RE: [spoon-discuss] Rock, Paper, Pirates

["Craig" <ragnarok@xxxxxxxxx>]

>> Body: You may play this card on any Waiting card. When this occurs, a
>> judge
>> is randomly selected. Both you and the player of the Waiting card
>> send a
>> message to the judge containing any one of the following terms:
>> "Rock",
>> "Paper", or "Scissors". These terms are known as Throws. If both
>> players
>> choose the same Throw, the judge chooses one of them at random, and
>> that
>> player gains the attribute "Hand Job Master". If the chosen throws
>> are
>> different, a player who selected Rock is given said attribute if and
>> only if
>> eir opponent selected Scissors. Otherwise, their opponent gains the
>> aforementioned attribute. If neither player chooses Rock but the
>> Throws
>> chosen differ, the player who chose Scissors gains the attribute
>> "Hand Job
>> Master".

You're right, this isn't all that expicit. Clarifications below:

>The judge is randomly selected from what set?

All players.

>When do the players send their throws?

As soon as possible. Maybe within three checking periods, or else one is
chosen for them?

>Is it possible to change one's throw?

I don't see why not, but there's probably some loophole if you can.

>What if the judge's e-mail address is hidden/bouncing?

Hrm. Good question. Use eir bnomic.org address, if e has one?

>How do we find out who won?
>When does the winner gain eir coveted attribute?

I'd been assuming that the judge would post the identity of the winner to
the PF, so that Dave could recognize eir attribute.

If anyone has any suggestions on how to work the above in without making the
card ridiculously long, let me know.

>For timing reasons I think it's a bad idea for any rule to force a
>player to post a message.  In fact, I'm contemplating a proposal to
>that effect.

You will note that the cards as revised simply state what happens if the
player fails to choose a target; e is not required to do so.

>I also don't like the name of the attribute (although I appreciate the
>efficiency of achieving two onanistic references in only three words).

I wanted something non-boring. Any replacement terms are welcome.

>Meanwhile, in Rule 625 A.1, "expicitly" should no doubt read
>"explicitly".

I think it means "in an expicit manner".

 -- Teucer

"Three little girls from school are we, Mr. Anderson."
 -Cosmoline

ragnarok@xxxxxxxxx
teucer@xxxxxxxxxx


_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss