Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 46 BALLOT

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 09:53  PM, SkArcher wrote:

> 31/07/2003 02:34:50, bd <bdonlan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > 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 people would include keyword assignments when they proposed rules, 
we wouldn't have a problem. I would have preferred more sprawl with the 
Grid - on a couple of occasions I had to wade through the Revision 
History of r301. It took forever just to load the page, even longer to 
find the revision I was looking for. If it had been split up into a 
dozen smaller rules, it would have taken me a tenth the time it did.

> If you don't like it in its current form, modify it, don't just repeal 
> it and leave us open to the problem

I don't think it's a problem. I don't particularly care for this 'less 
is more' movement anymore; it results in absurdly large rules that end 
up being almost as difficult to go through as the ruleset itself, 
except we get an alphabetical list of all the rule titles for the 
ruleset, which we don't get for subsections.

--
Wonko

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