Popularity is not so much an illusion as an enigma.  It exists based solely on the opinions and perceptions of others. In other words, its exists, it's not really an illusion - people can most definitely be popular. However, the reasons behind it's existence are ephemeral and transient.  Intangible at best.

Popularity is not always deserved, in fact, sometimes, the nicest and most loyal people are definitively unpopular.  Those that attain popularity do so in a variety of ways.
School or college is a closed circuit environment.  You're required to go (or else be home or private schooled) and the same kids will continually go to the same schools unless someone moves.  This means there is forced interaction between a group of people that don't necessarily have anything else in common, save geography.

This is in complete contrast to the rest of your life.  Once you graduate, you can choose your college and what you study, your vocation, the city you live in, the places you frequent.  These are not generally options for a minor, who is subject to his/her parents' decisions.Kids become popular because others decide to look up to them in some form or fashion.

It may be because they excel at something, like football. It may be because they are intimidating and mean and those around them have more submissive personalities and crave the protection of the more dominant leader. It could be because someone is exceptionally attractive and receives attention based solely on outward appearance. It could also be because a person is exceptionally nice, helpful towards others and retains a healthy sense of self esteem (never an easy enterprise in a high school environment)... even in the face of those that might belittle them.

All of these reasons and more could play a factor in one's perceived popularity.  The best thing you can do is strive to retain a stolid core of self awareness, and not let anyone else's opinion of you alter your own sense of worth.  But, while retaining a strong aura of dignity is not always a simple feat when surrounded by a group of, presumably, judgmental peers, it can be done.  I think most adults, as they get older (and hopefully a little wiser) and escape the high school scene, learn this in some form or fashion.

It's your archetypal coming of age fulfilment.  As you get older you gain a more concrete knowledge of the kind of person you want to grow into.
Be true to who you are.  If you aren't sure who you are, just stop and give it some serious thought – think of your standards and morals and likes and dislikes – this will let you know who you want to be.

So, the moral of the story is...

Seek out like minded people to be your friends.  This, far more than procuring a broad popularity, will help you to be happy and content no matter where you are in life. Almost as importantly, the number of friends you have is immaterial.  The quality of the friends you keep and what they mean to you, and you to them, is what ultimately matters.

The pendulum sways in space
Unaffected by what it sees.
Twelve numbers watch
The two hungry hands
Alas! "sleeping time"...

-!nversed Poignancy!

Earlier this month, Sri Lankan(SL) Cricket Board had asked their players to return back home by May, 2011. Apparently, the Sri Lanka cricket board wants the team to focus more on the England Tour ahead instead of IPL.

The call from the country is blatant that they would want their players to return home for the practice, suspending IPL for a while. This decision would impact the IPL in what might be called a "significant game changer". With teams losing out on few of the key players ( Mumbai Indians without the Malinga, Kochi Tuskers and Deccan Chargers without their captains during the tournament), the team's balance might just get tipped.

Amidst all these, "tu-tu main-main" [http://dict.hinkhoj.com/meaning-of-tu-tu%20main-main-in-english.html] between the players and the boards.I felt that there was more to it than what meets the eye -- I felt that it was a torrid move by the SL to somehow hit back at India, for the alleged "ill-treatment" of the SL president during the World Cup Final -- and IPL, IPLs Big Bucks and the plausible state of it 'minus' SL players might have seemed like the only way in which SL Board could have it easy to give a 'cold-shoulder' to India.

The whole scenario reminded me of the multi player generalization of the Prisoner's dilemma (PD) -- with dilemmas surrounding multiple players and it ofcourse gets difficult to get rational,more so, in getting the selfish agents to cooperate for their common good.

Just when I was trying to segregate the in-roads and aggregate the flaws in this decision, I stumbled upon a view from elsewhere, which said that the entire situation might suffer "big time" if there is a formation of cartels. As we know Cartelisation[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartel] is said to be the best way to break Nash Equilibrium. Sangakarra, Jayawardene, Dilshan, Mathews, Randiv, Malinga, and Kulasekara form the core of the Sri Lankan national team. Still, the only way they can win this battle is by coming together. But, the cartel will be broken if even one of them defects. With a whole lot of discussions going on between these players, it of-course, is congruent to the mutiplayer variant of prisoner's dielemma, the game of commons.

The franchise owners will definitely not be happy with this. The aggrieved owners include are likely to support the players’ cartel.

The Sri Lankan ministry, on the other hand, would like to form their own cartel with anti-BCCI boards like PCB and ECB. And, they would like to identify the weak link in the players’ cartel and lure him to defect. National captaincy could be a significant incentive and Dilshan could be their target. But, given that the ministry has acted on ego rather than financial considerations, they may be entering the battle with little preparation.

While, in the ordinary , universal cooperation is a pareto-optimal outcome, i.e., there is no outcome in which each player is at least as well off and some are better off. But in the commons game the only pareto optimal outcomes are those of minimally effective cooperation. Whether universal cooperation is nevertheless desirable may depend on the nature of the choices involved.

None, the less, the entire story now seems to have ended with not much "game theory masala" to taste. But, it was nice retrospecting, none the less :)

My thoughts leave
In mute protest
Of being confused
Until am left with
A blank expression

-!nversed Poignancy!