Can you give an example of what you're thinking about? Remember, the idea is you randomly pick 10, and then if someone says no, the other 9 continue and you randomly pick a replacement from the remaining volunteers.
It's less direct than knowing exactly who the next person is, but if you know who all the remaining people are, you can estimate how likely it is that the replacement will have various characteristics. As an extreme example, if all of the remaining candidates were from the same company, you'd have a pretty good idea who the replacement's employer would be. I agree that re-randomizing makes the perverce incentives less, but it can't make them go away. So I would not spend a lot of time looking for the ultimate tweak. Regards, John Levine, johnl@xxxxxxxxx, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
