5 ms·

> is literally part of the game unfortunately I strongly disagree with this framing. There is no "game". There are just the actions of the individual players.

> is literally part of the game unfortunately I strongly disagree with this framing. There is no "game". There are just the actions of the individual players. Yes, in some sense, lying is part of the "game" in that some players will do it. But extending that to saying "it's part of the game" implies that all players must use those moves, which is absolutely false. It also implies that you are morally excused from doing so because you didn't choose to lie, you were just obliged to by the rules of the "game". A core concept behind something being a "game" is that it exists in a morally isolated sandbox. You can't be a good or bad person based on which legal moves you make in a game of chess. The whole point is to create an environment where you are able to play freely largely unencumbered by the social consequences of your moves. Hiring is the exact opposite of a game. Every move has significant stakes, moral implications, and long term consequences on the entire field. I have never lied on a resume and I would massively lose respect for anyone who did. They are doing something wrong and they should feel bad for it. The fact that other people do it doesn't excuse the act any more than the existence of litterers makes it OK to throw your trash out the window.

nicholasjarnold 5y ago
How about this framing: It's part of a game that I've seen being played throughout my career in tech (software development). I am in no way advocating for that type of behavior. I'm merely pointing out that it exists, it seems to be a game to some and that those who choose a more genuine path can benefit from the follies of those others, however unfortunate that might be. It seems we are in agreement, though perhaps you interpreted my words differently than I had hoped people would.
LesZedCB 5y ago
it is a game in a game-theoretical sense. if those other individual actors lie and massage their resume, does it increase my chance of success by being honest, or by lying a little better? all players do use that move. whether you realize it or not. your moral framework (one i completely agree with, fwiw) is only informing your own decisions, not other adversaries.
walleeee 5y ago
> A core concept behind something being a "game" is that it exists in a morally isolated sandbox This is interesting; if true, what of game theory's seat at the core of many notions of strategy as deployed for explicitly moral purposes? Also, anecdotally, I've seen pretty good results putting some campy, tongue in cheek acknowledgement that I'm not playing games in the resume/cover letter space where these alleged "rules of the game" might otherwise dictate meaningless boilerplate should go Some employers seem to appreciate honesty and a reluctance to bullshit
- LesZedCB 5y ago
  GP is making up definitions for concepts in ways that make no sense. denying the existence of games because you find them morally reprehensible doesn't change the fact of their existence. of course games are executed with moral repercussions. if anything, that's really the point of games. they are simplified, yes, but not amoral. if anything, most "amoral" or "apolitical" games are widely implemented hegemonic tools.
  - walleeee 5y ago
    Yeah, games seem to circumscribe morality in a particular context, maybe in ways that allow us to explore certain moral questions, or (to your latter point) ignore others
- munificent 5y ago
  "Game" gets used to analyze human behavior a couple of unrelated ways. Game theory as a branch of mathematics is about analyzing adversarial and potentially limited knowledge systems. It is unrelated to whether some theoretical game is embedded in any particular social or moral system. You can look at dating, the voting patterns of the United Nations, and poker all under the lens of game theory even though the former two wouldn't generally be considered "games". Unrelated to that, over in the world of "ludology" or game studies and game development, people discuss what it means for a certain system to "be a game" or "not be a game". Likewise, they discuss what makes an activity "play" versus "not play". Why do we feel some moves are "play-like" and others aren't. What defines our notion of fair play? What is sportsmanship? What is cheating? Where is the line between the game and the metagame? I'm using "game" in the second sense here, which I think applies. When people say something "is a game", often what they are implying is that "all legal moves are fair play". But I think that value statement is only morally justifiable in an environment that is actually game-like. And for a social system to be game-like in that way means that everyone participating has agreed to the rules of the game and accepts that all moves are fair play.
kjgkjhfkjf 5y ago
Feel free not to engage in this practice if it offends your moral sensibilities, but you will be at a disadvantage if you do. Experienced resume readers are aware of the amount of self-aggrandizement that goes on, and your modest and truthful claims would be subject to the same amount of skepticism as everyone else's.
- munificent 5y ago
  > Feel free not to engage in this practice if it offends your moral sensibilities, but you will be at a disadvantage if you do. I think one could argue that all moral sensibilities exist to place one at an individual short term disadvantage in return for potentially better longer term or community level outcomes. We don't need moral codes to get us to be immediately self-serving—our natural self interest takes care of that. It's like the old joke that if there was a shortcut that always worked, it wouldn't be called a "shortcut", it would just be The Way.

nicholasjarnold 5y ago

How about this framing: It's part of a game that I've seen being played throughout my career in tech (software development). I am in no way advocating for that type of behavior. I'm merely pointing out that it exists, it seems to be a game to some and that those who choose a more genuine path can benefit from the follies of those others, however unfortunate that might be. It seems we are in agreement, though perhaps you interpreted my words differently than I had hoped people would.

LesZedCB 5y ago

it is a game in a game-theoretical sense. if those other individual actors lie and massage their resume, does it increase my chance of success by being honest, or by lying a little better? all players do use that move. whether you realize it or not. your moral framework (one i completely agree with, fwiw) is only informing your own decisions, not other adversaries.

walleeee 5y ago

> A core concept behind something being a "game" is that it exists in a morally isolated sandbox This is interesting; if true, what of game theory's seat at the core of many notions of strategy as deployed for explicitly moral purposes? Also, anecdotally, I've seen pretty good results putting some campy, tongue in cheek acknowledgement that I'm not playing games in the resume/cover letter space where these alleged "rules of the game" might otherwise dictate meaningless boilerplate should go Some employers seem to appreciate honesty and a reluctance to bullshit

LesZedCB 5y ago
GP is making up definitions for concepts in ways that make no sense. denying the existence of games because you find them morally reprehensible doesn't change the fact of their existence. of course games are executed with moral repercussions. if anything, that's really the point of games. they are simplified, yes, but not amoral. if anything, most "amoral" or "apolitical" games are widely implemented hegemonic tools.
- walleeee 5y ago
  Yeah, games seem to circumscribe morality in a particular context, maybe in ways that allow us to explore certain moral questions, or (to your latter point) ignore others
munificent 5y ago
"Game" gets used to analyze human behavior a couple of unrelated ways. Game theory as a branch of mathematics is about analyzing adversarial and potentially limited knowledge systems. It is unrelated to whether some theoretical game is embedded in any particular social or moral system. You can look at dating, the voting patterns of the United Nations, and poker all under the lens of game theory even though the former two wouldn't generally be considered "games". Unrelated to that, over in the world of "ludology" or game studies and game development, people discuss what it means for a certain system to "be a game" or "not be a game". Likewise, they discuss what makes an activity "play" versus "not play". Why do we feel some moves are "play-like" and others aren't. What defines our notion of fair play? What is sportsmanship? What is cheating? Where is the line between the game and the metagame? I'm using "game" in the second sense here, which I think applies. When people say something "is a game", often what they are implying is that "all legal moves are fair play". But I think that value statement is only morally justifiable in an environment that is actually game-like. And for a social system to be game-like in that way means that everyone participating has agreed to the rules of the game and accepts that all moves are fair play.

kjgkjhfkjf 5y ago

Feel free not to engage in this practice if it offends your moral sensibilities, but you will be at a disadvantage if you do. Experienced resume readers are aware of the amount of self-aggrandizement that goes on, and your modest and truthful claims would be subject to the same amount of skepticism as everyone else's.

munificent 5y ago
> Feel free not to engage in this practice if it offends your moral sensibilities, but you will be at a disadvantage if you do. I think one could argue that all moral sensibilities exist to place one at an individual short term disadvantage in return for potentially better longer term or community level outcomes. We don't need moral codes to get us to be immediately self-serving—our natural self interest takes care of that. It's like the old joke that if there was a shortcut that always worked, it wouldn't be called a "shortcut", it would just be The Way.