Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6728752" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Agreed.&nbsp; That was me extending a minor olive branch for the sake of trying to expedite some form of communication here.&nbsp; The barrier is already steep enough as is.&nbsp; But in truth, the starting point of all of this is the mental gymnastics required to go from (the obviously accurate) &quot;reasoning&quot; to full-blown cryptanalysis, so its probably not even healthy for clarity to allow for that.&nbsp; But if you're going to jump down the rabbit hole, you have to start somewhere.&nbsp; Where that common ground (no matter how shaky) might be, I wouldn't even venture a guess.I would go with &quot;preposterous&quot;, but if you want to throttle it back to &quot;implausible&quot;, then be my guest <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Preposterous is the idea that you can remove GMing cognitive biases with content generation tables that are absolutely EMBEDDED with bias (from choice of which stock tables to use or if homebrew generation then decisions on frequency and type) and with resolution mechanics with swathes of procedures (some mentioned upthread by you and others) that are either incoherent with respect to each other or are outright missing, therefore REQUIRING GM INTERVENTION (the kind of which loads play down with the GM's cognitive biases) so the game might move forward at all.Every single game with a human referee involved (even with the most clean and minimalist procedures possible) will introduce some measure of cognitive bias, therefore reducing the signal to noise ratio away from pure signal.&nbsp; You can guarantee a proportionate increase in noise the less clean, the less minimalist the ruleset/procedures of play are and the more involved the human referee must be.I give you...the freaking National Football League pre Roger Goodell and post Roger Goodell (and the reason why fans are losing their minds left and right and why &quot;Deflategate&quot; became a thing at all).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6728752, member: 6696971"] Agreed. That was me extending a minor olive branch for the sake of trying to expedite some form of communication here. The barrier is already steep enough as is. But in truth, the starting point of all of this is the mental gymnastics required to go from (the obviously accurate) "reasoning" to full-blown cryptanalysis, so its probably not even healthy for clarity to allow for that. But if you're going to jump down the rabbit hole, you have to start somewhere. Where that common ground (no matter how shaky) might be, I wouldn't even venture a guess. I would go with "preposterous", but if you want to throttle it back to "implausible", then be my guest :p Preposterous is the idea that you can remove GMing cognitive biases with content generation tables that are absolutely EMBEDDED with bias (from choice of which stock tables to use or if homebrew generation then decisions on frequency and type) and with resolution mechanics with swathes of procedures (some mentioned upthread by you and others) that are either incoherent with respect to each other or are outright missing, therefore REQUIRING GM INTERVENTION (the kind of which loads play down with the GM's cognitive biases) so the game might move forward at all. Every single game with a human referee involved (even with the most clean and minimalist procedures possible) will introduce some measure of cognitive bias, therefore reducing the signal to noise ratio away from pure signal. You can guarantee a proportionate increase in noise the less clean, the less minimalist the ruleset/procedures of play are and the more involved the human referee must be. I give you...the freaking National Football League pre Roger Goodell and post Roger Goodell (and the reason why fans are losing their minds left and right and why "Deflategate" became a thing at all). [/QUOTE]

Verification