Post by Cofa TsuiNo one product or service on earth is perfect; International Mahjong is no
exception. However, as owner of the trademarked products, I can guarantee
that any question that comes to my attention will be attended to promptly.
Really? What a piece of BS! But, since you still hide your head in the
sand, in profound denial, I'll ask you again the same questions posted
Post by Cofa Tsui1) How many IMJ Mahjong sets have you sold in the last 17 years? In
Canada? Elsewhere in the World?
2) How many international competitions or international Mahjong
gatherings have you organised? In Canada? Elsewhere in the World?
3) Out of your guesstimate of the 98 millions of Mahjong players in
the World, how many actually adopted IMJ rules? How many have IMJ
member cards?
4) How do you explain every single international, national or local
Mahjong association or federation don't use your IMJ products?
5) Why there is no mention of IMJ inside World's most important
Mahjong museum, in Chiba, Japan? Or in any other Mahjong exhibit
anywhere in the World?
Try to answer truthfully and completely for once. Not like the stupid
Post by Cofa TsuiI suspect that everybody here considers the [IMJ] trademark absurd.
I won't pay even the least attention to things that are considered absurd
by me; not to mention if those things are considered absurd by everybody!
For once, don't hide in delusions to avoid confronting reality. Don't
fool yourself. Below are some hints.
-----
*Wishful thinking* is the formation of beliefs and making decisions
according to what might be pleasing to imagine instead of by appealing
to evidence or rationality.
In addition to being a cognitive bias and a poor way of making
decisions, wishful thinking can also be a specific logical fallacy in
an argument when it is assumed that because we wish something to be
true or false that it is actually true or false. This fallacy has the
form "I wish that P is true/false, therefore P is true/false."
----
In psychology and cognitive science, *confirmation bias* is a tendency
to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's
preconceptions and to avoid "counter-attitudinal" new information. It
is a type of cognitive bias and represents an error of inductive
inference toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study. It refers
to the tendency for people to extend critical scrutiny to information
which contradicts their prior beliefs and uncritically accept
information that is congruent with their prior beliefs.
There are prosaic reasons why beliefs persevere despite contrary
evidence. Embarrassment over having to withdraw a publicly declared
belief, for example, or stubbornness or hope.
The behavior of confirmation bias has been named "Tolstoy syndrome"
after a quote from Count Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910): "I know that most
men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity,
can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as
would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have
proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread,
into the fabrics of their life".
----
*Denial* is a defense mechanism in which a person is faced with a fact
that is too painful to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that
it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
*Denial of fact*: This form of denial is where someone avoids a fact
by lying (to others or to oneself). This lying can take the form of an
outright falsehood (commission), leaving out certain details in order
to tailor a story (omission), or by falsely agreeing to something
(assent, also referred to as "yesing" behavior). Someone who is in
denial of fact is typically using lies in order to avoid facts that
they think may be potentially painful to themselves or others.
*Denial of denial*: This can be a difficult concept for many people to
identify in themselves, but is a major barrier to changing hurtful
behaviors. Denial of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors
which bolster confidence that nothing needs to be changed in ones
personal behavior. This form of denial typically overlaps with all of
the other forms of denial, but involves more self-delusion.
----
*Myside bias* : The term "myside bias" was coined by David Perkins,
myside referring to "my" side of the issue under consideration. An
important consequence of the myside bias is that many incorrect
beliefs are slow to change and often become stronger even when
evidence is presented which should weaken the belief. Generally, such
irrational belief persistence results from according too much weight
to evidence that accords with one's belief, and too little weight to
evidence that does not. It can also result from the failure to search
impartially for information.
----
*Sunk costs* : Many people have strong misgivings about "wasting"
resources. This is called "loss aversion". Many people, for example,
would feel obligated to go to the movie despite not really wanting to,
because doing otherwise would be wasting the ticket price; they feel
they passed the point of no return. This is sometimes called the sunk
cost fallacy. Economists would label this behaviour "irrational": It
is inefficient because it allocates resources wrongly by depending on
information that is irrelevant to the decision being made.
The idea of sunk costs is often employed when analysing business
decisions. A common example of a sunk cost for a business is the
promotion of a brand name. This type of marketing incurs costs that
cannot normally be recovered. It is not typically possible to later
"demote" one's brand names in exchange for cash (except perhaps as an
exit strategy from a market). Decisions about future investments,
sales or more advertising should be made based on future
possibilities, not biased by the recent large investment in the
advertising that the company made last year (or even last week).
The sunk cost fallacy is also sometimes known as the "Concorde
Effect", referring to the fact that the British and French government
continued to fund the joint development of Concorde even after it
became apparent that there was no longer an economic case for the
aircraft. The project was regarded privately by the British government
as a "commercial disaster" which should never have been started, and
was almost cancelled, but political and legal issues ultimately made
it impossible for either government to pull out.
---
*Escalation of commitment* is the phenomenon where people increase
their investment in a decision despite new evidence suggesting that
the decision was probably wrong. Such investment may include money
(known informally as "throwing good money after bad"), time, or - in
the case of military strategy - human lives. The term is also used to
describe poor decision-making in business, government, information
systems in general, software project management in particular,
politics, and gambling.