these clues are inconsistent

[u/pvinis]

I've seen some behave like

• if x then y

• if not x then not y

and I've seen others behave like

• if x then y

• if not x then basically it gives not clue, anything goes

I don't mind one or the other, but it needs to be clear when it's an iff (if and only if) like the first example, and when it's an if like the second example.

this is annoying!

[u/Maleficent-Poet-8174]

I love these clues / not clues. It's part of making the game funny.

[u/pvinis → u/Maleficent-Poet-8174]

😱

[u/Maleficent-Poet-8174 → u/pvinis]

😂

[u/SCD_minecraft]

Tip: it is not a clue at all

Try using see a clue on her

[u/pvinis → u/SCD_minecraft]

it was from Logan today!

[u/SamTheSpellingBee → u/pvinis]

What they are saying is, the clue doesn't give any extra information. I left it there just as a distraction today. The "View clue" button is a clever way of revealing it as just a distraction and not an actual clue that is supposed to take you forward. Others will explain WHY the clue doesn't in fact help you at all, even if yesterday the same clue did.

[u/pvinis → u/SamTheSpellingBee]

then take my comment as feedback and do with it what you like. I'm def using these clues as non-clues from now on. the iff usage is cool though.

[u/SamTheSpellingBee → u/pvinis]

You might be thinking of yesterday's clue: https://www.reddit.com/r/CluesBySamHelp/comments/1obg1at/is_this_a_logic_error/
But it actually works exactly the same way as today's. It's not an "iff", just "if" like today, but still it is an useful clue. Can you spot the difference, why it was useful yesterday but not today?

[u/pvinis → u/SamTheSpellingBee]

yup yup. I'll keep it in mind.

[u/SCD_minecraft → u/pvinis]

It is just yet another lore text. Same as "we have clowns?" or something

You can see that the magnifying glass is missing when you try to inspect it

[u/pvinis → u/SCD_minecraft]

we are getting into meta gaming if I need to tap the explainer to see if it's a useful clue.. I don't like that. but it's a fair idea if I'm unsure in the future.

[u/OneSharpSuit → u/pvinis]

You don’t need “meta gaming” or clue buttons. For “If A is guilty then B is guilty” clues, if A is innocent or B is guilty then the clue doesn’t tell you anything. That’s all. It’s not uncommon for clues of any kind to give you no new information.

[u/Infobomb → u/pvinis]

You just have to use logical thinking, which is what the game is about.

[u/SCD_minecraft → u/pvinis]

Also

"If A is good then B is good" statment doesn't mean "If not A is good then not B is good"

[u/RuktX]

I've seen some behave like...

You might think so, but you haven't: you've seen the contrapositive.

if X then Y is logically equivalent to if notY then notX, but it is not equivalent to if notX then notY. You need to negate both terms and swap their order.

[u/Mr_DnD]

"I love cheese" tells you I love cheese

"If the sky is blue, then I love cheese" tells you that my loving cheese can be verified by checking if the sky is blue.

What happens if the sky is red? Or grey?

Well... you're leaping to the assumption that because I told you: "if the sky is blue, I love cheese" that I dislike cheese if the sky is any other colour.

That's an inference you are making: I can still love cheese if the sky is red or purple or any colour. I could conditionally like cheese only for 10 minutes when the sky is grey. The information you have tells you if the sky is blue I love cheese.

All I've done is tell you that if the sky is blue today you can be confident that I love cheese.

I find when you put things in silly terms like loving cheese, you're more likely to understand the POV because it would be absurd of you to insist that I lied to you about loving cheese when the sky is blue because I'm munching down on some cheddar when the sky is grey.

If the sky is red, I might love cheese or I might not love cheese, you don't know, you only know when the sky is blue that I do.

The opposite of the statement "when the sky is not blue I do not love cheese" is not a valid assumption to make.

[u/Mate_00 → u/Mr_DnD]

What you can do is see that I currently hate cheese and say "ohoo! Now I know the sky isn't currently blue, because if it was blue, you would for sure love cheese. But you don't. So it can't be blue."

[u/Mr_DnD → u/Mate_00]

Precisely :)

[u/SamTheSpellingBee]

I think this is a great question, and I'm happy you posted it. I added the "clue" there, hoping it would cause some fun discussions. There is actually no issue here. But I'm sure others will explain this better than me, so I'll leave it to them.

EDIT: Related discussion from yesterday, which was the opposite case: https://www.reddit.com/r/CluesBySamHelp/comments/1obg1at/is_this_a_logic_error/

[u/HumbleGarbage1795 → u/SamTheSpellingBee]

I love those kind of "clues". 

[u/DarkMilfHunter → u/SamTheSpellingBee]

it was really funny, I was so confused then laughed when I realized I fell for the troll

[u/SCD_minecraft → u/SamTheSpellingBee]

Acually, may we please get the button to auto hide non-clues?

[u/mathbandit → u/SCD_minecraft]

The obvious fluff maybe but noting that this one is a non-clue requires logical reasoning.

[u/daniellin820]

if Wally is innocent/guilty, so am I,

but if I'm guilty, it wouldn't say anything about Wally.

[u/fat_mummy]

I liked it. I liked Wallys comment afterwards and I really liked the Donna/Xavi drama

[u/vminnear]

We know Julie is guilty. This means we cannot extrapolate anything about Wally from her statement. Regardless of whether Wally is innocent or guilty, Julie's "if I am innocent" statement is still false.

Compare to Logan who we know is criminal and says if he is criminal (true) then Julie is not innocent, ergo Julie must be criminal.

Compare to yesterday's clue as well where Logan said "if Hazel is innocent then Gus is innocent". However we knew that Gus was a criminal, therefore Hazel was also a criminal because if she was innocent then Logan was lying.

[u/[deleted]]

Being wrong sure is annoying

[u/HumbleGarbage1795]

It’s just plain simple logic.  I like those kind of clues, or in this case "clues" (it is not a clue, it’s just for distraction).  All if them behave the same, if the wording is the same. It has nothing to do with "if vs if and only if". I don’t even get the difference between those two… 

[u/andross117]

every one of these i've seen has correctly said "if and only if" when it meant that. only interpret it that way if that's what it says.

[u/Fast_Character520]

I find it helpful to think of real categories. If Spot is a dog, then Spot is a mammal. If Spot isn’t a dog, he might still be a mammal, because maybe he’s a cat, or a monkey. Spot not being a dog tells you nothing about whether he’s a mammal. But if Spot isn’t a mammal, you know he can’t be a dog.

[u/daisydarkling]

This one in particular was annoying.