Editing Talk:2597: Salary Negotiation

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 9: Line 9:
 
:: This raises more questions than it answers. Why was your friend giving you 1/3 of a penny? Why two sixths rather than one third? How did they cut it? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 13:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:: This raises more questions than it answers. Why was your friend giving you 1/3 of a penny? Why two sixths rather than one third? How did they cut it? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 13:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
::: I would imagine that it is significantly easier to slice a coin all the way through than it is to cut it halfway through. But I'm still wondering how: after making the first cut (presumably relatively easy given the right tools), the subsequent cuts would be against *parts* of a penny, not the entire thing (thereby decreasing the utility of making full slices). Once a penny is cut in half, the two parts won't stay together anymore, unlike a pizza where the entire thing retains its same shape the entire time. I also wonder about the utility: a fraction of a penny under 50% of the total volume is completely worthless. When someone has more than 50%, then it is worth the entire value of the penny. [[User:Cwallenpoole|Cwallenpoole]] ([[User talk:Cwallenpoole|talk]]) 14:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
::: I would imagine that it is significantly easier to slice a coin all the way through than it is to cut it halfway through. But I'm still wondering how: after making the first cut (presumably relatively easy given the right tools), the subsequent cuts would be against *parts* of a penny, not the entire thing (thereby decreasing the utility of making full slices). Once a penny is cut in half, the two parts won't stay together anymore, unlike a pizza where the entire thing retains its same shape the entire time. I also wonder about the utility: a fraction of a penny under 50% of the total volume is completely worthless. When someone has more than 50%, then it is worth the entire value of the penny. [[User:Cwallenpoole|Cwallenpoole]] ([[User talk:Cwallenpoole|talk]]) 14:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:::You can clamp down the two parts of a now discected coin, for a further cut across-tye-cut almost as easily as you can clamp down the original. Harder to do the two ⅙ths and two ⅓rds (or just the latter two) to get the final four ⅙ths. Or overlay the cut halves (or thirds), perhaps, then cut through both with a powerful enough slicer.
+
 
:::But the way I'd do it (assuming 6 ⅙s is the target) is to make the cut across all but a ''sliver'' of one edge, realign, make a similar cut (liberating ⅙, having ⅓+⅙+⅓ still joined) then clean through at the third angle (two more ⅙s loosed), after which you just need to snip through the two cut-ends that you left to make the slotted ½ into 3 separate ⅙s.
 
:::Just snipping from edge to centre, three times, can mess up at the meeting point. Though it involves the same angles, getting them to meet (non-messily) in the exact centre is awkward, and it's easier to visually map six equilateral triangles with an edge-length equal to the radius (to execute three cross-cuts, fairly) than the three obtuse triangles (or one equilateral triangle with edges ≠2r) in planning where on the edge to start. Well, from my regular experience in actual pizza-cutting into three equal portions, before we get to the difficulty in cleanly cutting a much smaller coin made of metal. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.154|141.101.99.154]] 14:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
  
 
Any idea how Cueball arrived at the figure of $61 1/3 thousand?--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 03:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
Any idea how Cueball arrived at the figure of $61 1/3 thousand?--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 03:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
: Arbitrarily non-round numbers are a really good idea as per [https://hbr.org/2016/03/dont-use-round-numbers-in-a-negotiation] (which I just added), and Cueball's is one of the simplest in terms of algebraic fractional expression at the bottom of the 110-120% widely-accepted counter-offer range already mentioned (with which I agree and have heard repeatedly from associates, but rather uncomfortably is in the explanation without a source.) I would sincerely say he's being quite shrewd at that point, except for the haggling over cents and fractional cents. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.185|172.70.214.185]] 03:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 
  
 
Interesting.  In the UK, I was taught to call them recurring decimals.  Never heard of repeating decimals. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.20|141.101.99.20]] 08:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
Interesting.  In the UK, I was taught to call them recurring decimals.  Never heard of repeating decimals. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.20|141.101.99.20]] 08:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Line 24: Line 21:
 
:Also inappropriately used/ill-formed, in this negotiation, but "15% of the gross" might be a given film-star's deal for appearing/cameoing in a movie, i.e. variable according to the success, tying directly into the money it earns the studio - potentially quite lucrative, without scaring off the studio by risking it (excessive) debts in the event of a flop or other failure to cash in. So long as the {{w|The Producers (1967 film)|total percentages are not excessive}}!
 
:Also inappropriately used/ill-formed, in this negotiation, but "15% of the gross" might be a given film-star's deal for appearing/cameoing in a movie, i.e. variable according to the success, tying directly into the money it earns the studio - potentially quite lucrative, without scaring off the studio by risking it (excessive) debts in the event of a flop or other failure to cash in. So long as the {{w|The Producers (1967 film)|total percentages are not excessive}}!
 
:A salary that is a set percentage (other than 100%) of one's own salary is, of course, nonsensicle and paradoxical (though one could suggest an introductive percentage 'discount' for the first year, as a wary employer's inducement/guarantee, perhaps in direct exchange for a corresponding bonus against the measure of productivity that is expected/hoped to be massively increased by being hired), but muddled Cueball seems to be grasping at apt-sounding fragments of such 'business language' yet mashing them together in various wrong ways. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 12:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:A salary that is a set percentage (other than 100%) of one's own salary is, of course, nonsensicle and paradoxical (though one could suggest an introductive percentage 'discount' for the first year, as a wary employer's inducement/guarantee, perhaps in direct exchange for a corresponding bonus against the measure of productivity that is expected/hoped to be massively increased by being hired), but muddled Cueball seems to be grasping at apt-sounding fragments of such 'business language' yet mashing them together in various wrong ways. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 12:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
Summary is way too long and overdetailed. It's more like a play-by-play of the comic than an explanation [[Special:Contributions/172.69.248.145|172.69.248.145]] 02:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:Seconded. Apologies to whoever wrote the existing description, but you worked too hard. -mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.91|172.70.130.91]] 19:37, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
As others have pointed out, $61,333.33 1/3 is not an irrational number; however calling it a rational number (and linking the page for that term) seems pointless.  Could we change it to say "irrational amount" to indicate Cueball's mindset and eliminate the link?
 
 
Why not just say that the 1/3 of a cent is paid in advance in 3 year cycles? The first year will get him $61333.34, then $61333.33 for the next 2 years. He can just save the 2/3¢ for the second and third years. :P [[Special:Contributions/162.158.118.58|162.158.118.58]] 06:49, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: