Re: [s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] Wonko submits p1952

[Jake Eakle <jseakle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The issue isn't so much that he could make illegal moves and get away with
them, it's that it would be in his interest to never let anyone make a move
if he can stop it. So in effect, if the minister plays correctly (assuing
one wantts one's own pieces on the board, that is : ) ) , this rule does
nothing at all as any move wihtout the board included will not be made.
Maybe board-inclusion should only be mandatory if the move affects three or
more squares, or something like that.


On 11/23/04 8:41 PM, "Jeremy Cook" <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 11:31:20PM -0500, Bryan Donlan wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:35:48 +0000 (GMT), automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> <automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Wonko has submitted a new proposal, p1952.
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Proposal 1952/0: A few little fixes
>>> A Standard Proposal by Wonko
>>> Last modified on nweek 73, nday 6
>>> 
>>> In r1900, The Board Game, replace the sentence "In order to perform a Move,
>>> a player must include with it an accurate textual representation of the
>>> board." with
>>> "In order to perform a Move, a player should include with it an accurate
>>> textual representation of the board. If e does not, the Minister of the
>>> Board may reject the Move at eir discretion, in which case the Move fails
>>> and has no effect."
>> 
>> The minister of the board can play too, right? Can't he make an
>> illegal move, then choose, at his discretion, to not reject it?
> 
> Well then the move Platonically didn't happen, so e'd lose a CFI against
> him.
> 
> Zarpint
> _______________________________________________
> 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