In the polarized environments of modern discourse, the cost of public speech has inverted. Where platforms promised a frictionless exchange of ideas, we’ve instead constructed reputational minefields—protocols of visibility without protection. This essay introduces the Reputational Collapse Game, a modification of the classic Chicken Game, where speaking truthfully risks reputational annihilation and silence becomes the dominant strategy. Drawing from game theory, political science, and the emergent protocol logic of the internet, we explore how digital audiences function less as communities and more as asynchronous tribunals—judging not only our present speech, but our archived and future selves.