Back in the autumn of 1988 during my freshman semester at Hamilton College, I enrolled in a sociology course led by Dan Chambliss that introduced a fascinating game theory test. The instructor presented our class with a high-stakes final exam proposition: if every single student boycotted the test, the entire roster would be awarded an automatic A; however, if even a solitary individual showed up, anyone who stayed away would instantly receive a zero. Taking charge of the situation, I spearheaded a boycott effort using printed handbills, a music stand, and direct communication to forge mutual trust. Ultimately, our collective action triumphed, and nobody took the exam. Nearly forty years down the line, I find myself examining this profound exercise in mass cooperation, drawing parallels between the complexities of human alignment and the upcoming dilemma of orchestrating autonomous artificial intelligence agents to collaborate effectively.

That initial semester on campus provided a masterclass in leadership and synchronized strategy, proving firsthand that uniting brilliant individuals is frequently far more difficult than simply making them smart in the first place.

Roots of an Ambitious Institution

Hamilton's origins date back to the eighteenth century and the missionary work of Samuel Kirkland among the Oneida community. Kirkland envisioned an integrated academy where Native American and settler children could study side by side, gaining the endorsement of George Washington and Alexander Hamilton, who served as a founding trustee.

While the institution ultimately evolved away from that original mixed-enrollment ideal as settlers moved westward, the founding spirit of pushing educational boundaries persisted. It produced iconic alumni like abolitionist Gerrit Smith, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elihu Root, behavioral psychology pioneer B. F. Skinner, diplomat Sol M. Linowitz, civil rights organizer Robert Moses, U.S. Secretary Tom Vilsack, Netflix co-founder Marc Randolph, and marriage equality advocate Mary Bonauto. Their diverse trajectories shared a common thread: challenging established norms and building cooperative societal structures.

Sociology, Strategy, and Dan Chambliss

The academic landscape at Hamilton expanded significantly with the integration of Kirkland College and the arrival of visionary faculty members. Among them was Dan Chambliss, a Yale Ph.D. graduate and protégé of sociology great Rosabeth Moss Kanter. Chambliss possessed an eclectic intellect, studying everything from Olympic swimming champions to institutional nursing systems.

His sociology syllabus was sweeping and unorthodox, designed to dismantle traditional thinking rather than merely impart facts. He assigned foundational texts by Émile Durkheim, Karl Marx, Max Weber, and others while maintaining a brutally honest stance on grading—viewing it as an institutional hurdle entirely disconnected from personal human worth.

The course featured three written evaluations, culminating in a December final exam. Because of Chambliss's reputation, the class attracted an eclectic mix of 63 students from every corner of campus, creating a vibrant melting pot of campus demographics.

Game Theory in Practice

On October 10, 1988, Chambliss introduced a classic game theory dilemma highlighting the perpetual tension between individual self-interest and group welfare. The final exam proposition was diabolical: boycott completely for universal As, or risk a zero if just one classmate betrayed the pact and showed up. Furthermore, attending students could double the exam weight, raising the stakes and forcing us to grapple with deep questions of trust, incentives, and coalition stability.