Exercise 1: A Sixth, Slower Estimator — Possible Solution
====================================================================

SETUP
------------------------------
    Frank: speed multiplier 1.5

RESULTS
------------------------------
    Absolute estimates: {'Alice': 8, 'Bob': 13, 'Carla': 10, 'Dan': 9,
                          'Eve': 12, 'Frank': 15}

    Relative estimates: {'Alice': 10, 'Bob': 10, 'Carla': 10, 'Dan': 10,
                          'Eve': 10, 'Frank': 10}
    Relative spread: 0

    Frank's absolute estimate: 15 hours
    Frank's relative estimate: 10 points

Frank's absolute estimate (15 hours) is the widest yet - even further
from the fastest estimator (Alice's 8) than the chapter's own Bob was.
His relative estimate is still exactly 10, identical to everyone else's.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
This confirms the relative-estimation finding isn't sensitive to how
extreme an individual estimator's own speed is - even Frank, at 1.5x
slower than average (the widest speed gap in either simulation), still
lands on the identical relative point value as everyone else. The
mathematical reason holds regardless of magnitude: since both the task
and the reference task are scaled by the exact same personal
multiplier, that multiplier cancels out of the ratio no matter how
large or small it is. Absolute estimates keep spreading further apart
as more, more-varied estimators are added; relative estimates stay
locked at 0 spread by construction.