Everyone is so full of simple solutions. My simple solution is to own a house with at least enough toilets for everybody so that you can have your own and don't need to share.
You must be American.
Nope, but thanks for the stereotype!
A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
51–60 of 65 posts
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
TheOatmeal has done a detailed pros and cons analysis on that habit, coming to the conclusion it should not be done. My apologies for not linking, but I can't access it from work.
I dug it up and it's pretty juvenile http://theoatmeal.com/comics/peeing_sitting_down I sit to pee, just easier and it means I can take a leak at night without blinding myself with the lights.
It's pretty easy to pee standing in the dark, just stand over the toilet and aim straight down.
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, sitting does not remove the possibility of missing. I once had an unfortunate encounter with a toilet where someone had installed an elongated seat on a non-elongated bowl. This made it possible to easily and inadvertantly sit in a way that resulted in missing.
Agreed - and it's not the only problem. I mentioned this to my brother and he said: You know, I think I once wee'd in my face doing that. I hit some crazy angle and it just sprayed out. I can't remember the exact parameters but something very odd happened. Always sit at your own risk.
Heh, I think your brother was just unlucky.
I've been sitting while peeing for most of my life and I've never sprayed myself. It does take a little practice to do it with an erection, but you have this problem if standing too.
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#54Heh. My simpler solution is to just always sit (I'm a guy). It's more comfortable, requires less concentration and removes any possibility of missing. The only time I stand is for proper urinals.
At the risk of getting too graphic and personal, if I sit to pee in most residential toilets I tend to make unpleasant contact with the interior of the toilet rim. Ugh.
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#55Heh. My simpler solution is to just always sit (I'm a guy). It's more comfortable, requires less concentration and removes any possibility of missing. The only time I stand is for proper urinals.
At the risk of getting too graphic and personal, if I sit to pee in most residential toilets I tend to make unpleasant contact with the interior of the toilet rim. Ugh.
Take a piece of toilet paper, hang it down the risky area. Of course, this wastes some paper. You have to weight the cost of rainforest deforestation against the cost of treating you whatever walked onto you over the, um, bridge.
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#56This analysis misses a very important point - Marsha benefits from John lifting the seat since this avoids it getting dirty (assuming they take turns using the toilet and John is not a very accurate shooter). Moreover, John is probably going to perform #1 more frequently then #2 - by a factor of 3-4? Thus, we can further stipulate that his default state should be 'seat up' and ask whether Marsha should be made to lif…
I think you need to reread the article: 1) The analysis assumes that John ensures the seat is in the up position before #1; if the seat is up he pays cost 0 and if it is down he pays cost C. Furthermore if John performes #1 with the seat down, the question of the final position of the seat is moot compared to the question of "why is John gross?" 2) The article takes the probability p of #1 for John. It notes that if…
"Furthermore if John performes #1 with the seat down, the question of the final position of the seat is moot compared to the question of "why is John gross?"
That's precisely what I am taking issue with - an implicit assumption that lifting of the seat ONLY benefits John and HARMS Marsh. I think it's more appropriate to characterize it as bestowing equal benefit on both parties (clean seat) and equal work as well (John lifts the seat / Marsha puts it down).
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#57If the seat is down, I lift it up.
If the lid is up, she puts it down.
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#58Heh. My simpler solution is to just always sit (I'm a guy). It's more comfortable, requires less concentration and removes any possibility of missing. The only time I stand is for proper urinals.
Standing up is always going to be more comfortable for me. I never have a problem concentrating so never miss.
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#59Heh. My simpler solution is to just always sit (I'm a guy). It's more comfortable, requires less concentration and removes any possibility of missing. The only time I stand is for proper urinals.
Actually, sitting does not remove the possibility of missing. I once had an unfortunate encounter with a toilet where someone had installed an elongated seat on a non-elongated bowl. This made it possible to easily and inadvertantly sit in a way that resulted in missing.
You can still aim when you sit down. You still have free hands, don't you?
Re: A game theoretic approach to the toilet seat problem
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the risk of getting too graphic and personal, if I sit to pee in most residential toilets I tend to make unpleasant contact with the interior of the toilet rim. Ugh.
Take a piece of toilet paper, hang it down the risky area. Of course, this wastes some paper. You have to weight the cost of rainforest deforestation against the cost of treating you whatever walked onto you over the, um, bridge.
I only shop at places that get their paper from regular forests, not rain forests.