bd on 31 Jul 2003 18:05:44 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Fwd: Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 46 BALLOT |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 30 July 2003 10:24 pm, Glotmorf wrote: > On 7/30/03 at 9:59 PM bd wrote: > >On Wednesday 30 July 2003 09:53 pm, SkArcher wrote: > >> >On Wednesday 30 July 2003 09:16 pm, Daniel Lepage wrote: > >> >[snip] > >> > > >> >> Personally, I feel that r1592 is a Bad Idea in general. There are > >> >> many situations when we might want a subgame to take up multiple > >> >> rules; and there's no reason why we can't put subgames into single > >> >> rules anyway. This is just an irritating restriction that does > >> >> nothing until it starts pissing us off. > >> >> > >> >> I was thinking about setting up a general structure for stones-laying > >> >> games - define a grid, a stone, etc., and things like Go and Othello > >> >> could use it to shorten their own definitions; but it falls apart > >> >> because of 1592, unless Go, Othello, and Ataxx are all in the same > > > >rule > > > >> >> (which is ugly and stupid). > >> > > >> >I agree, and propose: > >> >{{ > >> >__More is less__ > >> > > >> >Repeal rule 1592. > >> >}} > >> > >> r1592 is intended to stop the horrible sprawl of rules across the entire > >> database that happened with the grid. If it happens with multiple > > > >subgames > > > >> the rules base will become a huge mess of rubbish that is almost > > > >impossible > > > >> to wade thru > >> > >> If you don't like it in its current form, modify it, don't just repeal > >> it and leave us open to the problem > > > >[[How about requiring a keyword for all rules devoted soley to one > >subgame?]] > > > >I replace my as-yet-unrecognized prop __More is less__ with: > >{{ > >__More is less__ > > > >Replace rule 1592 with: > >{{ > >All rules devoted soley to one subgame (that is, where only that subgame > >would > >be directly affected by its repeal) must have as a keyword the name of the > >subgame. > >}} > >}} > > Needs to go on spoon-business. While you're moving it there, you may want > to replace "soley" with "solely". > > Also, you (or whoever replaces the rule) might want to say precisely what a > subgame is, so that Go doesn't potentially become a chocolate eclair. Oops. I replace my as-yet-unrecognized prop __More is less__ with: {{ __More is less__ Replace rule 1592 with: {{ __Subgame keywords__ {* Subgames *} All rules devoted soley to one subgame (that is, where only that subgame would be directly affected by its repeal) must have as a keyword the name of the subgame. }} }} [[ As for the definition of a subgame, I can't think of a good one - any suggestions? ]] - -- bd I'm all for computer dating, but I wouldn't want one to marry my sister. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/KVpBx533NjVSos4RAs6jAJ4xfbmoAkdJIevx7CAcuecVCfHUeQCeKXo8 AWniRTdxJA9KV/1yuOhQykY= =Sjhl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ spoon-business mailing list spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business