Asking a girl on a second date.

yahhh trick yahhhh

i look forward to when infinite posts

im confused now

page 14 is a disaster

The topic ended as of late 13. The thread has now evolved into a new discussion.

it's not a troll but it's a shitty explanation

the key point in that little riddle is that the interviewer knows which envelope contains the acceptance letter, and that he will not reveal the acceptance letter when he shows you that one envelope

in a standard situation, you have three pairs of outcomes, six total:

1. you select acceptance letter, he reveals rejection letter #1
2. you select acceptance letter, he reveals rejection letter #2
3. you select rejection letter #1, he reveals rejection letter #2
4. you select rejection letter #1, he reveals acceptance letter
5. you select rejection letter #2, he reveals rejection letter #1
6. you select rejection letter #2, he reveals acceptance letter

given the assumption that he has perfect information, outcome #4 and outcome #6 will not happen. however, if he does not know what envelope contains what, and there is a chance he will reveal the acceptance letter, then this question is moot and switching makes no difference. the perfect information assumption is key.

so you have outcomes

1. you select acceptance letter, he reveals rejection letter #1
2. you select acceptance letter, he reveals rejection letter #2

3. you select rejection letter #1, he reveals rejection letter #2
5. you select rejection letter #2, he reveals rejection letter #1

if you select an acceptance letter, there is a 50% chance he will reveal one of the rejection letters. which one is irrelevant. so outcomes 1 and 2 can be condensed into one result.

if you select a rejection letter, he has no choice but to reveal the other rejection letter.

so there are 3 possibilities with equal probability:

(1) you select acceptance letter, he reveals either rejection letter with 50/50 probability

(2) you select rejection letter #1, he reveals rejection letter #2

(3) you select rejection letter #2, he reveals rejection letter #1

(1) - switching LOSES
(2) - switching WINS
(3) - switching WINS

kmz had the right idea but phrased the question wrong and explained it incorrectly

Yes, he didn't explain that the interviewer knew which letter contained a rejection and had to pick one that contained a rejection.

But you really don't need to enumerate all the solutions to explain it. There is a 2/3rds chance you picked a rejection letter at the beginning. If you picked a rejection letter, once the other rejection letter is shown the remaining envelope must contain the offer, so there is a 2/3rds chance that by switching enveloped you get the offer.

Yes, he didn't explain that the interviewer knew which letter contained a rejection and had to pick one that contained a rejection.

But you really don't need to enumerate all the solutions to explain it. There is a 2/3rds chance you picked a rejection letter at the beginning. If you picked a rejection letter, once the other rejection letter is shown the remaining envelope must contain the offer, so there is a 2/3rds chance that by switching enveloped you get the offer.

your average TWer can't follow that brief explanation, and i didnt want another 2 pages of "wtf no, lies"

just ask yourself

what would joseph smith do?

Can we get back to what a train wreak this all is?

Can we get back to what a train wreak this all is?

No. The train wreck was avoided. Things got bumpy, but the train failed to de-rail.

Ignorance.

I don't know much about scientolgy to say I would or would not. That which I have seen comes off a crazy, but I don't feel comfortable drawing that conclusion until they taught me about their beliefs and clarified my questions.

You think all mormons are crazy, but yet there are plenty of people, even on TW that will admit they know normal mormons.

Err, when did I call mormons crazy? If brainwashed at a young age, anyone can beleive in anything. Mormons are far from crazy.

Hell, I'd go far enough to say that I like mormons. Most are very kind people and the ideal that the LDS church preaches is for the most part admirable.

HOWEVER, you're talking about a grown women who no longer believes in the tooth fairy or any other fairy tale yet still believes the utter bullshit involved in the history of your religion. She's either dumb or ignorant, not crazy. Either way, you can find better.

just ask yourself

what would joseph smith do?

nail pocahontas... :lolwut:

Again, ignorant you are being. For being dumb and ignorant, we Mormons are pretty well seated in important positions within society, and in fortune 500 companies. Google search famous Mormons, you would be surprised.

I did one, here:

Famous Mormons (http://www.famousmormons.net/)

WOW

GET THAT RING OFF YOUR PINKY YOU FAGGOT
^ 2nd best advice in thread (1 being you'll regret not calling/call her)

normal mormons.

Isn't that an oxymormon?
*rimshot*

I know two mormons, one is crazy and the other is normal. :shrug:

Famous Mormons in Business (http://famousmormons.net/bus.html)

Ok .. . this is a cool site I've decided. I didn't know half these people were Mormon.

You need to play more chess, then you could anticipate her next move.
Seriously, I play chess and I can tell you what a girl's next move is going to be 10 minutes before she does it.

Again, ignorant you are being. For being dumb and ignorant, we Mormons are pretty well seated in important positions within society, and in fortune 500 companies. Google search famous Mormons, you would be surprised.

I did one, here:

Famous Mormons (http://www.famousmormons.net/)

Guess I'm done.

You think all mormons are crazy, but yet there are plenty of people, even on TW that will admit they know normal mormons.
I know plenty of normal mormons, and I work with a dude who is a mormon and he's a good guy. That doesn't mean I don't think the religion is fucking crazy.

yahhh trick yahhhh

YAHH YAHH YAHH

damn i wanna stab soulja boy kid is a fuckin homo

man u talkin out the side of ur neck

there is no fucking way this isnt a troll