From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: Sat Dec 06 2003 - 17:38:44 PST
Round 219 has ended. Jae is the judge and wizard of Round 220.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2003.11.23 05:47 Matthew Cooper wrote:
> 1+ Each sentence immediately preceded by a number and a plus sign is
> considered to be a single restriction.
> 2+ Bob is a nanobot.
> 3+ Each nanobot is capable of performing a single action in each rule.
> 4+ One definition of an action is the addition of a new restriction.
> 5+ One definition of an action is the modification of an existing
> restriction.
> 6+ A tag is text contained within square brackets, consisting of a
> property-value pair separated by a colon.
> 7+ Tags may be added and removed without requiring the action of a
nanobot.
> 8+ The nanobot responsible for performing an action must be identified
in a
> tag (with the property name 'R') at the end of that action, for the
duration
> of the rule in which that action took place.
> 9+ All rules must conform to the restrictions specified in the
previous
> valid rule, as well as to those it puts in force itself.
> 10+ Charlotte is a nanobot. [R:Bob]
I'm going to be nice and interpret 219:1 as satisfying the first part
of 219:1.9 vacuously, since there is no previous valid rule. VALID.
+1.0 Follows theme
+0.5 Newbie bonus
-0.1 219:1.9 is redundant (Regular Ordinances already require rules to
obey all previous valid rules)
-0.1 219:1.9 attempts to refer to a nonexistent previous valid rule
+1.3 Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2003.11.25 11:30 jcm3_at_cec.wustl.edu wrote:
> 1+ Each sentence immediately preceded by a number and a minus sign is
> considered to be a "modification," as specified in 219:1.1, of all
> restrictions in all rules with the same number preceded by a plus
sign.
> 7+ A "modification" as specified in 219:2.1 *replaces* the modified
rules.
> 2+ At some point, the world will be consumed by nanobots.
> 31+ I, Jae at jcm3_at_cec.wustl.edu, am not a nanobot. [R:Charlotte]
> 2- When this round started there was just 1 nanobot, but the number
> doubles (and has been doubling) every time the word nanobot is used in
a
> rule.
> 11+ This restriction contains the word "nanobot."
Note the exact wording at the end of 1+. 2- does not modify 2+. It
would
modify +2, if there were a +2.
Note the exact wording at the end of 7+. If a 219:2.1 style
modification
modifies any part of a rule, then it replaces *that entire rule*.
However,
since 2- has no +2 to modify, it does not modify any part of 219:2 (and
so
it does not replace 219:2).
2- is still effective as an ordinary English sentence, and implies that
there were 32 nanobots after 219:1 was posted, and 512 nanobots after
219:2 was posted. (The word "nanobots" does not trigger 2-.)
VALID.
+1.0 Follows theme
+0.5 Builds on previous rule
+0.5 Newbie bonus
+0.1 Abandoning uniform-increasing restriction numbers
+0.1 Abandoning strict-increasing restriction numbers
-0.1 Glitch in 219:1.1 makes this rule's would-be modification less
powerful
+0.2 Glitch in 219:1.2 makes future modifications more powerful
+2.3 Total
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST