Week 2 Tutorial: Deniable to Overt

Applying the timing/target/aftermath framework to a cough, then contrasting it against a classroom violation nobody could call an accident.

3 August 2027

Activity, part one: the cough#

In pairs, take the deniable-cough case from the lecture — a pointed cough timed exactly as a classmate’s bag-rustling stops — and generate one variant where the timing, target, or aftermath signal is more ambiguous than the original.

Activity, part two: overt conduct#

Take the phone-call case from the lecture and write a version where the “disruption” is instead a strong-smelling or crinkly snack opened mid-class. Note what, if anything, is still deniable about it — and what plainly isn’t.

Record your reaction#

For the cough variant, note which of the lecture’s three signals (timing, target, aftermath) is doing the most work in deciding whether a room would read it as accidental or performed. For the overt-conduct variant, note that there is no equivalent signal to weigh — the choice was never in question — and what the room argues about instead.

Reflection#

Rewrite either of the deck’s Bad manner examples as its Good manner counterpart in your own words, and state in one sentence why the good-manner version costs less than the bad-manner one — for the cough, or for the overt case.