You talk too much TB Pesakhim 98

 I reached the age when I'm known to misplace things like my glasses or my cell phone. So far I've never lost anything really important or large. I wonder how could a person lose his lamb he designated as his korban Pesakh. Sacrificing and then eating the lamb with matza and maror was the very essence of the Passover celebration. I would think he would guard the lamb to avoid all the complications discussed on the last two dappim of Talmud.

Today's daf TB Pesakhim 98 discusses different scenarios when a group's lamb is lost and found and in between the group decides to designate another lamb as the korban Pesakh. The Mishna lays out the case and the Gemara comments on it.

“MISHNA: With regard to a group whose Paschal lamb was lost, and they said to one member of the group: Go and search for our Paschal lamb, and when you find it, slaughter it on our behalf; and he went and found the missing offering and slaughtered it on behalf of the entire group, but in the meantime they took a different animal and slaughtered it as a Paschal lamb, the halakha is as follows: If his Paschal lamb was slaughtered first, he eats from his offering, as he is considered to be registered specifically for that offering, and they eat with him from his offering, because he included them in his offering and it belongs to the entire group. The second animal does not have any registrants and is therefore burned. And if theirs was slaughtered first, they eat from theirs because they withdrew from the original offering through the act of slaughtering a replacement, and he eats from his because he was not registered for the replacement offering sacrificed by the remainder of his group.

“GEMARA: The Sages taught: If he, the agent, said to the other members of the group that if they slaughter their Paschal lamb first they should include him, and they said to him that if he slaughters his Paschal lamb first he should include them, all of them eat from the first Paschal lamb that was slaughtered, and the second one must be burned. If he did not say this to them and they did not say this to him, they are not responsible for each other, and each side eats its own Paschal lamb. From here the Sages stated: Silence is fitting for the wise, and a fortiori the same is true for fools. In the case under discussion, had neither side appointed the other to slaughter the Paschal lamb on its behalf, both offerings would be valid and would be consumed. When each side appointed the other to slaughter the Paschal lamb on its behalf, only the first one slaughtered may be eaten while the second one must be burned. This is as it is stated: Even a fool, when he holds his peace, is considered wise; and he that shuts his lips is esteemed as a man of understanding’ (Proverbs 17:28).” (Sefaria.org translation)

I think it is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you're wise then opening it and proving them wrong.