OK, so my post about the earthquake situation is a bit late, but here goes....It did seem a bit over-hyped. It was called "earthquake" and was about groups-I could pretty much guess that we would be in a simulation situation, pretending an earthquake had happened. Yet some how I was still expecting more. Nevertheless, it was somewhat interesting. I was in the group that was deemed "fractured". I completely disagree. I think we worked out everything very well, even if we did have a few people who seemed to be leading more. And if I were really in that situation, I would want clear, decisive leadership, not an unwavering, must-make-complete-consensus group. My theory is that by the time the other group had figured out all of the choices, my group would have already been signaling and been rescued. I do not to knock the other group in any way; I am merely saying that I preferred my group and still think our methods were effective. And this may just be because I am stubborn, but even on seeing the "experts" decisions and how ours differed, I am still satisfied with the decisions we made. So that is what I thought of it.