Difference between revisions of "Paranoid debating"

From Lesswrongwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Add rules, categorize with rationality dojo)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
A typical subject for the game might be "How much maize is produced in Mexico annually?".
 
A typical subject for the game might be "How much maize is produced in Mexico annually?".
 +
 +
=Rules=
 +
* Select player roles. In person, each player receives or selects a card from a pack of role cards. For 4 players, create a pack of role cards by combining 3 black cards with 1 red card. For 4-6 players there should be 1 red card and the rest black with the rest being enough for one card per person. For 7-9 players, 2 red cards. Some variants include a role named the Advocate, which you can designate one of the black cards to represent.
 +
 +
==Simplest variant==
 +
* Each player receives a role. No advocate.
 +
* A question is asked.
 +
* Players discuss for 20 minutes, then write down their individual response on a card.
 +
* The answer is researched.
 +
* Scores are assigned.
 +
 +
==Advocate variant, #1==
 +
* Each player receives a role. One advocate in the deck. The player who receives the Advocate displays it to the group.
 +
* A question is asked.
 +
* Players discuss for 20 minutes, attempting to convince the advocate. The advocate writes down their response on a card. This is the group's answer.
 +
* The answer is researched, scores are assigned.
 +
 +
==Advocate variant, #2==
 +
* Each player receives a role. One advocate in the deck. No player may display their card.
 +
* A question is asked.
 +
* Players discuss for 20 minutes. Anyone may say anything. At the end, the advocate writes down what they think the group's response is on a card, and the group is scored for this.
 +
* Answer researched, scores assigned.
 +
 +
==Variation-by-argument variant==
 +
* Each player receives a role. No advocate. No player may display their card.
 +
* A question is asked.
 +
* Players have 2-5 minutes to write down their initial, individual estimate.
 +
* Players discuss for 20 minutes. Anyone may say anything. At the end, players write their revised estimates on their card.
 +
* Players are scored based on their delta -- the more you go toward the correct answer from your initial estimate, the more points.
 +
 +
=Scoring=
 +
Playing this game would be easier if we had an established method of scoring.
  
 
==Blog posts==
 
==Blog posts==
Line 12: Line 44:
 
[[Category:Jargon]]
 
[[Category:Jargon]]
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 +
[[Category:Rationality Dojo]]

Revision as of 03:43, 16 October 2010

A variant of The Aumann Game where one player purposefully subverts the group estimate. Similar to The Aumann Game, the activity consists of a group jointly producing a confidence interval for an unknown, but verifiable quantity, which is then scored for accuracy and calibration. One individual is designated the spokesperson, who is responsible for choosing the final estimate. However, before the activity begins, one individual is secretly assigned the role of misleading the other members. The deceiver is scored higher the worse the final estimate is.

The activity is intended to teach accurate estimate, proper agreement techniques, and recognition of deception.

A typical subject for the game might be "How much maize is produced in Mexico annually?".

Rules

  • Select player roles. In person, each player receives or selects a card from a pack of role cards. For 4 players, create a pack of role cards by combining 3 black cards with 1 red card. For 4-6 players there should be 1 red card and the rest black with the rest being enough for one card per person. For 7-9 players, 2 red cards. Some variants include a role named the Advocate, which you can designate one of the black cards to represent.

Simplest variant

  • Each player receives a role. No advocate.
  • A question is asked.
  • Players discuss for 20 minutes, then write down their individual response on a card.
  • The answer is researched.
  • Scores are assigned.

Advocate variant, #1

  • Each player receives a role. One advocate in the deck. The player who receives the Advocate displays it to the group.
  • A question is asked.
  • Players discuss for 20 minutes, attempting to convince the advocate. The advocate writes down their response on a card. This is the group's answer.
  • The answer is researched, scores are assigned.

Advocate variant, #2

  • Each player receives a role. One advocate in the deck. No player may display their card.
  • A question is asked.
  • Players discuss for 20 minutes. Anyone may say anything. At the end, the advocate writes down what they think the group's response is on a card, and the group is scored for this.
  • Answer researched, scores assigned.

Variation-by-argument variant

  • Each player receives a role. No advocate. No player may display their card.
  • A question is asked.
  • Players have 2-5 minutes to write down their initial, individual estimate.
  • Players discuss for 20 minutes. Anyone may say anything. At the end, players write their revised estimates on their card.
  • Players are scored based on their delta -- the more you go toward the correct answer from your initial estimate, the more points.

Scoring

Playing this game would be easier if we had an established method of scoring.

Blog posts