From: Aron Wall (aron_at_wall.org)
Date: Tue Oct 02 2001 - 11:33:27 PDT
Glenn Overby II wrote: > As > an odd-numbered rule, it must specify the location of all pieces on the board (per > 169:11). This did not happen. But my rule *was* evenly-numbered, with a 14. I don't see why that isn't just as good (and a more literal) interpretation as the nth fantasy rule. Even if my interpretation is rejected, we don't have any good reason to assume that the number labels both valid and invalid fantasy rules (although both these latter interpretations would invalidate my rule). I was intending to deliberately exploit this loophole with a future rule (I was not intending to attempt to do it with *this* rule). Aron Wall -- Rule Date: 2001-10-02 18:33:38 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST