On 1 Dec 2001, at 12:56, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
-- On 1 Dec 2001, at 8:18, georgemw@speakeasy.net wrote:
I'm surprised I've gotten so much disagreement over this, particularly since my original statement was much weaker than it could have been. For reputation to have a single well defined value it is necessary but not sufficient that there be a market in reputations; it must be a COMMODITIZED market.
Not so.
Something has a single well defined value to its possessor without any need for it to be commoditized.
For an item to have a single well defined market value it needs to be commoditized, but that is a different issue.
We're not disagreeing. By a "single" value I meant a universally agreed upon value. It's likely true that the owner of any item will have a single value that he thinks he'll be out if that item is destroyed (I can't see how there could be more than one), but unless the item is a commodity, nobody else will know for sure what that value is. George
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG U5GMQeSNlQCQl5JIYhGl4zYPDycgMVdHUxmfk+l2 4S5Ss0+J1kdE7tCI/aRLeU8oLqXOwYgyIK3jX5qqJ