In practice, how do many negotiators make decisions between a, b, c, d and e? Well, a common tactic is this idea of I'll get rid of this if you get rid of that. So I'll take a off the table if you take e off the table. And here's an example where we see people playing this game. >> We need to make sure we can come to a conclusion. >> Yeah, and so I mean, based on what we already discussed we just go ahead and keep moving forward [CROSSTALK] [INAUDIBLE]. >> Right, finally, because I don't really feel like you're listening to my side. >> Oh, I hear exactly what you're saying [INAUDIBLE] >> I think we need to negotiate this a little bit more. >> That's exactly what we're here to do, to negotiate. >> Right, I don't think- >> Let's work to get something off the table here. Let's make some progress and get to- >> Sounds like d is off the table. D's off the table. >> No, d is not off the table. >> We've already discussed, we both discussed that d doesn't work well for either of us so we should just try to- >> D may not be very good for you, but it actually works really well for me. >> No. >> So I propose if you wanna cut something we take d off if we can also take a off. >> No. No, no, no, no, no, absolutely not. >> I think we both need to make a compromise. >> A stays on the table. A stays on the table. >> A can't stay on the table if you want- >> I think we should compromise and let d be off the table [CROSSTALK] [INAUDIBLE]. >> This is what I'm talking about, you're not listening to how this is a disadvantage [CROSSTALK] for me. >> No, no, no. I hear what you're saying, and I'm saying we're not gonna do it. We're not gonna go that way. We're gonna take d off the table. We'll leave a there. >> No, a, okay, I don't think you really understand. I will not compromise on d unless you make a compromise on a. And that will leave us- >> You can reconsider cuz we're not gonna do that. >> I think we can do that, I think we can do that. >> That's fabulous. Thank you. Finally we have someone who is willing to make some compromises for the better of this negotiation. >> Right, and I just want to say, my lawyer still represents me, so negotiating has to go through him, all right? >> Totally understandable. >> Okay. >> Totally understandable. So let's do, okay, I think we're down to b, c and e then. [CROSSTALK] >> I think we should take a smoke break. You wanna take a smoke break, yeah? >> I don't smoke. >> I think we need- [CROSSTALK] >> Coffee break? Would you like to take a coffee break? >> I'm actually more of a tea guy, so. >> One of the things I hope you appreciate, having seen this is, there's nothing to justify this idea that I'll take a off the table if you take d off the table. In fact if somebody says to me you have to give something up to put a off the table, I'd say wait a second. You know, we never were gonna pick a anyway. And so I don't know why you're asking me to give something up that you wouldn't have picked in the first place. The other argument, in my view, against this alternating removal, is that if you know you're gonna play this game, then what somebody's gonna do to do you is they'll add f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p of terrible options, from your perspective. And somehow they'll be seen fair, they've gotten rid of l, m, n, o, p. But actually, they just were disastrous to you. And so you'll end up somehow in the middle of this set of offers that have been put on the table. But that doesn't mean there's anything particularly fair about it. And so because of those two reasons, I'm not persuaded that eliminating opportunities, I'll get rid of this if you get rid of that, makes sense at all.