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

[bd <bdonlan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----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
As long as we're going to reinvent the wheel again, we might as well try 
making
it round this time.
- - Mike Dennison
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/KU+2x533NjVSos4RAr0PAJ9s5BbjyeF9Vs2iWkihDCl+8+SuJQCfVC0R
/6zYYbZx48UC/YMbBr1Xcd4=
=Qfkv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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