From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: Wed Feb 20 2002 - 18:28:23 PST
Oops, non-redirected reply-to catches me again. Here ya go, folks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Murphy" <emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com>
To: "Gallivanting Tripper" <tripper_at_zad.att.ne.jp>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: 177:2
> You claim that the flaw in Aron's theme is as follows: he presented a
> theme as if it were consistent and complete, but then explained that it
> was not. However, this is a flaw in Aron's presentation of the theme,
> not in the theme itself.
>
> On the other hand, if this *is* a flaw in the theme itself, then your
> theme has the same flaw - which 177:1 prohibits. In either case, the
> rule is INVALID.
>
> Style breakdown:
>
> +1.0 for a reasonable attempt
> -0.5 for confusing the Judge in a bad way
> -0.1 for sloppy grammar ("that the knew")
> for a total of +0.4
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <tripper_at_zad.att.ne.jp>
> To: "Ed Murphy" <emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com>; "FRC" <frc_at_trolltech.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 5:53 AM
> Subject: 177:2
>
>
> > 177:2
> >
> > "I Still don't know What the Theme of this Round is but I'm going to Find
> > Out!"
> >
> > I think it could be the Round whose Themes are Capitalised
> > palindromically... but I may be making an error in the same way as Aron did,
> > when he positively identified a theme of the round even though proclaiming
> > his ignorance of the fact that the knew full well what one of the themes of
> > the round actually was - shame!
> >
> > Let no future Rules make said Mistake.
> >
> > --
> > Rule Date: 2002-02-19 13:41:48 GMT
> >
>
--
Rule Date: 2002-02-21 02:30:38 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST