Re: 208:3 VALID +2.0

From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: Mon May 12 2003 - 10:58:04 PDT

Next message: Ed Murphy: "208:7 (was 208:6) INVALID -2.0"
Previous message: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "Can someone verify my FRC email archive?"
In reply to: Ed Murphy: "208:3 VALID +2.0"
Next in thread: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: 208:3 VALID +2.0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

>I see a potential paradox here.  +1.0 Style to the first player who
>identifies the one I have in mind.

Alan Riddell identified it.  I hereby increase the Style of 208:4
from +0.0 to +1.0

-- 
Rule Date: 2003-05-14 03:34:06 GMT

Next message: Ed Murphy: "208:7 (was 208:6) INVALID -2.0"
Previous message: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "Can someone verify my FRC email archive?"
In reply to: Ed Murphy: "208:3 VALID +2.0"
Next in thread: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: 208:3 VALID +2.0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

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