Re: [s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] PlayerIain submits p1917/0

[Iain Scott <iop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 19:33 15/10/04, you wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 08:38:37AM -0500, wonko@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > Amend Rule 1639/5 [[Political Go]] Section C to add
> > "4. Mining.
> > 5. Theft."
> > to the list of types of move.
> > [[I should have notcied this when 1854 was proposed (in fact I think I 
> did,
> > but then I forgot about it...), but given the other two technologies
> > specifically mention they dont take up a P-Go move, these two _should_.]]
>
> No, they weren't intended to take up a move. The reason those two
> technologies don't specifically mention that is that there's no
> ambiguity there, whereas playing a stone and forming an alliance are
> listed in the pGO rule as taking a move.

hmm... I think they are probabally too powerfull (especially in the hands 
of only one player, which is effectivly what is happening at the moment) 
not to take up a move...

cheers,
Iain

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