Hmm. I can imagine cases that kind of fit, but I’m not sure it generalizes—communities are a mix of different dimensions of desired virtues, different mechanisms of exclusion, and extremely varied status games. As such, there is no Alice that is the 99.5 percentile of the general population on more than a few dimensions that are important to the ingroup. You also ignore the cost of supporting or shaming Alice to your own standing in the group, which you likely value as much or more than you value the correct reaction to Alice’s infraction.
I very much do appreciate the insight (not novel, but often overlooked) that adversarial behavior is radically different from simple mistakes or even small-ish value divergence. Adversarial action requires min-max strategies (select your maximum from the options which your opponent will choose that minimize your score), not simple best-outcome selection.
Hmm. I can imagine cases that kind of fit, but I’m not sure it generalizes—communities are a mix of different dimensions of desired virtues, different mechanisms of exclusion, and extremely varied status games. As such, there is no Alice that is the 99.5 percentile of the general population on more than a few dimensions that are important to the ingroup. You also ignore the cost of supporting or shaming Alice to your own standing in the group, which you likely value as much or more than you value the correct reaction to Alice’s infraction.
I very much do appreciate the insight (not novel, but often overlooked) that adversarial behavior is radically different from simple mistakes or even small-ish value divergence. Adversarial action requires min-max strategies (select your maximum from the options which your opponent will choose that minimize your score), not simple best-outcome selection.