Re: 200:13 INVALID +0.50

From: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby) (jjweston_at_kenny.sir-toby.com)
Date: Mon Jan 20 2003 - 12:06:57 PST


On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Selengut, Jeremy wrote:

> *RULE START*
> 
> For purposes of the celebration, FRC balloons are considered to be
> fireworks, since they are hydrogen-filled and explode whenever a subsequent
> rule uses the word printed on their side.  They may also be destroyed by a
> collision with another firework - an event which destroys the impactor as
> well.  The glow from such explosions are visible for one second following
> the end of the rule in which the event took place.  Such events never take
> place outside the one second span of a valid rule.
> 
> Clearly, then, fireworks may be disrupted and so fail to endure as long as
> claimed by the rule which launched it.  Statements of the duration of a
> firework, being contained within a rule of finite duration, to the extent
> that they extend beyond the span of the rule, may be imprecise.  In fact,
> they are only true when none of the precisely 200 characters which fully
> define all fireworks are affected by the outside environment.
> 
> For instance, the beige bargain basement firework launched by Rich was
> supposed to expire at the end of this rule, but the black explosions from
> Alan's firework dimmed it somewhat and caused it to burn one second longer
> than predicted.
> 
> *RULE END*
> 
> -Jeremy

This rule makes my head hurt...

Validity: Let's break it down here. First, I'll address 200:2's
restriction. The Rule is 953 characters long, excluding whitespace. The
Rule does not contain the magic phrase from 200:2. The Rule does not
contain the alternate phrase "official FRC celebratory balloons", as
specified by 200:4. The Rule does not contain an official FRC celebratory
ballon, as permitted by 200:4. The Rule does not launch a firework that
contains exactly 200 characters, like 200:8. The Rule does not contain 200
story characters, like 200:9. While I've been relaxed in my interpretation
of 200:2's restriction, I don't think that this Rule follows *any*
existing interpretation of it, nor does it define its own interpretation.
It seems to run afoul of 200:2.

Now I'll tackle all of the other restrictions: The fireworks from 200:8,
200:9, and 200:10 are still in the sky. It is still possible for a
subsequent Rule to be fashioned. It does not attempt to commence earlier
than one second after the previous Rule. No firework is launched during
this Rule, so no need to worry about a unique color. No FRC balloons
launched during this Rule. This Rule does not launch more than one
firework. The author's firework from 200:8 is still in the sky and no
firework launch occured during this Rule, so 200:8's restrictions are met.
There are three fireworks in the air during this Rule. No firework was
launched during this Rule, so no need to worry about making it wider than
the last firework.

Now to tackle the Rule itself. The Rule states "Statements of the duration
of a firework, being contained within a rule of finite duration, to the
extent that they extend beyond the span of the rule, may be imprecise.  
In fact, they are only true when none of the precisely 200 characters
which fully define all fireworks are affected by the outside environment."  
Well, I'm not really sure what is meant by the "precisely 200 characters
which fully define all fireworks" means, although it looks like an attempt
to meet 200:2's restriction. I'm not sure how to determine whether or not
a firework's length will be precise given the above phrase. Rule 200:1
says that its firework will last 10 seconds long, to be precise. So to say
that some firework lengths may be imprecise seems to be inconsistent with
Rule 200:1. This Rule also tries to increase the length of the firework
launched during 200:9. 200:9 says that it lasts for 4 seconds.  This Rule
tries to extend it to 5 seconds, but that is inconsistent with 200:9. This
Rule tries to claim that firework lengths defined by previous Rules are
"predictions", but 200:1 seems to imply that firework lengths are precise.
I see nothing in 200:9 that indicates that 4 seconds was a prediction
instead of a statement of fact.

I'm left to conclude that this Rule is INVALID.

Style: This Rule seems to be less about restrictions and more about
twisting the Round in several strange ways. -0.25 for no restriction.
-0.25 for a method of determining if firework lengths are precise that
leaves me with no way to determine a yes or no answer (just what are the
"precisely 200 characters which fully define all fireworks" anyways?).
Lots of other good twists and turns to the round. +0.25 for turning FRC
baloons into fireworks. +0.25 for allowing us to blow up FRC balloons by
using the word on the side, or ramming a firework into them. +0.25 for
trying to add more variables to the length of fireworks, even though its
inconsistent with previous rules. +0.25 for advancing the theme. Total
style: +0.50

-- 
Jeff Weston (Sir Toby)

-- 
Rule Date: 2003-01-20 20:07:16 GMT


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST