Subscription pricing
Can "F is hired for a position in a different department from G" translate to F->/G? or Does it have to be F(-)/G?
0
Can "F is hired for a position in a different department from G" translate to F->/G? or Does it have to be F(-)/G?
7 comments
@donamhyun690 said:
@akikookmt881 Thank you! :) (3 (3 (3(/p)
I recommend that you look into this thread because I think you had the same confusion:
https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/14156/confusing-bi-conditional-vs-not-both-in-lg
@akikookmt881 Thank you! :) (3 (3 (3(/p)
As @zmeeker91389 says, if you are looking at In/Out game where there are two groups (for example, there are management and production only; management: IN group, production: OUT group), you should represent it as F (---) /G because representing as F ---> /G allows you put F and G both in the OUT group (production) when the original rule doesn't allow it to happen.
@donamhyun690 said:
@zmeeker91389 said:
I would say it is the first, unless you are looking at an In/Out game where both F and G have to be selected. The second would imply that anytime that G isn't hired in a department, F must be. That is stronger than what the statement says.
@akikookmt881 said:
Try and think about it as simply as possible.
“F is hired for a different department than G.”
Doesn’t that mean that F and G can’t be in the same department as each other?
If so F->/G and G->/F
We just want to make sure they aren’t in the same department! Sometimes it helps to just keep it simple and try and think about what it is saying. I hope this helps.
Thank you @zmeeker91389 and @akikookmt881 for helping organize my thoughts!
I was suddenly confused in this specific grouping game (that has three groups) in which JY translated "F is hired for a position in a different department from G" as /[FG]. This made me wonder if it is okay to use A->/B and A(-)/B interchangeably, which I highly doubted. I guess that was allowed in that specific incident, but not always! (PT38.S2.G3 that was if you are curious!) Thank you both again! (3 (3(/p)
How you represent rules depends on the kind of games you are dealing with.
PT38.S2.G3 is a grouping game with three groups. So if you want to represent the rule as a conditional rule, I think it should be represented as F --> /G (If F is in management, G has to be in other groups...etc) in this case because F (---) /G implies that either F or G has to be in each group. But it is confusing to remember this. This is why J.Y. represents the rule as /[FG].
@zmeeker91389 said:
I would say it is the first, unless you are looking at an In/Out game where both F and G have to be selected. The second would imply that anytime that G isn't hired in a department, F must be. That is stronger than what the statement says.
@akikookmt881 said:
Try and think about it as simply as possible.
“F is hired for a different department than G.”
Doesn’t that mean that F and G can’t be in the same department as each other?
If so F->/G and G->/F
We just want to make sure they aren’t in the same department! Sometimes it helps to just keep it simple and try and think about what it is saying. I hope this helps.
Thank you @zmeeker91389 and @akikookmt881 for helping organize my thoughts!
I was suddenly confused in this specific grouping game (that has three groups) in which JY translated "F is hired for a position in a different department from G" as /[FG]. This made me wonder if it is okay to use A->/B and A(-)/B interchangeably, which I highly doubted. I guess that was allowed in that specific incident, but not always! (PT38.S2.G3 that was if you are curious!) Thank you both again! (3 (3(/p)
I would say it is the first, unless you are looking at an In/Out game where both must be on the board. The second would imply that anytime that G isn't hired in a department, F must be. That is stronger than what the statement says.
Try and think about it as simply as possible.
“F is hired for a different department than G.”
Doesn’t that mean that F and G can’t be in the same department as each other?
If so F->/G and G->/F
We just want to make sure they aren’t in the same department! Sometimes it helps to just keep it simple and try and think about what it is saying. I hope this helps.