Experiment Would you accept a girlfriend in one of these Scenarios?

[Neggr]

Never accept it i'm not a cuck

 

[FlamingCel]

Never accept it i'm not a cuck

 

[Salustio]

Bobby_Fingers comments on Would you rather be single or be a cuckold ?

archived 17 Jul 2016 08:12:36 UTC

archive.is

You and your cucked fantasies, check the link. Even FA soyfilled leftists don’t want to be cucks. Yet there’s always the idiot who tell them that they have high standards

 

[PPEcel]

I really loved reading this! I assume that what you call "MRS" is the derivative of the function that is represented by the curve, am I right?
I'm not going to add anything, because you presented it very well. Nice job.
By the way, I may create my own function that represents the best my mindset. I would probably send it to you via PM's I think.

As of me... The foid literally kills herself if she cheats on me, no matter her attractiveness.
My curve would be something that looks like Albert's curve, I guess.

@PPEcel just used curves to show that attractiveness is something not everyone is willing to sacrifice in order to gain loyalty from a foid.
Tell me what you don't understand. Precisely.

Close. MRS is the derivative of the function multiplied by -1; I don't know why, but economistcels like working with positive numbers. When they refer to "the diminishing marginal rate of substitution" or "diminishing returns", it's because the MRS approaches zero as x approaches infinity.

 

[Pareg]

Close. MRS is the derivative of the function multiplied by -1; I don't know why, but economistcels like working with positive numbers. When they refer to "the diminishing marginal rate of substitution" or "diminishing returns", it's because the MRS approaches zero as x approaches infinity.

Oh! Of course. If you sacrifice a negative value (the derivative is negative here) of attractiveness, it wouldn't make any sense.
What I should say is: take one point M(x;y) of the curve. If y'(x) = -3 points of attractiveness per point of loyalty, then you are willing to sacrifice 3 points of attractiveness in order to gain one point of loyalty from the foid (on that point of the curve). The sign "-" shows that you sacrifice the attractiveness.
Anyways.

Regarding the limit, yeah it's pretty logical I guess.

 

[PPEcel]

Oh! Of course. If you sacrifice a negative value (the derivative is negative here) of attractiveness, it wouldn't make any sense.
What I should say is: take one point M(x;y) of the curve. If y'(x) = -3 points of attractiveness per point of loyalty, then you are willing to sacrifice 3 points of attractiveness in order to gain one point of loyalty from the foid (on that point of the curve). The sign "-" shows that you sacrifice the attractiveness.
Anyways.

Yeah, you got it right.

Oh! Of course. If you sacrifice a negative value (the derivative is negative here) of attractiveness, it wouldn't make any sense.
What I should say is: take one point M(x;y) of the curve. If y'(x) = -3 points of attractiveness per point of loyalty, then you are willing to sacrifice 3 points of attractiveness in order to gain one point of loyalty from the foid (on that point of the curve). The sign "-" shows that you sacrifice the attractiveness.
Anyways.

Regarding the limit, yeah it's pretty logical I guess.

Convexity is a key property of the indifference curve.

 

[Pareg]

Yeah, you got it right.

Convexity is a key property of the indifference curve.

I guess so, although I don't use convexity that much (only in one instance in chemistry).