loop holes for weight loss contracts

1

From: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu
Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:53
Subject: loop holes for weight loss contracts

Bethany and Laurie each have $5k at risk on a weight loss contract
that ends May 5.
But Laurie is leaving for Europe 2 weeks before that and Bethany (not
coincidentally) is leaving for Europe 4 days before that.
The question: is it too weaselly a loophole for them to use the
Vacation Clause of their contracts to just declare victory on the day
they depart?

Here’s the clause in question:

You can choose not to report up to 3 weeks (needed for vacations when you’re without your scale), but on the 22nd day after your last recorded data point, you have to report.
Not reporting at that time will result in loss by default.
The 3 weeks allowance gives the opportunity also in case you choose to let things go a little with plans to work really hard when you return.
NOTE: this is NOT recommended. Use your commitment to prove that vacations don’t have to spell disaster for your weight since you can make smart choices and still have fun.
It’s in your interest to report as often as possible as this allows beeminder to reflect your widest road possible, giving you more room to fluctuate without going off the road.

Can we have a verdict from the contract owners? (David Yang, David
Reiley, and Steven)

Possibly relevant: May 5 was actually chosen as the contract end date
because it’s my grandma’s 90th birthday, which is the occasion for the
vacation. So it’s arguably in the spirit of the contract for it to end
when they depart. And arguably within the letter of the contract since
the contract fails to specify what should happen if you invoke the
vacation clause within 3 weeks of the end date. On the other hand,
the first thing the contract says is “I promise not to weasel!” :slight_smile:

I propose a compromise: Allow the early declaration of victory under
the condition that they both put the $5k back at risk on a new yellow
brick road when they return (with the same terms and with David,
David, and Steven still owning the contracts).

And, actually, speaking of commitments, Bethany committed not to leave
on this vacation if we don’t have the new Beeminder launched before
then. We’re getting close!

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

1 Like
2

From: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu
Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 13:59
Subject: Fwd: loop holes for weight loss contracts

Irene said I could pass this along.
Apparently Brits pluralize “scale”. Either that or she’s so OCD about
accurate weight tracking that she needs multiple independent
measurements. :slight_smile:
Or maybe she has like a balance scale where you hang the fulcrum from
a tree and load one side up with rocks (stones, they would say).
That must be how they do it over there.

(I’m guessing that’s the etymological reason for the pluralization
anyway. Do we have a linguist on hand?)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Irene Randall irandall52@yahoo.co.uk
Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 13:08
Subject: Re: loop holes for weight loss contracts
To: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu

Ah ha! I am going on vacation - in Europe (but thats where I live!!)
and considering taking my scales with me…or Bethany and Laurie
could use the well calibrated scales in pharmacies in most European
towns. I think the very fact that they included a vacation clause
indicates they were thinking weaselly-ly from the outset. We do have
lots of healthy food in Europe and they will probably be doing lots of
walking - sightseeing and so on.
Hope they enjoy the vacation and Grandma’s 90th!
OK - Ive added my scales to the packing list…and can log in
everyday on my iphone from campsites…

Irene Randall

From: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu
To: akratics@beeminder.com
Sent: Wed, 20 April, 2011 18:53:36
Subject: loop holes for weight loss contracts

Bethany and Laurie each have $5k at risk on a weight loss contract
that ends May 5.
But Laurie is leaving for Europe 2 weeks before that and Bethany (not
coincidentally) is leaving for Europe 4 days before that.
The question: is it too weaselly a loophole for them to use the
Vacation Clause of their contracts to just declare victory on the day
they depart?

Here’s the clause in question:

You can choose not to report up to 3 weeks (needed for vacations when you’re without your scale), but on the 22nd day after your last recorded data point, you have to report.
Not reporting at that time will result in loss by default.
The 3 weeks allowance gives the opportunity also in case you choose to let things go a little with plans to work really hard when you return.
NOTE: this is NOT recommended. Use your commitment to prove that vacations don’t have to spell disaster for your weight since you can make smart choices and still have fun.
It’s in your interest to report as often as possible as this allows beeminder to reflect your widest road possible, giving you more room to fluctuate without going off the road.

Can we have a verdict from the contract owners? (David Yang, David
Reiley, and Steven)

Possibly relevant: May 5 was actually chosen as the contract end date
because it’s my grandma’s 90th birthday, which is the occasion for the
vacation. So it’s arguably in the spirit of the contract for it to end
when they depart. And arguably within the letter of the contract since
the contract fails to specify what should happen if you invoke the
vacation clause within 3 weeks of the end date. On the other hand,
the first thing the contract says is “I promise not to weasel!” :slight_smile:

I propose a compromise: Allow the early declaration of victory under
the condition that they both put the $5k back at risk on a new yellow
brick road when they return (with the same terms and with David,
David, and Steven still owning the contracts).

And, actually, speaking of commitments, Bethany committed not to leave
on this vacation if we don’t have the new Beeminder launched before
then. We’re getting close!

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

3

From: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu
Date: Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 23:44
Subject: Re: loop holes for weight loss contracts

For lack of objections from the contract owners and with Laurie
leaving in the morning, let’s make my compromise the official
interpretation of the contracts.
Note that that only applies to the weight loss goals. Laurie still has
to do 3 more workouts despite vacation (the first one within 6 days
from now).
And Bethany and I have several things we’ll need a safety buffer on
before leaving: beeminder.com/bd
(Luckily we’ve already locked up the hardest yellow brick roads – our
40 hours/week work goals – thanks to scrambling to launch the new
beeminder before we leave.)

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 13:59, Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu wrote:

Irene said I could pass this along.
Apparently Brits pluralize “scale”. Either that or she’s so OCD about
accurate weight tracking that she needs multiple independent
measurements. :slight_smile:
Or maybe she has like a balance scale where you hang the fulcrum from
a tree and load one side up with rocks (stones, they would say).
That must be how they do it over there.

(I’m guessing that’s the etymological reason for the pluralization
anyway. Do we have a linguist on hand?)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Irene Randall irandall52@yahoo.co.uk
Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 13:08
Subject: Re: loop holes for weight loss contracts
To: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu

Ah ha! I am going on vacation - in Europe (but thats where I live!!)
and considering taking my scales with me…or Bethany and Laurie
could use the well calibrated scales in pharmacies in most European
towns. I think the very fact that they included a vacation clause
indicates they were thinking weaselly-ly from the outset. We do have
lots of healthy food in Europe and they will probably be doing lots of
walking - sightseeing and so on.
Hope they enjoy the vacation and Grandma’s 90th!
OK - Ive added my scales to the packing list…and can log in
everyday on my iphone from campsites…

Irene Randall

From: Daniel Reeves dreeves@umich.edu
To: akratics@beeminder.com
Sent: Wed, 20 April, 2011 18:53:36
Subject: loop holes for weight loss contracts

Bethany and Laurie each have $5k at risk on a weight loss contract
that ends May 5.
But Laurie is leaving for Europe 2 weeks before that and Bethany (not
coincidentally) is leaving for Europe 4 days before that.
The question: is it too weaselly a loophole for them to use the
Vacation Clause of their contracts to just declare victory on the day
they depart?

Here’s the clause in question:

You can choose not to report up to 3 weeks (needed for vacations when you’re without your scale), but on the 22nd day after your last recorded data point, you have to report.
Not reporting at that time will result in loss by default.
The 3 weeks allowance gives the opportunity also in case you choose to let things go a little with plans to work really hard when you return.
NOTE: this is NOT recommended. Use your commitment to prove that vacations don’t have to spell disaster for your weight since you can make smart choices and still have fun.
It’s in your interest to report as often as possible as this allows beeminder to reflect your widest road possible, giving you more room to fluctuate without going off the road.

Can we have a verdict from the contract owners? (David Yang, David
Reiley, and Steven)

Possibly relevant: May 5 was actually chosen as the contract end date
because it’s my grandma’s 90th birthday, which is the occasion for the
vacation. So it’s arguably in the spirit of the contract for it to end
when they depart. And arguably within the letter of the contract since
the contract fails to specify what should happen if you invoke the
vacation clause within 3 weeks of the end date. On the other hand,
the first thing the contract says is “I promise not to weasel!” :slight_smile:

I propose a compromise: Allow the early declaration of victory under
the condition that they both put the $5k back at risk on a new yellow
brick road when they return (with the same terms and with David,
David, and Steven still owning the contracts).

And, actually, speaking of commitments, Bethany committed not to leave
on this vacation if we don’t have the new Beeminder launched before
then. We’re getting close!

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com

–
http://dreev.es – search://“Daniel Reeves”
Follow the Yellow Brick Road – http://beeminder.com