[EM] Answer to the initial issue.

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Based on the literal interpretation of the actual wording of Bart's
quotation of Merrill's Pij definition, that definition is the same
as my Pij definition, as I said at the time. As I said then, both
Pij definitions define the same probability, and they're just 2
wordings of the same definition.

I said that, and then Richard said that they defined different
probabilities.

Bottom line: I was right. Richard was mistaken.

But now I realize that it seems true that (not A) implies (if A then B).
But that turns out to not be relevant to the issue of the sameness
or differentness of the 2 Pij definitions.

Merrill likely intentionally chose his wording to avoid the logical
unaesthetics & contradiction that Richard described when there's no tie. 
But, as I said before, even had he worded it the way Richard assumed, they 
would have resulted in the same Approval strategy.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com