Consider the case where two cofounders build $1 million worth of a business prior to having a falling out. One of them has $20k in his checking account and one has $500k of home equity. (While this sort of situation might strike one as uncommon if one assumes that all cofounders are peers N months out of undergrad, it is in fact quite common in the real world.) These facts are mutually known. There's a very degenerate strategy here for the richer cofounder: propose transferring 50% of the equity via either the shotgun clause or "fair buy/sell", then offer a bid of $20,001.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7666501
The related article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7664261
A related submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7667325
Given that the introductory commentry is about a couple in an intimate relationship, surely by the stage you're that invested in the cake, you should know the other person's preference. Or, crazy thought, I know, the person doing the splitting can talk to the other party about their preferences. "Hey, I know I'm cutting the cake, but I prefer vanilla - do you have a preference?" would solve the problem at hand in a few seconds.
It's also an example that doesn't feed into the Fair Buy-Sell algorithm (which looks nice for the right circumstances - indivisible items where parties can trade other items of worth (like money) and the parties are not particularly concerned for the welfare of each other). How would you do the 'Fair Buy-Sell' for the cake situation? "This cake is worth X to me and Y to you" means what, exactly?
