.

NLP Academy Forums

   
1 of 2
1
group games
Posted: 04 January 2010 10:58 AM   [ Ignore ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hello again,

I hope you can forgive me another hunch. wink
I found on one of Polish NLP forums an old method of achieving up-time: you show one of the things around you and give it a wrong name (possibly aloud, I don’t exactly remember) – you are going to repeat it with different things on and on for some time.
A first image I had in my had as I read it was a circle of people in which one person after the other does that and all the others respond somehow kinesthetically (say like in the alphabet game) to whether the „leading” person did right or wrong (ie whether the thing shown and its name mismatched or matched). Another factor influencing the response could be the sex of the leading person.
This however does not make the responses of all other players different in the same time. Your response as a single player could also depend on the sex of you immediate neighbours or, more interestingly, whether they responded correctly the previous time ie to the previous leading person.
I have not set up the exact rules for individual responses as I am very much curious how you would do it (if you found the idea interesting). I imagined the rules to be cellular automata like (njsc, you probably could provide a clear and easily digestible explanation of this term) but maybe there are other solutions possible.
I am really looking forward to trying out the final form of the group game – I would probably find it very exciting.
I would be extremely grateful for the ideas of all of you. It would be fantastic if we created or designed something together.
Please, tell me if there is any ambiguity in what I am saying – I’ll try to respond as clear as I can
Yours

Dymitr

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 09 January 2010 07:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Thanks, nJsc smile

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 10 January 2010 03:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  40
Joined  20-09-2009

Another interesting hunch Dymitr, reading it I wondered if something like the version of group games above had been done before. Would be good to watch something created or designed here.

I checked out the book out of curiosity, and it comes with quite a price tag - £69 inc. postage to uk. Wondered how/if it justifies the price.

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 13 January 2010 10:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hi Hobgoblin,
Feel invited and encouraged to take part in the process of creation.
I imagined using Disney strategy here. At the initial stage every idea may be treated as a possible contribution to the final solution(s).
My intention/goal here is to create a game that would be possible to use simultaneously for, say, the number of people equal to sizes of groups of seminar participants.
Literally every idea, clever or quite irrelevant is welcome. I am probably going to make a list of all the ideas that are going to appear. Contradictory ones will be simply treated as alternatives. Let us just open our minds and imaginative powers. Censorship away!
Thank you very much for your comment smile
Dymitr

[ Edited: 13 January 2010 10:39 AM by dymitr ]
Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 18 January 2010 04:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hi again.

njsc, your contribution has had so far at least two interesting aspects for me.
First is your remark about group games from the NLP Field Guide. I thought of asking you for their details but finally I decided to leave you the decision whether and when to share with us your knowledge about them and I am going to accept whatever decision you take. An argument for no sharing now is that it might direct our imagination in a specific way and, in fact, limit it. I trust you consider all the pros and cons.
Secondly, you mentioned using mobile phone pictures and Google – and that was entirely unexpected for me. As you will see below my intention was to create a game for, say, seminar participants or crazy party beasts (so the parties could have some extra value wink). Feel free to develop your idea – the more options, the better. Am I right that you intended some kind of on-line game? It can turn out to be interesting for many reasons.

Now, some changes in my thinking occured. I generated an outline of the game and as you can see, I chose a bit different set of ingredients than previously.
In this version there is no leading person inside the game and I banished the showing/naming thing, too.
People playing still stand in a circle facing the centre of it. They simultaneously choose one of the three movements from either alphabet or colours, say, without legs at the beginning. Colours movements probably help better in keeping rythm and a steady pace together at least at the beginning (if there is not any person responsible for rythm outside the circle of players). Everyone says the name of his/her left or right neighbour while making the move.
The next step is to say the name of the next person and move accordingly to the movement done by the previous person. It can be a simple repetition – we do left if it was left, right if right and together if it was together. So, as an example, when I move at the first step I look at Jane on my right side, I observe her movement and say her name. At the next step I look at the next person in the circle, John, repeat previously observed Jane’s movement, observe his movement and say his name. And so I go the full circle over and over (there are a few versions what I do when it comes to me again – in one of them I just continue).
But the repetition is not the only choice. Out of 26 possible sets of substitution rules (pure repetition is the 27th) there are 5 balanced ones:

L—>L, R—>T, T—>R

L—>R, R—>L, T—>T

L—>R, R—>T, T—>L

L—>T, R—>L, T—>R

L—>T, R—>R, T—>L


Maybe clearer presentation of those rules should look like this (upper line of each rule represents all possible inputs, lower shows respective outputs):

L   R   T         L   R   T         L   R   T         L   R   T         L   R   T    

L   T   R         R   L   T         R   T   L         T   L   R         T   R   L


So probably the easiest transformation is the second one: one just does a mirror reflection of what one sees: left goes for right, right for left and together stays together. But I am sure if the game was used as a warming up for the seminar the other transformations would have been found easy, too.

But this is not the final development of the game. So far our next movement depended solely on the movement of the person whose name we say in the present step. So far so good. Our next movement could depend also on our present movement. This time even the repetition looks far less trivial. For the repetition now means either repeating someone else’s or someone’s own movement or both if they are the same:


LL—>L, LR—>L, LT—>L,  RL—>R, RR—>R, RT—>R,  TL—>T, TR—>T, TT—>T

or

LL   LR   LT     RL   RR   RT     TL   TR   TT
L     L     L       R     R     R     T     T     T


In the set of rules given above (the same set presented in two ways) our previous own movement does not influence the present one (I assume the second letter of each pair to be representing our own previous movement). So even with taking our own movements into account we can arrive at simple repetition of somebody else’s movements. But this does not have to be the case. Have look at this single set of rules:


LL—>L, LR—>L, LT—>L,  RL—>R, RR—>T, RT—>R,  TL—>T, TR—>T, TT—>R

or

LL   LR   LT     RL   RR   RT     TL   TR   TT
L     L     L       R     T     R     T     T     R


In the case shown above we raise left hand as in simple repetition of somebody else’s movement without exceptions. Exception for right hand is when both us and the „imitated” person raised right hands previous time – then we go for „together” (both hands up); and again, an exception for both hands is made when us and the imitated person have made the same „together” movement – then we go for the right hand only.
Out of 59049 possible sets of rules of the kind given above only 1680 (if I am not mistaken) are balanced, ie the number of the possible results L, R and T in the particular set is equal. Fewer rules still, instead of conserving the number of lefts, rights and togethers, promote the aproximate equality of responses throughout the game regardles of the initial input, which is random (it depends on individual decisions of players at the beginning of the game).
Some of the sets of rules should possess the property of causing an arrival at a clearly repetitive pattern of movements produced by the group and individual players. It could serve as an indication for the end of the game: once the repetitive pattern is achieved it proves that everyone stopped doing mistakes – this being probably not achievable without common HPS.
Some versions should exhibit higly complex and hardly predictable behaviour. The repetition period is inevitable with limited number of players and no mistakes, but can turn out to be astronomically long.

Dymitr

[ Edited: 18 January 2010 04:22 PM by dymitr ]
Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 21 February 2010 11:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hi everybody again smile

njsc - I have only now noticed the modification of your post, hence such a late answer. I think what you do is best for the phase three of the Disney strategy. Therefore I am not going to analyse your reasoning now. I am far more interested in creating as many alternatives as possible first. They don’t have to be perfect or analysed. What really counts is the number. And the limits of imagination. I must confess I liked very much your joke with the cellphone and Google - not only as a joke smile

I present below a slight modification of the previous idea with an exemplary set of rules and also an exemplary evolution of the game.
This time every player responds kinesthetically to the movements of just always the same two people (including him/herself) in the previous step of the evolution of the game. The players stand next to each other in a circle-formed cue instead of facing the centre of the circle. This circularity is reflected by the order of the numbers below: person 1 faces back of the person no. 9 and so on:


9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


Now, the exemplary set of rules is following: 1) if in the previous step both the person in front of me and myself made the movement equivalent to the ‘left’ movement from the alphabet game, I repeat that movement in the present step; 2) if the person in front made the ‘left’ movement while I did ‘right’, I change to ‘left’ in the present step; 3) if my front neighbour raised left hand and I made ‘together’ movement raising both hands (so, letter B corresponds to this movement) in the previous step, I am going to raise right hand; 4) I am also going to raise right hand if my neighbour has raised his right and I have raised my left hand; 5) after my neighbour’s right hand and my own right one I raise both my hands; 6) having seen right up and having raised both I raise both again; 7) after his/her both and my left I raise both; 8) after his/her both and my right I raise right again and 9) if both of us raised both hands I raise my left one in the present step. All these rules have their symbolic representation below: L stands for left, R for right and B for both (which is equivalent to together from the alphabet game). Letter in the left corner always represents my own previous movement, top letter the neighbour’s previous movement and the letter on the right – my own present movement:


L
LL

L
RL

L
BR

R
LR

R
RB

R
BB

B
LB

B
RR

B
BL


So, as in the representation below, vertical sets of letters show movements of all players at the particular step and time goes to the right. Each player can additionally name the present movement of the front-neighbour. For example the person no. 1 raises both hands and says ‘left’ in the first step. At the same step person no. 2 raises left hand and says ‘both’ (which is much shorter than ‘together). And so on.
I chose the particular set of rules in order to get possibly random chains of movements of each player. The initial condition has been chosen to show how the rules support that randomness. I have shown 42 steps of the game assuming that no player does any mistake (and that I haven’t done any wink):

9   L L L L L L L L B L B L L L L L L B L B B R B R L L B L   B R R R L R L B L B R R L R
1   B R L L L L L L L B R R L L L L L L B R R R B L R L L B R R B B B R B R R L B B B R
2   L B R L L L L L L L B B B R L L L L L B B B B L L R L L B B B L B L R R B B R R R R
3   L L B B R L L L L L L B L B B R L L L L B L B L L L R L L B L B R R L R B L B B B B
4   L L L B L R L L L L L L B R R R B R L L L B R R L L L R L L B R R B B R B L L B L B
5   L L L L B B B R L L L L L B B B B L R L L L B B B R L L R L L B B B L B B L L L B R
6   L L L L L B L B B R L L L L B L B L L R L L L B L B B R L   R L L B L B R R R L L B L
7   L L L L L L B R R R B R L L L B R R L L R L L L B R R B B R B R L B R R B B B R R L
8   L L L L L L L B B B B L R L L L B B B R L R L L L B B B L B B   L R L B B B L B L R B


Well, it seems obvious that I made a mistake assuming that vertical lines would be kept in the above - how wrong! Sorry, the view is not the same even if corrected… I trust in your imagination though

Dymitr

[ Edited: 22 February 2010 12:03 AM by dymitr ]
Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 22 February 2010 12:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  40
Joined  20-09-2009

Although I haven’t, I feel I’ve been away for a very long time. And things continue, and they don’t. While realising I’m not meant to, I have no idea what either of your separate aims are here, although a hunch that when both/either of you get there it could be pretty interesting, and the forum would be quiet without you. And then there will be the next thing, the next goal. Is there ever an end goal/situation or do you either/both of you not believe in that?

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 22 February 2010 12:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hi Hogoblin - my aim here is to provoke creation of a New Code game for a group. And I am going to use the Disney strategy for creating it. I don’t care who finds the best solution - I am just curious what turns out to be satisfactory if anything. And Disney strategy can be such a fun! Please, contribute smile
Your last question… I have to think about it smile

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 22 February 2010 01:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

njsc - it is still phase three…

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 22 February 2010 07:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

I have noticed smile
However, you are really welcome to contribute directly to the abundance of alternative solutions…

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 23 February 2010 04:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  40
Joined  20-09-2009

nj, Thank you for a very detailed response - as dymitr said ...“I have to think about it”.

dymitr, thanks for your repeated offers that I should contribute, however a little beyond my level! grin)

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 27 February 2010 09:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

njsc,

I am really enthusiastic about your cellphone-Google joke. It has in fact opened an entirely unexpected field for me and I find it a truly valuable contribution to the phase one. I had never considered using internet for any live NLP exercise before your remark.
The last version of the game I proposed fits actually pretty well if one wants to play it online. So we, the members of this forum, could try it out!
The main idea, inspired by your remark, is to have a circular video connection, ie that I see somebody doing the exercise in front of the webcam while that person watches somebody else doing that exercise in front of the webcam… and so on… and at the and of this chain there is a person watching me doing that exercise. We could also prevent a (long distance) connection delay by introducing a synchronised ticking clock keeping everybody in the same rhythm. An alternative idea is to use the delay (maybe multiplying it) and have a synchronous movement with a previous movement of the person our own movements depend on. The exemplary set of rules would then look like:


L?
  LL

L?
  RL

L?
  BR

R?
  LR

R?
  RB

R?
  BB

B?
  LB

B?
  RR

B?
  BL

So, to explain the symbols: ‘?’ represents the movement of the other person occuring at the same time as our previous movement, ‘R’ stands for ‘right’, ‘L’ for ‘left’ and ‘B’ for ‘both’ or ‘together’, top lines represent our neighbour movements, lower lines our own movements, and time goes to the right while symbols on the same vertical line are symultaneous. Let’s take the third rule as an example: our (lower line) present (rightmost letter) movement is R; our previous movement is B, we however cannot react on the previous movement of our neighbour because of the delay – it appears on our screen at the same time as we do ‘R’, so we base our reaction on our previous (B) and our online neighbour’s next previous movement, which is in this case L.
We might add another rule: if there is only a single input, ie if we have an access only to our own previous movement or only to the other person’s movement because we haven’t done any, we simply repeat what we have done or seen. ‘?’ stands this time for the movement which is missing. In the following evolution person 1 starts the game and others wait for an external input:


9   ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ?RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRLBRLBBB LBRRLBLBBBBLRLRR
1   RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBRRBRRRRLBBBRRLBLBLLRL
2   ? ? RBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBLBLBL BLBLBLBL BLBLBLRBLRBBBRRRRBBRRLBRL
3   ? ? ? ? RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRLBBLLBRRLBR RLBRRLBRBLLRRRRBBBBLBBBRR
4   ? ? ? ? ? ? RBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBLBRLBBBRRBBRRBBRRBLLLRBBBLBLBRRRR
5   ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRLBBRRRRBBLBBBLBBBLLLLRRRRLBRRBB
6   ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? RBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBRRRBBBBLBRRRRLBLBRLLLRBBBRRBB
7   ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRBBBLBLBRRBBBBRRLBBRLLRRRRBB
8   ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? RBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBLBLLBRRBBLBLBBBRRRBRLRBBB


We see the same problem of letter arrangement as in my previous longer post. Maybe we’ll find the solution in the following substitution:

?=>_
L=>*
R=>#
B=>$


The exemplary set of rules given above will then look as given bellow:


*_
  **

*_
  #*

*_
  $#

#_
  *#

#_
  #$

#_
  $$

$_
  *$

$_
  ##

$_
  $*


And respectively the evolution of the game with the given initial condition is going to be represented by the following arrangement of symbols:

 

9   ________________###################*$#*$$$*$##*$*$$$$*#*##
1   ##################$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$##$####*$$$##*$*$**#*
2   __#$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$*$*$*$*$*$*$*$*$*#$*#$$$####$$##*$#*
3   ____##################*$$**$##*$##*$##*$#$**####$$$$*$$$##
4   ______#$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$#*$$$##$$##$$##$***#$$$*$*$####
5   ________###################*$$####$$*$$$*$$$****####*$##$$
6   __________#$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$###$$$$*$####*$*$#***#$$$##$$
7   ____________###################$$$*$*$##$$$$##*$$#**####$$
8   ______________#$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$**$##$$*$*$$$###$#*#$$$


I guess the apparent randomisation of the movements of each person is visible and the working mechanism is easy to follow this time at least in the attachment. 56 steps of evolution of the game are shown.

The evolution shown is maybe a bit boring at the beginning and certainly unbalanced: the first ‘left’ movement appears for the first person in the 45th step! This is however based on the assumption that no mistake has been made before. So earlier randomisation would prove the presence of mistakes (or I have made some).

A slight modification of the additional rule would balance frequences of different movements appearances very easily: we could go for left, right and together (both) in turn, if there were single input:

 


9   ________________$$#*$$##$$##*##*#$**#$**$##*$**##$*#**##**$*$*$#**$#*$**$#**$
1   *#$*#$*#$*#$*#$*#$*$$$*#$$*#$$#$$#$***##**$$$##**#$**#**#$#*$##*$$#*$$##**$$#
2   __#$**##*##*##*##*##*$*#*###*###$*$$****#$#*$*$$$#*##**#**##$##$$###$###$$#*$
3   ____$***$$#$$#$$#$$#$$*#*#*#$$#$$$**$*****##$##*$*$$#$$#*#**#$*#$*$$$$*#$$*$$
4   ______****$*###$*$$*$$*#*#*#*###$*$***$#****#$*#$##*$*###$#$#*##*##*$*$**###*
5   ________#***$#$$$**$**$**#*#*#*#$$**$#**$$#***##*##$$##*#$$*##$#$$#$$##*$#*#$
6   __________$#**$$*$***$#*$#*#*#*#*####*$$#*$*#***#$#$$*$$$#$*$#$$*###$*$$$##$#
7   ____________*#**$**$#**$$##$#$#$#$#$$$$###$##*#***##$*$####$**$$*$#$$$**$*$$$
8   ______________##**$#*$$#*$*#$*##$*##$*$*$$$$*#$#$#**#$**$$$$$***$**$$*$***$##


77 steps of the evolution of the game are shown but I had to reduce this number in the attachment.


Whatever movements (delayed or not) are subjectively sychronised we name aloud the movement of the person we are watching on screen during the game. To add a little more confusion we can say ‘star’, ‘pound’ and ‘dollar’ instead of ‘left’, ‘right’ and ‘together’ wink Or we can set up certain rule or rules for giving wrong names to the movements.

There are of course some problems left to solve and I hope either minor adjustments or entirely new concept, or, last but definitely not least, some vague hunches will be presented on this forum smile For your internet half-hunch – chapeau bas

Dymitr

Image Attachments
evolution 1.jpgevolution 2.jpg
Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 27 February 2010 09:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hobgoblin – I am going to respect whatever decision you are going to take. But… as you can see the difference between njsc having joked or not really makes a difference…
Hoping for more restricted inner censorship smile
Dymitr

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 27 February 2010 10:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Suzy - thanks a lot!
Awaiting it smile
d

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 03 March 2010 10:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  121
Joined  21-09-2009

Hobgoblin - I have thought a bit about your question smile However, before I bore you with my answer, I’d like to know: wasn’t it just a rhetorical one? wink
Dymitr

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 03 March 2010 11:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  40
Joined  20-09-2009

No, if you’ve got an answer, I’d love to hear it grin

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
   
1 of 2
1
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed