Ket you are missing a BIG factor in this whole debate when you say: "In this gameshow the highest EV for the population as a whole is for everyone to cooperate and pick split, but everyone has to do it."
This is wrong, because as you realize if everyone did that this gameshow wouldn't exist, and no one would profit. As it is right now at least some people are profiting and who knows if the losers are also profiting a bit.
And to people who took it personally, relax, Ket and Baal aren't calling you scumbags, are saying that the people who picked steal and don't share the bounty after acknowledging the other player was being honest are, something which most of us agree with.
On April 25 2012 08:53 Spitfiree wrote:
What if the girl stole the money so she could donate them to organisation researching cure for cancer? Would that make it immoral ?
by this logic mugging old ladies is morally correct too, since for all you know the mugger donated it to cancer research
?! no the logic behind this has nothing in common
that flip agreement seems to be spot on @ first glance, but its not as you take poker as a profession and folding the 23o would be unprofessional for you aka your opinion is biased by your principles... dont think they take the game as a profession there
Last edit: 25/04/2012 11:35
1
NMcNasty United States. Apr 25 2012 11:46. Posts 2041
On April 25 2012 09:56 Spitfiree wrote:
Btw it seems that there is pre-action before they have to choose split or steal? What do they do before they are given the options to choose ?
The pre-action is a fundamental part of the game. Regardless of whether you pick steal or split, I think everyone would agree that its correct strategy to attempt to convince your opponent to choose split. The question seems to be whether creating a pact with your opponent in order to up the chance they split and then breaking it is considered immoral. If there was no talking at all, I don't think anyone would have a moral problem with someone picking steal.
At some level, I feel breaking certain pacts has to be considered immoral whether its in a game setting or not. Examples:
"I swear by the life of my children I will pick split"
"I swear to god and all the is holy I will pick split" (for a religious person)
"I enact... *insert sacred tribal blood oath here*"
On April 25 2012 09:56 Spitfiree wrote:
Btw it seems that there is pre-action before they have to choose split or steal? What do they do before they are given the options to choose ?
The pre-action is a fundamental part of the game. Regardless of whether you pick steal or split, I think everyone would agree that its correct strategy to attempt to convince your opponent to choose split. The question seems to be whether creating a pact with your opponent in order to up the chance they split and then breaking it is considered immoral. If there was no talking at all, I don't think anyone would have a moral problem with someone picking steal.
At some level, I feel breaking certain pacts has to be considered immoral whether its in a game setting or not. Examples:
"I swear by the life of my children I will pick split"
"I swear to god and all the is holy I will pick split" (for a religious person)
"I enact... *insert sacred tribal blood oath here*"
That's funny cause that too happens in survivor as a lie. Or, what if someone promises you their vote, and you ask do you swear by the life of your children, are they supposed to answer no? They may as well not play the game at all then.
No i didnt mean the talking part. The girl on the right in the last video said " we've been through so much together " which means there s something happening even before the talk, that they somehow know each other before that ... what do they go through in the game before they talk about splitting or stealing
1
NMcNasty United States. Apr 25 2012 11:50. Posts 2041
On April 25 2012 10:17 locoo wrote:
[QUOTE]On April 25 2012 02:02 Baalim wrote:
[QUOTE]On April 24 2012 22:20 locoo wrote:
if there were no lies this game would be pointless and wouldn't exist.
but neither correct individual strategy or one's personal ethics should depend on whether the game will continue to exist or not.
1
NMcNasty United States. Apr 25 2012 11:54. Posts 2041
On April 25 2012 09:56 Spitfiree wrote:
Btw it seems that there is pre-action before they have to choose split or steal? What do they do before they are given the options to choose ?
The pre-action is a fundamental part of the game. Regardless of whether you pick steal or split, I think everyone would agree that its correct strategy to attempt to convince your opponent to choose split. The question seems to be whether creating a pact with your opponent in order to up the chance they split and then breaking it is considered immoral. If there was no talking at all, I don't think anyone would have a moral problem with someone picking steal.
At some level, I feel breaking certain pacts has to be considered immoral whether its in a game setting or not. Examples:
"I swear by the life of my children I will pick split"
"I swear to god and all the is holy I will pick split" (for a religious person)
"I enact... *insert sacred tribal blood oath here*"
That's funny cause that too happens in survivor as a lie.
That's surprising, and perhaps even somewhat immoral by the producers to even let it happen.
On April 25 2012 04:15 player999 wrote:
another point I just thought, a conversation is made of 2 people, so if the average person lies 40 times in 15min, the average conversation (made of 2 people) contains 80 lies in 15 minutes, or, if you divide the time spent talking equally, each lie 40 times in 7.5 minutes
Already confirmed 2 pages ago I exagerrated, you're being a penis here as well
you confirmed you had the "40 in 5min" wrong and changed to "40 in 15min", which was still wrong and absurd, as you confirmed with the video, so why are you mad at me for calling you out?
I have a really good reply for thiz, but I'll keep my promise to NAzgul
On April 25 2012 10:17 locoo wrote:
[QUOTE]On April 25 2012 02:02 Baalim wrote:
[QUOTE]On April 24 2012 22:20 locoo wrote:
if there were no lies this game would be pointless and wouldn't exist.
but neither correct individual strategy or one's personal ethics should depend on whether the game will continue to exist or not.
I agree, and this is what we are discussing, if the game is build around lying being OK for it to exist, then lying in the game is perfectly fine. There are tons of games in which lying and deceiving is encouraged within the game or there would be no game at all. Baal and Ket are talking about the best possible outcome for everyone, it isn't in everyones best interest for this game to dissapear, it gives away free money.
Speaking of which the analogy about this game and mugging an old lady is absolutely terrible, it was already established that no one is actually LOSING anything, whereas the old lady is absolutely losing her purse.
The analogy about flipping is also bad, as people aren't expecting you to lie about flipping but expect you to lie in game. I've been lied about flipping and felt the guy was a scum, and been lied in game and also felt bad if I wasn't expecting that particular guy to lie to me, but I guess whatever it's just part of the game.
On April 25 2012 11:15 iRiis wrote:
Why do they always check both balls?
Just in case the show fucks up and gives them two splitballs or two stealballs.
...but I see you point, obv the first ball you look at should be the ball you want to pick around 50% of the time so I don´t know why everyone looks at both balls tbh.
All war is based on deception - Sun Tzu
1
Stroggoz New Zealand. Apr 25 2012 12:45. Posts 5365
hmm i just think that poker is more immoral than this game show. It's completely uncontroversial that online poker can be somewhat life ruining for some people because of their addictions, which are uncontrolable and unforseeable to addicts that get into poker. no one willingly chooses that life.
This game show is not life ruining at all no matter the outcome. my logic in what is good/bad is based off how +/-lifeEV something done to another is. Convince me otherwise?
One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings
1
NMcNasty United States. Apr 25 2012 12:51. Posts 2041
I don't think the game is making a comment on whether lying is OK or not, and that ambiguity is part of the appeal. It lets the contestants and audience decide. If it were "just a game" it wouldn't stir up emotions from the audience as much, and would lose some of its entertainment value.
Yea that's exactly it, for some of us it's implied that lying should be ok in game because otherwise the game wouldn't exist, ignoring the fact that some people will lie anyway even if it is morally wrong.
It's interesting because in poker you don't necesarily HAVE to lie, it's your own choice and you can always just reply with "sorry can't say", but it's generally accepted ok to just plain lie. To tell you the truth at first I was naive and just told the truth everytime in poker or just said "i don't want to say", until I realized people lied all the time and it was generally accepted as an ok behaviour on the table.
Floofy says X
LP who disagrees: LOLOLOL YOU IDIOT I HOPE FOR YOUR SAKE YOUR TROLLING THAT IS SO STUPID LLOLLLL
LP that agrees: (i think hes right but i won't talk about it... shhhh)
Ket says X (maybe in a more thought out way, but still same idea)
LP who disagrees: "actually reads the posts and reply semi-logical things, almost change their mind realizing they are so wrong"
LP that agrees: well yea i been wanting to say this! so brillant! how did nobody else think of this before!
I don't have any problem respecting people I disagree with, I think ket is quite awesome, although I think his views on this topic is way off, and I disagree with locoo, nazgul and them. Not that it matters who believes what. I'd still fight for what I think, without the affirmations of people with a lot of influence recognition. Since I decided to put my foot in the water here lol.
On April 25 2012 15:00 Floofy wrote:
I think i should probably change my nickname.
Floofy says X
LP who disagrees: LOLOLOL YOU IDIOT I HOPE FOR YOUR SAKE YOUR TROLLING THAT IS SO STUPID LLOLLLL
LP that agrees: (i think hes right but i won't talk about it... shhhh)
Ket says X (maybe in a more thought out way, but still same idea)
LP who disagrees: "actually reads the posts and reply semi-logical things, almost change their mind realizing they are so wrong"
LP that agrees: well yea i been wanting to say this! so brillant! how did nobody else think of this before!
-_-
its because this matter is very subjective, there are no facts to confirm one side or another, so opinions is all we have, and some people have more credibility than others, and it doesn't help when the one on your side is capaneo
Browsing through your hand histories makes me wonder that you might not be aware these games are possibly play money. Have you ever tried to cash out? - Kapol
On April 25 2012 03:04 EvilSky wrote:
Fuck off, so you have no problem with beating someone at the table out of their kids college money where unknown to them you have an insane edge over them but picking the higher EV choice at a fucking game show is morally repulsive?
The only play is to pick steal, if they chose to split you can give them their half after the show.
read before posting, once again its not the same, you are both players openly trying to take each others money, there is no mutal agreement to share the money, poker is not a good analogy, making a deal to flip and not flipping is the correct analogy (Lying on a deal for profit)
You guys just don't understand, when you start with your opening lie, the conversation is built on that lie, so that makes your next sentence, body language, pitch of voice lying all through the next few sentences, and it keeps building up.
LOL, at being "sick" and disapointed in here. So cool when people all subtle come in with the most massive of insults, making them personal to boot. NOW I AM DISAPPOINT.
Most people in here, who were saying it'z alright to steal, were having a dialogue, sharing their opinion, their belief on the matter.
Then you have all these shitfaces come in and throw personal insults and whatnot, like that'd somehow make their belief superior lol, that shit ain't cool.
*hrmpfhh*
Ps, shouldn't call ppl shitface, don't really mean it, just a little emotional xD
It is you morno, you guys are advocating theft and its disguting that you think its only a matter of opinion, you simply have no integrity.
Good to know Ke tand I are shitfaces for telling the truth
Contact Users: 864 Active, 2 Logged in - Time: 11:59
United States. Apr 25 2012 11:46. Posts 2041
,
,
,
,