give high quality critiques to the newer card maker, but will do so far less commonly when compared with the elastic card maker.

 

Summary

 

Do not underestimate this model. This model can do far more things than what I've explained already. These are the groundwork basics that show you what it is capable of.

 

You still have to add the engine, the wheels. I will expand this analysis, but I would appreciate it if you can admire how humans have developed social science.

 

 

[-DOOM]

This site is no state, there is no "government", and politics have nothing, absolute nothing to do here. This is a forum, and it is just about having fun. FUN not some stupid economics. FUN not politics. You could see this forums as an avocation from the real world, even because we have politics there. CORRUPT, FALSE and GREEDY politics. Do we want to have something like this here?

 

Well, assumed that what you are saying applys to 100 %. It would only affect the "value" of a card by 20 % at most. Humans, as well as people, are navigated by emotions. People will only make a useful critique if they have emotions about a card or the card maker.

For example if someone is in the mood to help some new members, because of sympathy, compassion or whatever. He will give a **** about the quality of the new member's card, because he wants to help, and because of that he will give a useful critique.

Or if a unknown or not liked card maker makes qualitative high-value cards, he will get low quality critiques, just because he is not liked. Contrariwise, a well liked and known card maker will get more high quality critiques.

But in the end, all card makers will only get a few good rates, just because of the people's laziness. I'm no exception here. I'm lazy too.

 

And this is the reason why you can't analyse the YCM society, since you can't predict emotions without seeing or hearing people.

[Maliki]

WTF??? What are you trying to convince us?

[Jazin Kay]

This site is no state' date=' there is no "government", and politics have nothing, absolute nothing to do here. This is a forum, and it is just about having fun. FUN not some stupid economics. FUN not politics. You could see this forums as an avocation from the real world, even because we have politics there. CORRUPT, FALSE and GREEDY politics. Do we want to have something like this here?

 

Well, assumed that what you are saying applys to 100 %. It would only affect the "value" of a card by 20 % at most. Humans, as well as people, are navigated by emotions. People will only make a useful critique if they have emotions about a card or the card maker.

For example if someone is in the mood to help some new members, because of sympathy, compassion or whatever. He will give a **** about the quality of the new member's card, because he wants to help, and because of that he will give a useful critique.

Or if a unknown or not liked card maker makes qualitative high-value cards, he will get low quality critiques, just because he is not liked. Contrariwise, a well liked and known card maker will get more high quality critiques.

But in the end, all card makers will only get a few good rates, just because of the people's laziness. I'm no exception here. I'm lazy too.

 

And this is the reason why you can't analyse the YCM society, since you can't predict emotions without seeing or hearing people.

[/quote']

 

This.

 

Thread over.

[Dark Mousy]

I'm saying moderators. They are referred to as Government, because I do not have a better word for them.

 

I also stated it is a model. A model that can try to predict what will happen if we try to do this, or try to do that.

 

Also, I did not assume everything applies 100% I specifically stated that it does not.

 

It's not supposed to prove anything, it's a MODEL. It is another way of looking at it.

 

Just like a car, a model car is not going to be like a real one, here we just have the frame. I will add the engines, the exhaust, the tires, and the decorations all later.

 

I'm not done writing yet, this is still a work in progress.

---

This site is no state' date=' there is no "government", and politics have nothing, absolute nothing to do here. This is a forum, and it is just about having fun. FUN not some stupid economics. FUN not politics. You could see this forums as an avocation from the real world, even because we have politics there. CORRUPT, FALSE and GREEDY politics. Do we want to have something like this here?

 

Well, assumed that what you are saying applys to 100 %. It would only affect the "value" of a card by 20 % at most. Humans, as well as people, are navigated by emotions. People will only make a useful critique if they have emotions about a card or the card maker.

For example if someone is in the mood to help some new members, because of sympathy, compassion or whatever. [b']He will give a **** about the quality of the new member's card, because he wants to help, and because of that he will give a useful critique.

Or if a unknown or not liked card maker makes qualitative high-value cards, he will get low quality critiques, just because he is not liked. Contrariwise, a well liked and known card maker will get more high quality critiques.

But in the end, all card makers will only get a few good rates, just because of the people's laziness. I'm no exception here. I'm lazy too.[/b]

 

And this is the reason why you can't analyse the YCM society, since you can't predict emotions without seeing or hearing people.

 

The model actually proves the bolded. It doesn't disprove it.

---

Who reported this?

 

Icy approved of it already. In fact, I had to change the model from being more correct to less correct to suit Icy.

[-DOOM]

Moderators are no Government, they are Moderators. It's simply like that. I said it before, maybe you did not see it, politics shall have nothing to do here.

 

I know you did not assume that everything applies 100%, I assumed it and showed what would be if it applies to 100%.

 

But it's the wrong way. You are trying to squash this forum into a political model, and this does not work. Anyways, i don't want to see this forum in any political way.

[Dark Mousy]

I think I wrote this too early (Section 3). But it shows you some power in this model. It can get more powerful if more accuracy is added, but since people want to know where I was going with this analysis...

[ragnarok1945]

real impressive, Dark Mousy

 

now if only you just put a card here

[Guest JoshIcy]

real impressive' date=' Dark Mousy

 

now if only you just put a card here

[/quote']

 

I lol'd. Good Job Rag.