Watch Your Mouth! Planters Win!

Forum Matches
#1241

Geez has nobody played scrabble and wonder how they do it? Smh

#1242

You propose that the host still decides what is ambiguous or not, which is not neutral. :eyes:

#1243

Boohoo

#1244

Good reapers donā€™t boo.

#1245

Well youā€™ve seen how people react when I say get nodded which is effectively a ā€˜no, stop asking what you are askingā€™ thereā€™s also ā€œchur, broā€ which means thanks informally but I can understand people being like ā€œwhat does that mean?ā€

Hosts do have hearts and Iā€™d hope they wouldnā€™t kill you for using slang in conversation

1 Like
#1246

at the end of the day Iā€™m fine with host deciding what common sense is

#1247

This whole thing is true except hosts having hearts
If they had hearts they wouldnā€™t allow the mafia to kill people :crying_cat_face:

#1248

I have no heart, I have a kraken to keep me alive

#1249

For that theyā€™d have to recognize it as slang in the first place however.

I thought I had mentioned it here, but I prefer a host that could operate like a program or robot aside from flavour, so thatā€™s a fundamental difference between us.

#1250

How does a robot understand slang as well?

#1251

hey make a robot that can host this game thx :smiley:

#1252

wait nuke may actually be able to
Hold on

#1253

A robot cannot ā€œunderstandā€ in the conventional sense. Thatā€™s why I dislike your rule on a fundamental level. A robot couldnā€™t apply it.

#1254

Yes, a robot can apply a check easily if itā€™s in a certain dictionary, but a human cannot feasibly imitate that.

#1255

@NuclearBurrito

#1256

Actually what if a robot could scan messages for a certain word

#1257

Itā€™s super easy to program something like that. Simple if statement.

#1258

Control f imitates it here for you as well. :eyes:

#1259

Can we program it to basically have a message that quotes their message and says something like @x has died for saying a certain word.

#1260

Easily.