On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, CuddleBeam wrote:
> We could define "privacy" in the tourney's rules.
Yes, I agree, it's simple to add an asterisk to the tourney regulations
with a statement: "a message is private if and only if ...(whatever)".
Doesn't matter if it's arbitrary ("a message to everyone's registered
email is private while a message to the discussion forum is not") as
long as it's clearly defined.
> Keeping information secret or not will be hard imo, unless there's a
> clear reward to follow what the game intends you to do.
This is the deepest issue I think. Past experience agrees with this
for me: "don't say X" speech prohibitions are hard to regulate and
cause all kinds of arguments when there's a clear game advantage for
breaking them - there's just too many ways to communicate something
without saying it. Better to design a tourney that doesn't need them
at all. (*encourage* secret communication rather than *requiring* it).
-G.
