I'm not saying they're doing the right thing - just that the game theory is what it is. I'm trying to give an explanation, not an excuse.

Anonymous only works in a small spectrum of possible whistle blowing - where the issue and the players are large enough to matter, but small enough that it won't be trivial to guess who the anonymous tip came from.

It's funny how game theory gets fouled up all the time in real life. A rainstorm or a faulty mechanism or a careless installer or 100 other human or non-human factors that aren't part of the game theory intervene to change everything.

If game theory is stacked against ethical behavior in a particular situation, I'll back ethical behavior. It's encouraging how often the game theory gets tripped up by factors outside the "rules".

At this point, game theory is mostly useful for predicting what people who try to act rationally will do.

But the trouble is, that as these things become more of the fabric of the culture, people's behaviour takes them into account, and then it doesn't work as well as it used to.

Even if it is game theory it is a game of stag and not prisoners dilemma.