Phil Ulrich on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:09:42 -0600 (CST)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] Re: [s-b] <no subject>

I wasn't Minister of the Board at the time all that went down, so I didn't receive points for it anyway. 

--Phil
===========================================
anarchism:
You have two cows. Keep them. Steal another. Shoot the government. 


On Nov 15, 2004, at 12:16 PM, Jake Eakle wrote:





On 11/15/04 8:34 AM, "Daniel Lepage" <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:




I create a Squid at A2. I maintain that I can do this due to the
following line:

You may only make a Squid upon the edges of the board.
Since one can only create pieces on the edge of the board anyway, this 
line
seems to grant permission to create them anywhere along the edges of
the
board. I also maintain that since there is nothing to the left of the
leftmost side of the board, the Squid's move cannot be made, and thus
it
will stay where it is until destroyed.


If one rule says 'you can do X on any of the following squares: {list
of squares}" and another rule says 'you can only do X on edge squares", 
I would interpret that to mean that you can do X on any of the squares
in the first list that are also edge squares, NOT that the later clause 
supersedes the first


yes, but since the first set is smaller than the second, and existed
previously, i would argue that the inclusion of this instruction in the
Squid p-spec may be and was intended to be read as 'you may create a Squid on any edge square'. It was changed in several ways to fit song form (create -> make for example), and one of them was the inclusion of the completely arbitrary word 'only'. 'You may create a Squid on any edge square' and 'You may only create a Squid on any edge square' appear to me to be functionally 
equivalent in this case.
Wait, okay, i know how to explain this better now. I think the p-spec is saying 'This p-spec overrides the rules for piece creation for Squid' and then later saying 'Creating a Squid on any edge square is legal move.' This 
works much in the same way that the black hole does:

The following is a legal move:

    *  Creating a Black Hole on any square.

I don't think anyone is arguing that you can create a black hole on any
square just so long as that square is also adjacent to one of your pieces on the edge of the board too. More importantly, i think that if this p-spec 
instead read


The following is a legal move:

    *  Creating a Black Hole on any non-edge square.
It would no longer be legal to create a black hole in the general manner described at the top of the book of piece. In other words, any p-spec which 
contains any modifications to the piece-creation process completely
overwrites the original piece-creation process. Thus, once the Squid p-spec has said anything about piece-creation, only its own rules apply, and it's own rules say 'You may [only] create a Squid on an edge square'. I think it 
is clear that this sentence alone means the same thing with or without
'only'.


Now i have rambled on a lot. I hope this all makes sense.
Also, Phil's black hole should have destroyed itself, as it is on the same 
square as a black hole. This brings up the interesting question of what
order pieces are destroyed in, but i think the only safe precedent is to say that first the game checks all nine squares around and on the black hole, and then destroys anything on them simultaneously. I would have said that a better way to look at was that a black hole just replaced the squares on it and around it with empty squares, without looking at other pieces at all, but at some point we might have non-pieces on the board, or we might have 
anti-gravity pieces that resist black holes, or whatever.
Because of this, the last several moves were illegal, and Phil failed to perform all of his duties as minister of the board, and did not recieve 20 
points. The board ought to look like this:

     A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   | pc|   |   |   |   |   |   |   | bc|
 0 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 1 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | Wc|
 5 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   | PO| PO|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

This shouldn't have to be posted to s-b, because it's not something im
doing, jsut a truth about the gamestate. Regardless of this post, the public 
displays ought to properly reflect the gamestate.

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


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