Monday, May 18, 2020

Proposal: Word on the Street

Timed out 3 votes to 1 with 1 unresolved DEF. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 21 May 2020 09:16:18 UTC

In Epistemic Knowledge, replace “The justification for their belief is entirely based on information given to that Amnesiac by the Past Memory, or given to that Amnesiac by another Amnesiac who was given it by the Past Memory;” with:-

“The justification for their belief is entirely based on information originating from the Past Memory;”

Allows for chained trades

Comments

Josh: HE/HIM

05-18-2020 18:58:16 UTC

I think that tracability is important - the Amnesiac submitting the Confrontation should be able to chart the full history of the information in order for it to qualify.

Kevan: HE/HIM

05-18-2020 19:37:56 UTC

I think without the full history the Confrontation wouldn’t meet “leaves no possibility for their Role to be anything other than the Role named in the private message” anyway.

In fact, even with a full history, there’s still the possibility that somebody along the way was lying.

Josh: HE/HIM

05-18-2020 19:40:42 UTC

Traitor is active, after all.

Kevan: HE/HIM

05-18-2020 20:36:15 UTC

Someone could just be mistaken about something, as well.

ayesdeeef:

05-18-2020 20:54:18 UTC

Those issues exist in the current rule as well.

If any part of the confrontation is wrong, the confrontation fails. At least, that’s how I understood it being handled in the current rule, and I don’t see how this change creates a new problem.

ayesdeeef:

05-18-2020 20:57:32 UTC

Oh I see, you’re saying this basically doesn’t do anything because we can’t use information from other Amnesiacs either way.

ayesdeeef:

05-18-2020 21:09:26 UTC

Even in the current version of the rule, it’s possible that the one person I got the information from was lying or mistaken. In this case, that would not be information from that Amnesiac from the Past Memory, because the information I got from the other Amnesiac, and the information that Amnesiac got from the Past Memory are different.

The same logic can be applied here, with a longer link chain. If any of the people in the chain lied or were mistaken, that information did not originate from the Past Memory. Thus, this Rule implicitly requires traceability in the same way that the previous version of the rule does. That is, now I need to show that my information originates from the Past Memory, whereas before I needed to show that I got it from an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory.

This phrase, “originates from the Past Memory”, in other words means the same thing as “given to that Amnesiac by the Past Memory, or by an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory, or by an Amnesiac who got it from an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory, or by an Amnesiac who got it from an Amnesiac who got it from an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory…”

Josh: HE/HIM

05-19-2020 10:32:05 UTC

against Hm, I don’t agree that as written this says that - I think that it opens up some room for guessing/fishing, as the Amnesiac could say something hoping that the Past Memory has given supporting evidence to another Amnesiac without having to prove that they have actually acquired that evidence themselves.

Kevan: HE/HIM

05-19-2020 10:38:26 UTC

I’m happy that “justification for their belief leaves no possibility for their Role to be anything other” rules out a Confrontation of “I am the Gardener because it’s just a guess and I’m guessing such information originated from the Past Memory at some point”.

The whole deduction system does need to be broader, though, for players who can deduce their Role logically from the gamestate.

for

Darknight: HE/HIM

05-19-2020 13:34:45 UTC

imperial

derrick: HE/HIM

05-19-2020 14:40:09 UTC

for