Why was the top player there all along? In a financial "pyramid scheme" it is because money streams to the top. In a teaching ladder, what malicious incentive does the person at the top have to where leaving would cause the whole system to collapse? Most likely, the other players at the top would be happy to take on the role as top player in the league and would continue to self-teach to maintain their place.
Exactly. A teaching ladder is simply a cooperative effort to share skills. No money changes hands and there is no benefit to being at the top of the ladder other than kudos.
I think people on Hacker News have a good sense of humor. However, with no indication of sarcasm, attempts at humor can instead make you look foolish. Try adding a winky-face next time, dummy ;-)
well, they promise you to be teached - but (and here's the catch) you have to teach yourself - but then at some point the upmost teacher leaves with his knowledge and the whooooole ladder starts to crash - so obvious
A teaching ladder is a linear system, not a pyramid. I get a lesson, I give a lesson, one for one. Reciprocity is used purely to prevent the free rider problem. Participants freely barter their expertise rather than paying for lessons. This is a perfectly stable arrangement - the ladder in the first link has been running continuously since 1994.
The person at the top of the ladder is essentially performing a public service, because they don't get the benefit of learning from a more experienced player. If they leave then the ladder doesn't collapse, the second strongest player simply becomes the leader.
Ladders are commonly used as a competition format in many sports. They provide an excellent way of giving players a challenging but enjoyable game. Teaching ladders are simply an elaboration on this format.