The Prisoner's Dillema:

Two members of a criminal gang are arrested and imprisoned. Each prisoner is in solitary confinement with no means of communicating with the other. The prosecutors lack sufficient evidence to convict the pair on the principal charge. They hope to get both sentenced to a year in prison on a lesser charge. Simultaneously, the prosecutors offer each prisoner a bargain. Each prisoner is given the opportunity either to: betray the other by testifying that the other committed the crime, or to cooperate with the other by remaining silent. The offer is:

• If A and B each betray the other, each of them serves 2 years in prison
• If A betrays B but B remains silent, A will be set free and B will serve 3 years in prison (and vice versa)
• If A and B both remain silent, both of them will only serve 1 year in prison (on the lesser charge)

It is implied that the prisoners will have no opportunity to reward or punish their partner other than the prison sentences they get, and that their decision will not affect their reputation in the future. Because betraying a partner offers a greater reward than cooperating with them, all purely rational self-interested prisoners would betray the other, and so the only possible outcome for two purely rational prisoners is for them to betray each other.[1] The interesting part of this result is that pursuing individual reward logically leads both of the prisoners to betray, when they would get a better reward if they both kept silent. In reality, humans display a systemic bias towards cooperative behavior in this and similar games, much more so than predicted by simple models of "rational" self-interested action.

******************************************************************

The majority of us here have been holding this stock underwater for years....some of us for only a few , and others for up to 10 years or more . So, in a sense we have already been "serving a sentence". Now we are being offered an opportunity to have the remaining duration of our sentence reduced...as the prisoner's dilemma would dictate, the best outcome for the current gang of Fancamp prisoners would be to stay silent (or to stay put with our shares in this instance ). Of course , any given individual could benefit if they took this opportunity to sell currently, but if all others had the same idea then there would be a declining return as everyone decided to head for the exits. Thus, the only logical move for all of us currently is to continue to hold onto the majority of their shares (as denisbe alludes to above). I myself continue to hold all of my shares ..not only do to the priciple above, but out of self-interest that not only will we be "let out of prison" in the near future, but that we will be reimbursed many fold over for the time already spent  "wrongly imprisoned".

Cheers,

Luker