From: Aron Wall (aron_at_wall.org)
Date: Thu Apr 07 2005 - 08:56:07 PDT
Below is my judgement and style award for this rule...which I sent to Quazzie alone. This is my post to the list. But by RO 8 Default and RO 10 Public Posting, three days have elapsed with no judgement and therefore this rule is in fact VALID. Aron Wall wrote: > Quazie wrote: > > > The tenth valid rule of this round shall never have a break within it > > for any reason, that is in the sense of a period, exclamation point, > > or question mark, until it has come to an end, for if it does it shall > > violate this rule, which in and of itself, is a perfect example of > > exactly what the tenth valid rule of this round shall look like, and > > furthermore the tenth valid rule of this round, written by hamlet, not > > to be televised etc etc shall furthermore contain exactly as many > > words as the tenth valid rule of this round, which by reference and in > > accordance with the first valid rule of this round implies that the > > tenth valid rule of this round and this valid rule of this round, > > whatever number it may be, shall both contain the exact number of > > words, which by absolute chance happens to be not more not less but > > exactly equal to then number that shall end this sentence, which in > > itself shall count as words as it will be written as words: one > > hundred and eighty five. > > Validity: I'm sad to say this isn't. If only you had written "the first > rule", instead of "the first valid rule" I think that it would be fine. > But the first valid rule happens to be 234:2, which in no way "by > reference and in accordance" produces the clever twist which you hope > for. > > Style: +2 for merit. I really like your plan to restrict 234:2 with a > tautological restriction, but then exploit an ambiguity in 234:1's > statement that each rule must itself satisfy the restriction it places on > the 10th valid rule in order to twist it into a nontautological > restriction on your own rule, which however because it requires the rule > to do something the same as the 10th Valid rule actually acts as a > restriction on that rule. > An additional +0.5 as a traditional bonus to a new player's first > submission. > Total: +2.5 > > Aron Wall X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <4252BD8B.5E92EFC_at_wall.org> Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 10:32:11 -0600 From: Aron Wall <aron_at_wall.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.6.8-1.521 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Quazie <quazie_at_gmail.com> Subject: Judgement 234:4 INVALID +2.5 Style References: <817305ea05040211523e26722b_at_mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Quazie wrote: > The tenth valid rule of this round shall never have a break within it > for any reason, that is in the sense of a period, exclamation point, > or question mark, until it has come to an end, for if it does it shall > violate this rule, which in and of itself, is a perfect example of > exactly what the tenth valid rule of this round shall look like, and > furthermore the tenth valid rule of this round, written by hamlet, not > to be televised etc etc shall furthermore contain exactly as many > words as the tenth valid rule of this round, which by reference and in > accordance with the first valid rule of this round implies that the > tenth valid rule of this round and this valid rule of this round, > whatever number it may be, shall both contain the exact number of > words, which by absolute chance happens to be not more not less but > exactly equal to then number that shall end this sentence, which in > itself shall count as words as it will be written as words: one > hundred and eighty five. Validity: I'm sad to say this isn't. If only you had written "the first rule", instead of "the first valid rule" I think that it would be fine. But the first valid rule happens to be 234:2, which in no way "by reference and in accordance" produces the clever twist which you hope for. Style: +2 for merit. I really like your plan to restrict 234:2 with a tautological restriction, but then exploit an ambiguity in 234:1's statement that each rule must itself satisfy the restriction it places on the 10th valid rule in order to twist it into a nontautological restriction on your own rule, which however because it requires the rule to do something the same as the 10th Valid rule actually acts as a restriction on that rule. An additional +0.5 as a traditional bonus to a new player's first submission. Total: +2.5 Aron Wall
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST