Round 211 ends

From: Steve Gardner (gardner_at_sng.its.monash.edu.au)
Date: Thu Jul 17 2003 - 22:24:12 PDT


Summary of Round 211
Theme: Foul play

(All times GMT)

I hereby declare Rich Holmes is the Winner of Round 211. He is both
Judge and Wizard for Round 212.

EVENTS

Mon, 30 Jun 2003 01:29:14   Round 211 commences
Mon, 30 Jun 2003 02:01:41   211:1 submitted by Joshua Bearden
Mon, 30 Jun 2003 19:08:20   211:2 submitted by Alan Riddell
Tue, 01 Jul 2003 04:49:09   211:1 Judged VALID, Style +1.5
Tue, 01 Jul 2003 04:57:57   211:2 Judged INVALID, Style 0.0
Tue, 01 Jul 2003 17:34:35   211:3 submitted by <dallas368_at_comcast.net>
Tue, 01 Jul 2003 18:43:32   211:4 submitted by Rich Holmes
Wed, 02 Jul 2003 01:07:31   211:3 Judged VALID, Style +0.5
Wed, 02 Jul 2003 01:16:40   211:4 Judged VALID, Style +2.0
Thu, 03 Jul 2003 02:49:48   211:A proposed by Steve Gardner
Thu, 03 Jul 2003 02:49:48   Steve Gardner votes FOR 211:A
Thu, 03 Jul 2003 07:01:11   Jeff Weston votes FOR 211:A
Fri, 04 Jul 2003 02:58:43   Ed Murphy vote FOR 211:A
Sat, 05 Jul 2003 02:49:48   211:A adopted, 3-0
Sat, 05 Jul 2003 04:52:59   211:B proposed by Joshua Bearden 
Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:00:00   --- Time out [211:A] ---
Tue, 08 Jul 2003 06:49:42   Jeff Weston votes AGAINST 211:B
Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:40:28   Rich Holmes votes AGAINST 211:A
Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:40:28   Rich Holmes votes FOR 211:B
Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:40:28   211:C proposed by Rich Holmes 
Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:40:28   Rich Holmes ABSTAINS on 211:C
Thu, 10 Jul 2003 06:24:20   Steve Gardner votes FOR 211:C
Thu, 10 Jul 2003 06:29:52   Steve Gardner votes AGAINST 211:B
Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:35:08   211:5 submitted by Ed Murphy
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00   --- Time in [211:A] ---
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 01:52:16   211:6 submitted by <dallas368_at_comcast.net>
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 02:26:19   211:5 Judged INVALID, Style +0.5
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 02:44:16   211:6 Judged iNVALID, Style -1.0
Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:43:32   Round 211 ends; Rich Holmes wins the Round

STYLE, ELIGIBILITY

Player                     Style   Eligible until

Alan Riddell               0.0     Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:08:20
Joshua Bearden             +1.5    Fri, 11 Jul 2003 02:01:41
dallas368_at_comcast.net      -0.5    Fri, 11 Jul 2003 17:34:35
Rich Holmes                +2.0    Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:43:32
Ed Murphy                  +0.5    Fri, 11 Jul 2003 01:29:14


Everyone else              0.0     Fri, 11 Jul 2003 01:29:14

===========================================================================

PROPOSALS
[] voted too late

Proposal 211:A (adopted 3-1)

      For the purposes of calculating the validity of Rules posted in
      this Round, and the eligibility of Players for this Round, no time
      shall be deemed to have passed between midnight GMT at the
      beginning of Monday, 7 July 2003, and midnight GMT at the
      beginning of Friday 11 July, 2003.

      This Rule temporarily overrides the Regular Ordinances for Round
      211.

FOR:     Steve Gardner, Jeff Weston, Ed Murphy
AGAINST: [Rich Holmes]

===========================================================================

Proposal 211:B (rejected 1-2)

I propose the judge resigns immediately and appoint me as replacement.

FOR:     Rich Holmes
AGAINST: Jeff Weston, Steve Gardner

===========================================================================

Proposal 211:C (adopted 1-0)
FOR:     Steve Gardner
AGAINST: 

All proposals containing grammatical errors shall be ignore.

===========================================================================

RULES


R211:1 (VALID, Style +1.5)

I accuse all future rule posters in this round of cheating and unfair
play. Their rules must be dirty and underhanded, and though valid due
to nominal adherence to the regular ordinances and consistency with
previous rules, they all violate the spirit of those ordinances in one
way or another.

I only hope that Steve will do his best to combat this unsportsmanlike
behavior by punishing you rule-breakers with many invalid judgments and
negative style-point awards. (In return he can expect lenient judgments
and lots of style points next time I'm the judge.) You may all think
I've "crossed the line" the line with this rule but I'll say you're all
"out" in left field. This ball's fair the there ain't nuthin' you can
do about it.

===========================================================================

211:2 (INVALID, Style 0.0)

This is a Rule.

===========================================================================

R211:3 (VALID, Style +0.5)

As noted in 211:1, future rule posters will use dirty and underhanded
tactics. As a concerned FRCer, I propose the following to prevent the
pathetic scum from (in my humble opinion) having any chance of winning
the round: All future rules that don't state "This rule is invalid." are
forbidden.

===========================================================================

R211:4 (VALID, Style +2.0)

"This rule is invalid."  The previous statement is false.

All future rules shall be of sufficiently high quality to receive
specific personal commendation, posted to the FRC forum, from Rich
Holmes (rsholmes_at_mailbox.syr.edu) within 72 hours of their posting.
Naturally, any rule that is so low in quality that it does not receive
such commendation shall be inconsistent with this rule.

And of course, I commend this rule.

===========================================================================

R211:5

Rule 211:3 stated:

> All future rules that don't state "This rule is invalid." are
> forbidden.


I don't have a comment here - I just really like saying "stated".

For the purpose of this round, any message posted to the FRC forum,
containing the text "flibber" immediately followed by the text "gibbet",
is deemed to be a specific personal commendation of this rule, posted
to the FRC forum, from Rich Holmes (rsholmes_at_mailbox.syr.edu).

I hereby obey 211:1 by declaring:

      All future rules are invalid.

===========================================================================

R211:6

Rule 211:5, in its annoying restriction, has failed to realize a
loophole. I state the following:

This rule occurs on Feb. 18th, 1998.

For the purposes of this round, any post to the FRC fourm whatsoever is
considered to be a commendation of this rule.

I also impose the following restriction: No other restrictions, besides
any one (if any) in 211:1, 211:2, 211:3, 211:4, 211:5, and 211:6 are
allowed in this round.

===========================================================================

===========================================================================




-- 


Steve Gardner                   | 
School of Computer Science      |      I've only just realized
 and Software Engineering       |      how self-conscious I am.
gardner_at_sng.its.monash.edu.au   | 


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