From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 14 17:59:25 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id RAA22886 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:59:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id RAA00372 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:59:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7EFxNp07487
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:59:23 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114689AbQHNP7E>;
        Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:59:04 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 11:58:43 -0400
From: Don Blaheta <dpb@cs.brown.edu>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 145:A FOR
Message-ID: <20000814115843.B5330@jones.cs.brown.edu>
Mail-Followup-To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@troll.no>
References: <3997F919.ED099F2A@wall.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <3997F919.ED099F2A@wall.org>; from aron@wall.org on Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 06:50:17AM -0700
Status: RO

Quoth Aron Wall:
> --------Overrule Proposal 145:A---------
> That for the duration of round 145, all submissions to the FRC official
> forum (currently the mailing list) shall be regarded as Fantasy Rules,
> provided that the player who posted them is eligible.
> [...]

I vote FOR proposal 145:A.

-- 
-=-Don Blaheta-=-=-dpb@cs.brown.edu-=-=-<http://www.cs.brown.edu/~dpb/>-=-
And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-14 15:59:04 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 14 20:17:02 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id UAA28858 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:17:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id UAA01093 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:17:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7EIH1p12115
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:17:01 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114679AbQHNSQj>;
        Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:16:39 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Message-Id: <200008141816.OAA23031@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: Round 145
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:16:23 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008141838290.23279-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk> from "Anton Cox" at Aug 14, 2000 06:38:58 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

I vote FOR 145:A.

-Jesse

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-14 18:16:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 14 16:53:19 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id QAA19784 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:53:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id QAA29801 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:53:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7EErHt21288
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:53:17 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114670AbQHNOxI>;
        Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:53:08 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3997F919.ED099F2A@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 06:50:17 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 145 "The Thought Police"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

The theme of round 145 is "The Thought Police".

I have a suggested overrrule proposal to make the round more
interesting... This idea was lifted from a previous round (I can't find
it in the archives now, but I know it's there) in which all submissions
to the FRC were interpreted as rules and judged as such.  This policy
was met with deserved disapproval, because it was created by a Fantasy
Rule and not a proposal as it should have been to have an effect on what
entities are considered FR's.  The Judge therefore stopped it.   I shall
try to do the same thing, only legally, for this next round, by using
this proposal.  Remember that it can hardly hurt you if you don't feel
like playing, but your cynical comments about the round might make life
more interesting for those playing!

--------Overrule Proposal 145:A---------
That for the duration of round 145, all submissions to the FRC official
forum (currently the mailing list) shall be regarded as Fantasy Rules,
provided that the player who posted them is eligible.

A message which contains nothing but a vote on a proposal must not be
given a style rating.

After the round ends, the player who would become the new Judge must
post within the 3 days following the end of the round that they accept
the position, or else it shall be given to the player who was eligible
the longest who *did* post a message saying that they would accept.  If
no one posts an acceptance message in 3 days, the first to do so after
the 3 day period gets to be Judge.
-------------------------------------

Round 145 shall begin as soon as the voting period has expired (3 days
from now), regardless of whether or not it passes.


The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-14 14:53:08 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 14 19:35:49 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id TAA27015 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:35:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id TAA00893 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:35:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7EHZlp10683
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:35:47 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114541AbQHNRfd>;
        Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:35:33 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:38:58 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Round 145
In-Reply-To: <39981F30.1DAF710A@wall.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008141838290.23279-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Aron Wall wrote:

> I shall consider the effect of a proposal as a proposal and the effect of
> the proposal as a rule to be two entirely different issues.  A valid
> proposal could fail and an invalid proposal could succeed.  The same applies
> to the efficacy of votes on proposals.

In that case, I vote FOR 145:A.

   Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-14 17:35:33 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 14 19:46:12 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id TAA27269 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:46:12 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id TAA00952 (ESMTP). Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:46:08 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7EHk3p11086
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:46:07 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114679AbQHNRpf>;
        Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:45:35 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39982251.D19798A8@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 09:46:09 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 145:A Comment
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008141628260.23159-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk> <39982D54.12212075@rhythm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Nicholson Neisler wrote:

> It would seem to me the effect of proposal 145:A would be to make 'all emails
> to FRC mailing list' rules.

Exactly.

>  Therefore as rules they would have to follow ROs
> in order to be judged valid.
>
> Can a posting be a rule and a proposal at the same time?
>
> -Nick

Just to make myself perfectly clear, I will repeat myself.  The answer to your
question is YES.  The rule/proposal's fate as a rule (VALID / INVALID) and its
fate as a proposal (PASS / FAIL) do not neccesarily have any relation to each
other.  I will look at any text inside a proposal as if it had a hidden clause
reading "if this proposal succeeds, the following shall become true:" for the
purpose of determining its VALIDITY.  A rule to override the R.O.'s for example,
is not inconsistant with the R.O.'s even though it makes statements in direct
contradiction to them, because the R.O.'s allow themselves to be modified by
proposals.

By the way, I will vote FOR 145:A.

The Wizard Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-14 17:45:35 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 17:04:16 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id RAA29480 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:04:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id RAA25021 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:04:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HF4CJ22756
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:04:12 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114274AbQHQPDj>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:03:39 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399BF0D1.3DF758F6@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:04:01 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Happy information... VALID +1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008171638370.12847-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> To all loyal citizens:
>
> Being far too modest ever to post here himself, our Great Leader Fred
> Cousin has gracefully given me the honour to remind you all that this is
> his birthday.  We will therefore all be happy and rejoice for the coming
> week.
>
> With our Dear Leader in Celebration,
> from the Clerk of Important Occasions.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-17 14:47:02 GMT

VALID.
Not too exciting, but fits with the theme perfectly and may make victims.
+1 Style

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 15:03:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 17:41:02 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id RAA00838 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:41:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id RAA25330 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:41:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HFf2J24395
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:41:02 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114260AbQHQPku>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:40:50 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399BF992.6A646525@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:41:22 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Submission 2 VALID +1
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1000817172443.1508B-100000@ipngraal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Ronald Kunne wrote:

> Dear Fellow Committee Members,
>
> humbly I remind you that submissions to our faithful
> forum will be invalidated by the Honourful Mr. Judge,
> whenever they are of impolite or unrespectful content.
>
> Sincere salutations to you all and a special accolade
> for our beloved and Great Leader,
>
> le Marquis d'Orsay
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-17 15:32:38 GMT

Yes; it would not do to have a society such as existed in the bad old
pre-utopia days. +1.

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 15:40:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 17:48:34 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id RAA01022 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:48:34 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id RAA25361 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:48:34 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HFmXV25125
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:48:33 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114323AbQHQPsU>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:48:20 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399BFB5B.841FC2D4@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:48:59 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: New Inglish Dictionary (4th edition) VALID +1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008171635520.27278-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Anton Cox wrote:

> As we all know so well, every day, in every way, our glorious society
> continues to improve. Thus, thankfully, the need for words that
> express opinions incompatible with an attitude of affirmation
> diminishes by the hour.
>
> For this reason I am delighted to report that the latest edition of
> our Great Leader's guide to the Inglish language has just appeared.
> The vocabulary has been improved to such an extent that it is now only
> possible to communicate in a positive and constructive manner.
>
> All citizens I know will join me in adopting this wonderful
> innovation!
>
> Until the next Great Leap Forward,
>
>       Citizen Blair, Acting Principal Scribe
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-17 15:35:18 GMT

Happiness is mandatory :-).  +1 Style.  I only worry that the extreme
excess in happiness might cause some of our differently-strong citizens
to explode.  Therefore I suspect that our happy and productive society
needs guidelines as to differing levels of bliss with corrosponding
levels of initiation into our most utopian society.

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 15:48:20 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 19:59:12 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id TAA05770 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:59:11 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id TAA26029 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:59:11 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HHxAJ29416
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:59:10 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114588AbQHQR65>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:58:57 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399C19F4.4016C06E@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:59:32 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Special celebratory information
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008171816420.12847-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> All citizens should feel the joy at our Great Cousin's 54th anniversary
> week!
>
> The Bureau of Important Occasions has therefore determined that it is
> appropriate to finance the following extra celebratory measures:
>
> *  An increase in today's rations by one bowl of delicious lentil
> soup.
> *  An extra entertainment special tomorrow showing the beheadings of
> three recently uncovered enemy spies.  Victory is getting closer every
> day!
> *  The decoration of our streets with ribbons in our national colors
> Glorious Blue and Aurora Purple.
>
> With the wish of a Fredful week,
> Clerk Potemkin.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-17 16:46:16 GMT

INVALID.  For shame, Clerk Potemkin.  "Beheading" is neither a
constructive nor a positive word.  And "enemy" has such bad cannotations.
We must strive to remove such irregularities from our language.  I would
suggest "removal of an extraneous object" for the first word, and "those
who have valiantly decided to demonstrate by converse how co-operation
with the utopian authorities greatly increases life expectancy" for the
second word.  Nevertheless, I think you deserve +1 style for your
otherwise magnificant report on how our society only becomes more perfect
with every passing day.  Thank Cousin Fred!

The Wizard Judge and Censor-in-Chief

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 17:58:57 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 21:52:19 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id VAA09854 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:52:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id VAA26660 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:52:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HJqHV04131
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:52:17 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114724AbQHQTvz>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:51:55 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399C3471.D3199B0E@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 11:52:33 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Special price winner announcement
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008172033110.12847-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> Dear fellow citizens, I am honoured to announce the winner of Great Leader
> Fred's Anniversary Achievement Prize.
>
> For special diligence in helping fellow citizens with the correct use of
> the Inglish language, the prize is awarded to our Meticulous Judge.
>
> The prize includes a year's vacation in Icebergia, where he and his family
> will be able to personally meet wonderful wildlife, and to observe and even
> participate in our nation's greatest mining project.
>
> I am sure this will be the experience of a lifetime!
>
> With wishes of a continued Fredful week,
> Clerk Potemkin.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-17 18:54:31 GMT

It sounds simply wonderful (and VALID).  Our clerk deserves to have his
molecular components alternatively arranged just for the quality of this fine
piece.  Additionally, I cannot help but admire the glamour of constructive
thinking that positively drips from his announcement.  Truely his rule shows
great improvement from our normal (yet glorious and perfect) fare.  In fact,
I think it contrasts so favorably to the previous rule submitted within our
noble forum that I will relieve that rule of three style points and give one
of them to this rule.  Needless to say I will continue to provide my much
needed services during my vacation.

The Wizard Judge.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 19:51:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 22:01:30 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id WAA10861 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:01:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id WAA26708 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:01:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HK1TV04471
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:01:29 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114728AbQHQUBR>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:01:17 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399C36AA.2B44B3AB@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 12:02:02 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: [frc] news brief
References: <8525693E.006D54A9.00@mail.adpims.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

cleonhar@adpims.com wrote

> SYLVANIA (FRC) In an encouraging development in the ongoing diplomatic
> negotiations with neighboring Sylvania, several elements of the 1st Fredonian
> Peacemaking Team were treated yesterday to an impromptu demonstration of current
> Sylvanian defense technology. In the wake of the festivities, these teammembers
> were invited to remain in Sylvania as honored guests of Queen Sylvia herself.
> The Leader, on hearing the news, was overcome with emotion, making numerous
> remarks concerning the good Queen's honored ancestors and his wishes regarding
> her continued health.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-17 19:54:15 GMT

VALID +2.  Praise Our Great Leader Cousin Fred!

The Wizard Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 20:01:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Fri Aug 18 03:55:57 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id DAA26001 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:55:57 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id DAA28173 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:55:56 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7I1ttV14106
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:55:55 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114675AbQHRBzn>;
        Fri, 18 Aug 2000 03:55:43 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399C88A3.851C91C9@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:51:47 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Know what I mean?
References: <xzcem3ns6kf.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

"Richard S. Holmes" wrote:

> Greetings, most fortunate of Citizens,
>
> Surely we all rejoice in the constantly increasing perfection of the
> Inglish Language.  The Popular Front for the Happiness of Ingland
> takes great pleasure in one of the most wonderful attributes of our
> language, which is that when we use a word it means exactly what it
> would bring us joy for it to mean -- no more and no less.  Thus, for
> example, when we say "The love of money is the root of all Splendor",
> it becomes delightfully clear what we mean by "Splendor".
>
> It is the hope of the PFHI that our Great Leader's Splendor will
> continue to grow more apparent to our beloved Citizens with each
> passing day.
>
> Yours in pleasant thinking,
>
> Citizen Crane
> Coordinator, PFHI
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-18 01:26:42 GMT

INVALID.  This would make all language practically meaningless and give
even the Wizard Judge headaches.  It is confusing and unclear, at least
to me (yes, I have left happy affirmative mode.  Would anyone like to
complain???).  Therefore, it brings joy to the Judge to have PFHI mean
"This rule shall be ruled INVALID."

Are you a new player?  I see you neither in the member list (though I've
been here for the last 35 rounds and I'm not on it yet), my mail box,
nor my memory of the archives and the time I've been here.  Therefore I
will give you the benefit of the doubt and not penalize you any style
points.

The Wizard Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-18 01:55:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Fri Aug 18 17:04:23 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id RAA00276 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:04:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id RAA02634 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:04:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7IF4MJ16112
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:04:22 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114553AbQHRPD6>;
        Fri, 18 Aug 2000 17:03:58 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399D4270.EDF267DA@wall.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 07:04:32 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: [frc] news brief
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008181627030.12847-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> NUKOSIA (FRC) In the beautiful capital of Radonia, our dear Leader today
> signed a friendship and cooperation agreement together with General
> Secretary Uran Radovan of Radonia's Populist Party.
>
> "Through the Radionans' recent radiant and energetic technology
> achievements," Cousin Fred said, "their nation has achieved its goal of
> stability and self-sufficiency.  We have therefore agreed that the
> exchange of peacemaking missions between our countries is now
> unnecessary, and that we will in the future redirect such missions to
> more productive uses."
>
> "Naturally, this shows the continued importance of our own similar
> program, and so the resources to the Icebergian mining and refinement
> project have been increased so that our nation can continue to reap even
> greater benefits from this newly developing technology."
>
> Praise our great Leader, graciously bringing peace to the world!
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-18 14:29:30 GMT

VALID.  It was worth 2 points the first time so I suppose it ought to be
worth 1 point the second time.  Praise Cousin Fred who never allows us to
get bored but provides us interesting and original events every single day
(hint hint).  It was good of you to speak even more about Fred's glorious,
glowing, mining project.  The Judge is hoping for an administrative
position with respect to the mining project, lest certain valiant clerks
in charge of prize allotment announcements personally demonstrate by
converse how regard to the wishes of their superiors, especially judicious
ones, greatly increases life expectancy.  Are you happy?  You see, my
friend, I have been informed by the secret service that you seem to have a
definite streak of not being happy ever since I performed my censorial
duty by allowing one of your announcements to be returned in order to
become even more perfect than it already was.  But we are a fair and
utopian society.  It would not be good in this case to prosecute even
those wretched scum (pardon my Inglish) who have already commited no less
than 2 vile, disgusting, vindicative offenses against the Judge who has
done so much for all the citizens of our utopia!  Any more heaped on my
personal affairs which is not considered favorable by the judicial
authorities, and you shall be allowed to see how they really ought to have
listened to the Judge to the maximum extent of the guidelines (praise Fred
for them).  +1 Style because the Judge is merciful.  I hope no one changes
my mood.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-18 15:03:58 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 17 16:27:00 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id QAA27478 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:27:00 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id QAA24699 (ESMTP). Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:26:59 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7HEQxJ20572
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:26:59 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114267AbQHQO0l>;
        Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:26:41 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399BE793.18ADD6C@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 06:24:35 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 145:A PASSES 4-0 Start Round
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

145:A PASSES
For: Don, Anton, Jesse, The Wizard
Against:

The round begins!

The Judge.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-17 14:26:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Fri Aug 18 18:57:24 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id SAA04348 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:57:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id SAA03272 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:57:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7IGvMV00289
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:57:23 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114581AbQHRQ47>;
        Fri, 18 Aug 2000 18:56:59 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399D5CFD.82A60369@wall.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:57:49 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Another Great Step Forward
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008181732480.28646-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Anton Cox wrote:

> My dear comrades, I do believe that the next Great Step Forward has
> just occured. How marvellous an honour it is to be able to convey to
> you the latest masterplan of our revered Leader!
>
> While any ordinary person would have to have had a pretty hearty meal
> of magic mushrooms to even consider for a moment the possibility that
> our society may contain members yet to be enlightened as to the true
> glories of our cause, our master strategist prepares for every
> eventuality.
>
> To this end, our Meticulous Judge has volunteered not only to serve
> double shifts in his exciting new job at the cutting edge of
> mineral science, but also to vet all posts by his fellow citizens.
>
> Any citizen who somehow lets their writings wander from the way of our
> Leader (as outlined in our public proclamations) will be alerted to the
> fact by the fine gift of a ruling other than VALID. Such citizens will
> then have the additional honour of demonstrating their loyalty to the
> cause by including in all future postings mention of another
> improvement in the workings of our society.
>
> Citizens with multiple such rulings will find additional opportunities
> to demonstrate their worth! However, I leave that particular piece of
> good news for another to enlarge upon...
>
> May all our thoughts be Fredful!
>
>     Citizen Blair
>
> --

> Rule Date: 2000-08-18 16:31:00 GMT

VALID.  +1 style for the very normal--yet glorious, perfect, majestic,
etc.--guideline (praise Our Great Cousin for the wonderful way in which
he allows us to use our creativity by living life under the madatorily
voluntary infinitely wise constraints on what those who valiantly
demonstrate by converse how Fred increases life expectancy would call
freedom but what we enlightened utopian citizens know is really an
invitation into even greater freedom, joy, and utter bliss of such
magnitude that our primitive anscestors (doubtless mythological) living
free of his rein could not even comprehend, or advance enough in truth
and insight to even want)!

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-18 16:56:59 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Fri Aug 18 19:12:45 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id TAA05590 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 19:12:44 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id TAA03339 (ESMTP). Fri, 18 Aug 2000 19:12:44 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7IHChV00837
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 19:12:43 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114585AbQHRRMQ>;
        Fri, 18 Aug 2000 19:12:16 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399D6096.FA0AAE4F@wall.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:13:10 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: And the sofa over there
References: <xzcu2cicy87.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

"Richard S. Holmes" wrote:

> Cousin Fred in his great and much-deserved modesty wishes to recognize
> the contributions his peerless relatives have made to the success of
> his leadership.  He therefore requests all Citizens make mention of
> said relatives' achievements in any future missives.
>
> For example, it was Younger Half Brother Dref who so boldly handled the
> reassignment this morning of Colonel Radmere of Bungalow Security to an
> important new position with an office in the third subbasement of the
> Secret Service Convenience Center where he will be undergoing personal
> training with some of the Service's most talented instructors.  This
> promotion was in recognition of Radmere's work as Security Liaison with
> the Popular Front for the Happiness of Ingland, which in appreciation
> for Cousin Fred's 54 years of tireless service has begun a volunteer
> effort to renovate the Leader's 734-room Bungalow.  The project got off
> to a splendid start today with the rearrangement of most of the
> Bungalow's West Wing at around 3:30 am.  Our Leader was from all
> reports quite effusive in his appreciation of this surprise gift from
> his adoring Citizens.  Hats off to Younger Half Brother Dref for his
> prompt and efficient response!
>
> Yours in pleasant thinking,
>
> Citizen Crane
> Coordinator, PFHI
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-18 16:48:06 GMT

VALID.  +3 style for this masterpiece of praise and adoration and the
inevitable spread of glory from Our Great Cousin Fred to all those who
loyally serve him in every way.  Strictly speaking, it is logically
impossible, a contradiction in terms, derived from the most fundumental
axioms of mathematics and the laws of physics, biology, social science,
and psychology, to actually NOT obey and loyally serve Our Great Leader
The Most Noble And Modest Just Yet Forgiving Cousin Frederick Who Created
The Most Perfect (Yet Steadily Getting Even More Perfect) Utopia On Earth
And Whom All Citizens Cannot Help But Obey From The Shear Depths Of Their
Reflexive Love For Him, but some serve him EVEN MORE than this perfect
but automatic level and become even more perfect than they already were.
You see?  Your rule was so excellent I immediately went into rhapsodic
bliss oriented at Cousin Fred's supreme greatness.  Amazing.

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-18 17:12:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Sat Aug 19 19:31:22 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id TAA25532 (ESMTP). Sat, 19 Aug 2000 19:31:22 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id TAA07793 (ESMTP). Sat, 19 Aug 2000 19:31:21 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7JHVKJ19936
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 19:31:20 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114723AbQHSRa5>;
        Sat, 19 Aug 2000 19:30:57 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <399EB66B.D861203E@wall.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:31:39 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: A fantastic new job!
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008191841520.12847-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> I would like to thank our fairness-minded Judge, who alerted Cousin Fred
> to my recent very personal involvement in the Vacation Industry.  May your
> vacation continue to bring you interesting challenges, so that you may
> emerge radiating with new health and energy!
>
> Our gracious Leader was so satisfied with my work that I have now been
> promoted to Tourist Chief, and from my new office here in the splendid
> Sulphara desert (a place with such a perfect climate as to need no such
> appliances as air condition or heating) I now oversee the arrival of
> newcomers to this resort.
>
> This place is so famous for its effects on health that our Leader in his
> endless wisdom has decided that any citizen who indicates a desire for
> extra rest from eir work will be provided with a free vacation here!  So I
> should meet lots of interesting new people every day.
>
> It has been my great pleasure to meet Uncle Bob, the eminent scientific
> genius, who has designed this place and currently manages it from his
> underground quarters just a few hundred meters from here. He has informed
> me that Cousin Fred will be joining us for a spectacular firework show by
> the end of next week.
>
> Thanks to our beloved Leader, expecting a bright and shining future,
> T.C. Potemkin.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-19 16:53:06 GMT

VALID.  Apology accepted.  +1 Style.

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-19 17:30:57 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 21 17:13:48 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id RAA14808 (ESMTP). Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:13:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id RAA17792 (ESMTP). Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:13:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7LFDkJ27853
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:13:46 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114353AbQHUPNV>;
        Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:13:21 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39A13938.362F9D8@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 07:14:16 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: A cousinly idea
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1000821170230.25478B-100000@ipngraal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: ROr

Ronald Kunne wrote:

> It was Cousin Orjan Johansen who contributed to our Glorious and ever
> Improving State of Ingland, by suggesting to Cousin Fred that every
> Citizen who issues a submission will be awarded the title of Cousin.
>
> Our Leader, in his Magnificent State of Wisdom, immediately saw the merits
> of this idea and adopted it fully as His Own.
>
> `Of course', Cousin Fred thought politically, `Cousins have to sign
> subsequent submissions by their Name and Titles and be addressed as such.'
>
> Hail to the Chief Cousin!
>
> Cousin Ronald Kunne
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-21 15:05:45 GMT

INVALID.  No mention of Cousin Fred's relatives achievments.  -1 for
presumptuously usurping our beloved Cousin's title, -1 again for being
inconsistant with the spirit of previous rules.  It is clear from them that
family titles are assigned to all of Cousin Fred's relatives.  One wonders
who the reference point is, though, that their relations are described
relative to.  It can't be Cousin Fred (unless someone can figure out how to
make himself his own cousin!).

The Wizard Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-21 15:13:21 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 21 20:50:31 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id UAA22806 (ESMTP). Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:50:31 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id UAA19290 (ESMTP). Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:50:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7LIoTJ05837
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:50:29 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114558AbQHUSuF>;
        Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:50:05 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39A16C07.4DB6FC9A@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:51:03 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Cushions be it!
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1000821172943.25478C-100000@ipngraal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Ronald Kunne wrote:

> It was Cousin Fred's  Aunt Sissie who contributed to our Glorious and
> ever Improving State of Ingland, by suggesting to Cousin Fred that every
> Citizen who issues a submission will be awarded the title of Cushion.
>
> Our Leader, in his Magnificent State of Wisdom, immediately saw the
> merits of this idea and adopted it fully as His Own.
>
> `Of course', Cousin Fred thought politically, `Cushion have to sign
> subsequent submissions by their Name and Titles and be addressed as such.'
>
> Hail to the Chief Cousin!
>
> Cushion Ronald Kunne
>
> PS Kudos to the Honourific and Magnanimous Judge A.W. for bringing me back
> on the Right Path to Enlightment.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-21 15:31:19 GMT

VALID.  +1 Style (yes, flattery works).

The Wizard Judge.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-21 18:50:05 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Mon Aug 21 22:29:44 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id WAA26652 (ESMTP). Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:29:44 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id WAA19885 (ESMTP). Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:29:43 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7LKTgV13235
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:29:42 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114573AbQHUU3R>;
        Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:29:17 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39A18307.DD3AFFC9@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 12:29:11 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 911 Relief <get911relief@yahoo.com>, frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: You won't regret it!
References: <20000821183702Z114563-28640+31@trolltech.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------CF09C395B594BBEDC84EB02C"
Status: RO

--------------CF09C395B594BBEDC84EB02C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

911 Relief wrote:

>  This message is to inform the consumer public about an amazing
> productthat has been in use for 8 years by private industry and
> government organizations.if you feel you have been spammed in any way
> please delete this message and accept our apologies,however if you
> have a need for first aid (which everyone does) please read on and
> follow the link provided.Try our amazing product! You won't be
> disappointed!Again we apologize for any inconvenience we may have
> caused you. Have you ever asked yourself the question "Is there a
> first aid product out therethat works, but is not oily, greasy or
> contains no alcohol ?" or "What can I useto relieve this sunburn pain
> NOW -?" or "Is there anything that will totally relieve thesemosquito
> bites NOW ?" click link for the answer and find out what over
> 1100school systems, over 700 county and city governments, state
> agencies, and over500 industries currently use for almost all of their
> first aid needs! This productwill replace many of the items in most
> first aid kits!The AnswerUse on: sunburns, insect bites and stings,
> jelly fish stings, 1st, 2nd, & 3rd degree burns, use on cutsand
> scrapes to kill germs and bacteria and many more! It really works
> fast! Stay at the beach longer!Keep your employees on the job! Make
> you outdoor activities more tolerrable! -- Rule Date: 2000-08-21
> 18:37:11 GMT

How amusing!  An evil spammer seems to have deigned to post a fantasy
rule in our nomic round.  How interesting that that they should choose
the round in which all submissions to the mailing list are regarded as
rules (there is, by the way, precedence for regarding the submission of
a rule as a request to join the committee).  Just in case the evil
spammers have any interest in how our longstanding and noble traditions
work, I am now checking this rule against all previous VALID rules
existing in this round.  Should it prove to be consistant with them, the
rule shall be VALID, but should it be inconsistant, it shall be INVALID.

1) This rule is required to be of polite or respectful conduct.  Now it
is true that spamming is very, very, very, rude.  On the other hand, the
text of this message is very, very, very, polite, no doubt in accordance
with some kind of misguided belief that this somehow counteracts the
extreme rudeness of spamming and interfering with a semi-private game
whose participants did not specifically ask to be distracted by those
with unholy commercial self-serving motives.  Yet the theme of this
round *is* "The Thought Police".  Has not the whole point been to do
horrible things to each other under the guise of extreme politeness and
respect?  I therefore think that this rule passes the "be of polite and
respectful conduct" test.

2) Does this rule use proper Inglish, which can only be used to
communicate in a "positive and constructive manner"? (whoops, better
slip into positive mode now myself) Well, there are words which might be
considered negative or unconstructive in other contexts, such as "pain"
and "germs".  But the positivity or negativity cannot consist in the
individual words.  To "relieve pain" is a positive and constructive
thing.  You see, while this rule contains that which our primitive
ancestors might have considered "bad", it only brings them up in the
context of removing them.  Two negatives make a positive.  Anyway, we
should no so much look to condemn (surely a negative word if I ever saw
one) negative words within the rule as evaluate the overall giddy
sensation produced by each phrase.  And this rule is masterful at
producing giddy sensations.  (Cushion Orjan, if your feelings of
unhappiness were magnified by this illusion of difference between my
treatment of your invalid rule and this rule, please meet me just
outside the Block 01027 Termination Center for a private heart-to-heart
talk about how this makes you feel).

3) Citizens may be disturbed by the absence of any of our great leader
Cousin Fred's most worthy relatives, despite the rule which stated that
some relative's achievements must be mentioned.  Let me look over the
rule again.  Oh!  I seem to have found a loophole!  Not that any
honorable citizens would stoop to using those, but for those who feed
their children by sending unsolicited email to our citizens, a stronger
word than "honorable" is required, so this shall be overlooked.  Anyway,
the guideline which Cousin Fred so nobly gave us lest we mislead
ourselves only asks that we mention a relative's achievement, not that
we necessarily state which of (or that a) relative did so.  So this rule
passes this test with flying colors as well.

4) Finally, the alternatively-moral processed meat fun senders have not
posted any previous submissions, so they have not yet graciously
recieved their title of "cushion" from Cousin Fred.  Thus they need not
use it.

VALID.

Style Award:
-3 for being Evil Spammers
+2 for humor
+2 for following theme
+2 for boundless enthusiasm (no doubt financially motivated: we should
start paying the Judge and the Wizard salaries and see if it improves
play quality).

Total Style: +3 (the maximum)

The Wizard Judge

--------------CF09C395B594BBEDC84EB02C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
911 Relief wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>This message
is to inform the consumer public about an amazing product</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>that
has been in use for 8 years by private industry and government organizations.</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>if
you feel you have been spammed in any way please delete this message and
accept our apologies,</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>however
if you have a need for first aid (which everyone does) please read on and
follow the link provided.</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Try
our amazing product! You won't be disappointed!</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Again
we apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused you.</font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Have
you ever asked yourself the question "Is there a first aid product out
there</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>that works, but is
not oily, greasy or contains no alcohol ?" or "What can I use</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>to
relieve this sunburn pain NOW -?" or "Is there anything that will totally
relieve these</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>mosquito bites
NOW ?" click link for the answer and find out what over 1100</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>school
systems, over 700 county and city governments, state agencies, and over</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>500
industries currently use for almost all of their first aid needs! This
product</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>will replace many
of the items in most first aid kits!</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1><a href="http://911relief.com">The
Answer</a></font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Use on: sunburns,
insect bites and stings, jelly fish stings, 1st, 2nd, &amp; 3rd degree
burns, use on cuts</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>and scrapes
to kill germs and bacteria and many more! It really works fast! Stay at
the beach longer!</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Keep your
employees on the job! Make you outdoor activities more tolerrable!</font></font>&nbsp;--
Rule Date: 2000-08-21 18:37:11 GMT</blockquote>
How amusing!&nbsp; An evil spammer seems to have deigned to post a fantasy
rule in our nomic round.&nbsp; How interesting that that they should choose
the round in which all submissions to the mailing list are regarded as
rules (there is, by the way, precedence for regarding the submission of
a rule as a request to join the committee).&nbsp; Just in case the evil
spammers have any interest in how our longstanding and noble traditions
work, I am now checking this rule against all previous VALID rules existing
in this round.&nbsp; Should it prove to be consistant with them, the rule
shall be VALID, but should it be inconsistant, it shall be INVALID.
<p>1) This rule is required to be of polite or respectful conduct.&nbsp;
Now it is true that spamming is very, very, very, rude.&nbsp; On the other
hand, the text of this message is very, very, very, polite, no doubt in
accordance with some kind of misguided belief that this somehow counteracts
the extreme rudeness of spamming and interfering with a semi-private game
whose participants did not specifically ask to be distracted by those with
unholy commercial self-serving motives.&nbsp; Yet the theme of this round
*is* "The Thought Police".&nbsp; Has not the whole point been to do horrible
things to each other under the guise of extreme politeness and respect?&nbsp;
I therefore think that this rule passes the "be of polite and respectful
conduct" test.
<p>2) Does this rule use proper Inglish, which can only be used to communicate
in a "positive and constructive manner"? (whoops, better slip into positive
mode now myself) Well, there are words which might be considered negative
or unconstructive in other contexts, such as "pain" and "germs".&nbsp;
But the positivity or negativity cannot consist in the individual words.&nbsp;
To "relieve pain" is a positive and constructive thing.&nbsp; You see,
while this rule contains that which our primitive ancestors might have
considered "bad", it only brings them up in the context of removing them.&nbsp;
Two negatives make a positive.&nbsp; Anyway, we should no so much look
to condemn&nbsp;(surely a negative word if I ever saw one) negative words
within the rule as evaluate the overall giddy sensation produced by each
phrase.&nbsp; And this rule is masterful at producing giddy sensations.&nbsp;
(Cushion Orjan, if your feelings of unhappiness were magnified by this
illusion of difference between my treatment of your invalid rule and this
rule, please meet me just outside the Block 01027 Termination Center for
a private heart-to-heart talk about how this makes you feel).
<p>3) Citizens may be disturbed by the absence of any of our great leader
Cousin Fred's most worthy relatives, despite the rule which stated that
some relative's achievements must be mentioned.&nbsp; Let me look over
the rule again.&nbsp; Oh!&nbsp; I seem to have found a loophole!&nbsp;
Not that any honorable citizens would stoop to using those, but for those
who feed their children by sending unsolicited email to our citizens, a
stronger word than "honorable" is required, so this shall be overlooked.&nbsp;
Anyway, the guideline which Cousin Fred so nobly gave us lest we mislead
ourselves only asks that we mention a relative's achievement, not that
we necessarily state which of (or that a) relative did so.&nbsp; So this
rule passes this test with flying colors as well.
<p>4) Finally, the alternatively-moral processed meat fun senders have
not posted any previous submissions, so they have not yet graciously recieved
their title of "cushion" from Cousin Fred.&nbsp; Thus they need not use
it.
<p>VALID.
<p>Style Award:
<br>-3 for being Evil Spammers
<br>+2 for humor
<br>+2 for following theme
<br>+2 for boundless enthusiasm (no doubt financially motivated: we should
start paying the Judge and the Wizard salaries and see if it improves play
quality).
<p>Total Style: +3 (the maximum)
<p>The Wizard Judge
</body>
</html>

--------------CF09C395B594BBEDC84EB02C--

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-21 20:29:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Tue Aug 22 16:12:25 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id QAA12328 (ESMTP). Tue, 22 Aug 2000 16:12:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id QAA26009 (ESMTP). Tue, 22 Aug 2000 16:12:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7MECOV01647
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 22 Aug 2000 16:12:24 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114711AbQHVOLr>;
        Tue, 22 Aug 2000 16:11:47 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39A27B88.53766731@wall.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 06:09:28 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: A cousinly idea]
References: <39A27878.8B274429@wall.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Aron Wall wrote:

> I recieved this rule in my private mailbox.  Since it was clearly intended to be
> a rule, I shall forward it to the list and then judge it.  (If this delay causes
> it to be inconsistant with other stuff I shall of course rule it UNSUCCESSFUL).
>
> The Judge
>

Good work!  I'll take over from here.

The Wizard

>
> Andre Engels wrote:
>
> > Aron Wall wrote:
> >
> > > INVALID.  No mention of Cousin Fred's relatives achievments.  -1 for
> > > presumptuously usurping our beloved Cousin's title, -1 again for being
> > > inconsistant with the spirit of previous rules.  It is clear from them that
> > > family titles are assigned to all of Cousin Fred's relatives.  One wonders
> > > who the reference point is, though, that their relations are described
> > > relative to.  It can't be Cousin Fred (unless someone can figure out how to
> > > make himself his own cousin!).
> >
> > I see one possibility to be one's own cousin: If one's father and mother
> > were brother and sister, then one's father is also one's uncle (and one's
> > mother one's aunt), so one is indeed in some sense one's own cousin.
> >
> > Whether this is the case with Cousin Fred I do not know [1], but I do know
> > that the sheer cleverness of this remark (it got me comparisons not only
> > with the judge but even with Cousin Fred's daughter who at her tender age
> > is already out of diapers) caused a celebration committee from the internal
> > peacekeeping unit to knock on my door and notify me that I have been chosen
> > for a free visit of 5 years to the paper mills in Far-Thickwoodistan!
> >
> > The climate here in Far-Thickwoodistan is wonderful, and the management
> > inspires us to work even harder than I did at home. I am also blessed with
> > the opportunity to find my own ways of entertaining myself (like watching
> > the management offering inspirement on the backs of my co-workers), and
> > thus am not influenced by any possibility of improvement in hapiness that
> > I might learn from through the media. Because of that, please send me
> > information on the ongoing status of our peacekeeping missions and other
> > foreign affairs. If not, the honourable Judge who has a more than average
> > degree of Fred-likeness will provide you with a clarification of your
> > possible improvements which will be even more valuable than the VALID
> > Judgement you otherwise might have gotten.
> >
> > All hail cousin Fred!
> >
> > 1: Although it would explain the large amount of Fred-like greatness that
> >    his grandfather has, who single-handedly (although with the help of our
> >    country's loyal and industrious farming population) caused our grain
> >    production to reach new heights, so that we now can export grain to
> >    allow our magnificent, artistic, beloved leader to extend his private
> >    art collection while still keeping the bread rations at a whole bread
> >    per person per week!
> >
> > --
> > Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
> > telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
> > http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html
> >
> > A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
> >                                                 - Maria Montessori
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-08-22 13:56:13 GMT

VALID.  +2 style, one for being the first rule to actually look vaugely like a
discussion forum by replying to one of my remarks, and another one for figuring out
some my puzzle about cousins.  Well done, Cushion.

The Wizard

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-22 14:11:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Aug 30 13:13:43 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id NAA17708 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 13:13:43 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id NAA28301 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 13:13:42 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7UBDgV08913
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 13:13:42 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114588AbQH3LN0>;
        Wed, 30 Aug 2000 13:13:26 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200008291928.VAA04738@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Round 146 starts!
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 21:28:19 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Round 146 starts!

The theme of this round will be 'Sex' (Hey, it works for television channels,
who knows what it might do for the FRC?).

The round will start when one of the Co-Wizards Richard S. Holmes and
911 Relief posts the first round, or 48 hours exactly after the Rule date
of this message, whichever comes first.


-- 
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-30 11:13:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Aug 30 16:37:27 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id QAA29071 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:37:27 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id QAA00146 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:37:26 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7UEbPV26101
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:37:26 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114666AbQH3OhE>;
        Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:37:04 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200008301436.QAA04018@wsinfm05.win.tue.nl>
Subject: 146:1 VALID, +1
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:36:41 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Rule 146:1, by Richard S. Holmes, 2000-08-30 14:08:12

***

You're either male or female, you know.  Or znotz.  In any case, you
should let people know the first time you say anything, just to avoid
confusion.  Unless you're znotz, of course, in which case you'll lie
and say you're male, or female.  Me, I'm male.

***

Validity: No problems. VALID
Style: Nothing spectacular, but an ok rule. +1

-- 
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-30 14:37:04 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Aug 30 19:53:55 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id TAA08314 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 19:53:54 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id TAA01650 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 19:53:54 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7UHrrJ05606
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 19:53:53 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114691AbQH3Rxb>;
        Wed, 30 Aug 2000 19:53:31 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200008301753.TAA00502@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: 146:2 VALID, +2
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 19:53:18 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Rule 146:2, by Ronald Kunne, Rule Date 2000-08-30 15:52:47 GMT

>>>>>
When two different genders mate, their off-spring is
the third gender. 
(When three different genders mate, it's called Nirwana.
But that's a completely different story -and rule!)
 
No two following rules can be written by persons
of the same gender.

I am znotz. 
>>>>>

VALIDITY: A znotz is allowed to tell the truth, and Ronald is not
 necessarily of the same gender as Richard.
STYLE: A logical addition to the round and a good rule. No substraction
 for the backdoors that are left open, as those might well have been on
 purpose.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-30 17:53:31 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Aug 30 21:27:39 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id VAA12432 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:27:39 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id VAA02154 (ESMTP). Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:27:38 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7UJRbJ09320
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:27:37 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114729AbQH3T10>;
        Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:27:26 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200008301927.VAA00604@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Re: 146:2 VALID, +2
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:27:03 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Richard S. Holmes wrote:

> 146:1 says:
> 
>   Unless you're znotz, of course, in which case you'll lie
>   and say you're male, or female.
> 
> I *thought* I was disallowing the possibility that a znotz could say
> "I am znotz".  Thus I expected this rule to be invalid.
> 
> Care to set me straight?  Thanks...

No, I don't set you straight, you set me straight. I just had misremembered
your rule. I thought it said "you may lie" rather than "you'll lie", in
which case Ronald's rule would have been valid (and shown that you're
not znotz). As it is, I can only agree with you.

The Judgement of Rule 146:2 is hereby changed to INVALID. The style points
remain as they were (+2). With my apologies.


-- 
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-30 19:27:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 31 11:31:49 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id LAA20940 (ESMTP). Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:31:49 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id LAA06487 (ESMTP). Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:31:49 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7V9VmJ06854
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:31:48 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114596AbQHaJb0>;
        Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:31:26 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200008310931.LAA02302@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: 146:3 VALID, 0
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:31:04 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: ROr

Rule 146:3 by Chuck, Rule Date 2000-08-30 21:55:33 GMT

----------

Peeps (the beings discussed in this round, scientific name
Fanto rehobilis caliensis) can mate in groups of two or more.
The gender of the offspring of a mating group is determined
by the number of each gender present in the mating group,
as follows:

* If all three genders are present in equal numbers, the offspring
  may be of any gender.

* If two genders are present in equal numbers, and the third in
  either a greater or lesser number, the offspring will be of the
  gender which is present in an unequal number.

* If the number of each of the three genders differs, the offspring
  will be of the gender which has the median number of peeps present.

It is also to be noted that znotzes are an exceptionally devious
bunch; a znotz claiming to be male or female will have the
physical appearance of a male or female, respectively.  Even a
znotz's mating partners may not know that e is not what e claims
to be, although the careful observer will note that conclusions
can sometimes be drawn from the offspring of a mating group.

I am male.

----------

VALIDITY: No problems.
STYLE: Some off for partly re-iterating Ronald's ideas (even if only the
 idea of the gender of offspring being important), but some bonus for closing
 the holes he would have left behind. Interesting, logical Rule. +1.

Andre

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-31 09:31:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Aug 31 16:47:39 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id QAA09225 (ESMTP). Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:47:39 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id QAA09602 (ESMTP). Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:47:39 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e7VElbV08716
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:47:38 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114716AbQHaOrO>;
        Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:47:14 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200008311447.QAA05615@wsinfm05.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Rule 146:4 VALID, +0.5
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:47:05 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Rule 146:4 by Luk Vandelaer, Rule Date: 2000-08-31 10:09:52 GMT

--- 146:4 ---
The peeps are very social, they form mating groups whenever they can. Once in
such a group, they are not able to leave it at free will, but they can be
rejected by all other members of the group, or can be pulled out to form a new
mating group.

All future rules from a peep whithout mating group will include which mating
group e joins, or with which peep e starts a new mating group.

I am a female joining the mating group of Chuck.

------

VALIDITY: Making Valid Rules still is easy, and this one does not fall foul
 (it seems). VALID
STYLE: Not a bad Rule, but nothing exciting either (not even with all the
 mating going on). +0.5 Style.


-- 
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-08-31 14:47:14 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Fri Sep  1 13:01:37 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id NAA08255 (ESMTP). Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:01:37 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id NAA16560 (ESMTP). Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:01:36 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e81B1ZF28589
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:01:35 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114701AbQIALBM>;
        Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:01:12 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200009011100.NAA04745@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: 146:5 VALID, +1
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:00:56 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Rule 146:5, by Richard S. Holmes, Rule Date 2000-08-31 17:36:21 GMT

--- 146:5 ---

I walk into the smoky bar and look around as my eyes adjust.  It's the
usual -- crowded, mostly with losers -- male peeps in garish purple
globba suits, females in tight see-through scrabbs, and znotz peeps
in... well, garish purple globba suits and tight see-through scrabbs,
I guess.

Then I see her.  The most stunningly beautiful female peep I've ever
laid eyes on.  Alone in a corner with her drink, watching the room, a
mysterious smile on her face...

Or she could be a znotz passing for female, I suppose.  One so seldom
knows, I have to remind myself what the pronouns for a known znotz
are... "Ze asked me to dance"... "I danced with zir"... "We went to
zis room"... all future rules, I tell myself, should use the correct
pronouns when dealing with known znotzes.

I go to her table and introduce myself.  Her name is Andrea, and she
claims, of course, to be female.  She has no mating group, so she and
I start one.


-- Rich

VALIDITY: Rich already told his gender, now tells the mating group he
 starts, he (or ze) does not mention any offspring, nor any known
 znotzes. VALID
STYLE: Little to say about it, but certainly positive. +1


-- 
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-01 11:01:12 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Sat Sep  2 22:33:56 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id WAA00328 (ESMTP). Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:33:56 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id WAA25726 (ESMTP). Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:33:56 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e82KXtD12702
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:33:55 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115178AbQIBUdc>;
        Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:33:32 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200009022033.WAA00678@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: 146:6 INVALID, -0.5
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:33:12 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Rule 146:6 by Nicholson Neisler, Rule Date 2000-09-02 18:43:17 GMT

===

Being a peep accountant ain't easy.  Long hours, difficult situations,
and all the paperwork. It's almost as hard as being a znotz hunter but
someone has to keep track of mating groups.  Purely for tax reasons of
course.  Good organization makes things easier, so all groups are named
by the first letter of all the known members in the group, in
alphabetical order.  The two groups Zi've been checking out, Zi mean,
preparing paperwork on so far are the "CL" group and the "AR" group.

Zi just noticed that Rich and Luk had a peepoy. (That's what baby male
peeps are called).  That would be a great tax break, but it might be a
znotzling for all Zi know.  Zi think Zi'll join that group.

Zi'm either male or female.  That's all Zi can say due to client
confidentiality.

===

VALIDITY: Rich and Luk do not form a mating group at the moment, thus
 you cannot join that group either.
STYLE: Feels too much like searching loopholes just for the fun of it,
 rather than to really be able to do something. I have no idea what to
 do with you 'Zi', and it is also vague whether your claim to be either
 male or female could be made by a Znotz or not. Your story seems much
 ado about nothing.
 On the plus-side there is the start of some web of dependancies regarding
 who is znotz and who is not(z). But despite that, I'll still give this
 Rule -0.5.

Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-02 20:33:32 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Sep  6 13:15:17 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id NAA29058 (ESMTP). Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:15:17 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id NAA23455 (ESMTP). Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:15:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e86BFF509507
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:15:16 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115840AbQIFLOt>;
        Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:14:49 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200009060931.LAA04383@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Rule 146 Overview
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:31:22 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

The first week of Round 146 is almost over, new entries have only about
one hour left to post Rules.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

			Eligible until			Style
Richard S. Holmes	Thu, 7 Sep 2000, 17:36:21	+2
Luk Vandelaer		Thu, 7 Sep 2000, 10:09:52	+0.5
Chuck			Wed, 6 Sep 2000, 21:55:33	+1
Others			Wed, 6 Sep 2000, 14:08:12	 0
Ronald Kunne		*** not Eligible ***		+2
Nicholson Neisner	*** not Eligible ***		-0.5

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 146:1 (Richard S. Holmes, VALID, +1)

You're either male or female, you know.  Or znotz.  In any case, you
should let people know the first time you say anything, just to avoid
confusion.  Unless you're znotz, of course, in which case you'll lie
and say you're male, or female.  Me, I'm male.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 146:2 (Ronald Kunne, INVALID, +2)

When two different genders mate, their off-spring is
the third gender. 
(When three different genders mate, it's called Nirwana.
But that's a completely different story -and rule!)
 
No two following rules can be written by persons
of the same gender.

I am znotz. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 146:3 (Chuck, VALID, +1)

Peeps (the beings discussed in this round, scientific name
Fanto rehobilis caliensis) can mate in groups of two or more.
The gender of the offspring of a mating group is determined
by the number of each gender present in the mating group,
as follows:

* If all three genders are present in equal numbers, the offspring
  may be of any gender.

* If two genders are present in equal numbers, and the third in
  either a greater or lesser number, the offspring will be of the
  gender which is present in an unequal number.

* If the number of each of the three genders differs, the offspring
  will be of the gender which has the median number of peeps present.

It is also to be noted that znotzes are an exceptionally devious
bunch; a znotz claiming to be male or female will have the
physical appearance of a male or female, respectively.  Even a
znotz's mating partners may not know that e is not what e claims
to be, although the careful observer will note that conclusions
can sometimes be drawn from the offspring of a mating group.

I am male.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 146:4 (Luk Vandelaer, VALID, +0.5)

The peeps are very social, they form mating groups whenever they can. Once in
such a group, they are not able to leave it at free will, but they can be
rejected by all other members of the group, or can be pulled out to form a new
mating group.

All future rules from a peep whithout mating group will include which mating
group e joins, or with which peep e starts a new mating group.

I am a female joining the mating group of Chuck.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 146:5 (Richard S. Holmes, VALID, +1)

I walk into the smoky bar and look around as my eyes adjust.  It's the
usual -- crowded, mostly with losers -- male peeps in garish purple
globba suits, females in tight see-through scrabbs, and znotz peeps
in... well, garish purple globba suits and tight see-through scrabbs,
I guess.

Then I see her.  The most stunningly beautiful female peep I've ever
laid eyes on.  Alone in a corner with her drink, watching the room, a
mysterious smile on her face...

Or she could be a znotz passing for female, I suppose.  One so seldom
knows, I have to remind myself what the pronouns for a known znotz
are... "Ze asked me to dance"... "I danced with zir"... "We went to
zis room"... all future rules, I tell myself, should use the correct
pronouns when dealing with known znotzes.

I go to her table and introduce myself.  Her name is Andrea, and she
claims, of course, to be female.  She has no mating group, so she and
I start one.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 146:6 (Nicholson Neisner, INVALID, -0.5)

Being a peep accountant ain't easy.  Long hours, difficult situations,
and all the paperwork. It's almost as hard as being a znotz hunter but
someone has to keep track of mating groups.  Purely for tax reasons of
course.  Good organization makes things easier, so all groups are named
by the first letter of all the known members in the group, in
alphabetical order.  The two groups Zi've been checking out, Zi mean,
preparing paperwork on so far are the "CL" group and the "AR" group.

Zi just noticed that Rich and Luk had a peepoy. (That's what baby male
peeps are called).  That would be a great tax break, but it might be a
znotzling for all Zi know.  Zi think Zi'll join that group.

Zi'm either male or female.  That's all Zi can say due to client
confidentiality.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work), +31-6-27174384 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

A child is not a glass that is filled, but a fire that is set ablaze.
						- Maria Montessori

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-06 11:14:49 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Thu Sep  7 10:05:11 2000
Received: from svin12 [131.155.71.135] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id KAA15144 (ESMTP). Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:05:11 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@win.tue.nl>
   id KAA05599 (ESMTP). Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:05:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [195.0.254.19])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e87859717580
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:05:09 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114384AbQIGIDg>;
        Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:03:36 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200009070803.KAA00484@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: 146:7 INVALID, -0.5 style
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:03:19 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: O

Rule 146:7, by Luk Vandelaer, Rule Date 2000-09-06, 13:26:58 GMT

--- 146:7 ---
A child is mysteriously 'born' in the midst of the group, when the
members of a mating group come together. Or we have to say, when they are drawn
together. (All future rules will have a sexual act of the mating group
of the rule's writer notified)

The peep sexuologists have always wondered why the mating groups are so
exhausted from the sexual act, that they (including the child) can't say
anything unless another rule has been posted.

After thinking this over, I invited my mating group for a discussion over it,
and it didn't stay by a discussion, it was almost a furious battle that
concluded in a comforting night in bed.

------

VALIDITY: When the members of a mating group come together, a child is
 'born', this rule says. From this, I conclude that the 'coming together'
 is a sexual act. Thus, after coming together, the members of the mating
 group can't say anything. Thus, Luk cannot have a discussion with his
 mating group, because when they are together they cannot say anything.
STYLE: Rather uninteresting way of making a child, also not exciting
 otherwise. -0.5.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-07 08:03:35 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Sep 20 18:45:23 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id SAA09300 (ESMTP). Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:45:22 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8KGjM529163
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:45:22 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8KGjJ908455
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:45:21 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8KGjIN27456
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:45:18 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S117021AbQITQow>;
        Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:44:52 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: engels@win.tue.nl (Andre Engels)
Message-Id: <200009201644.SAA00903@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Round 146 has ended
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:44:43 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: O

And there I had completely forgotten to announce the end of Round 146...
Well, it ended almost two weeks ago. Richard S. Holmes is the winner, and
the Judge for the next round. The Judge and Ronald Kunne are co-wizzards.

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

146:1	Richard S. Holmes	VALID	+1
146:2	Ronald Kunne		INVALID	+2
146:3	Chuck			VALID	+1
146:4	Luk Vandelaer		VALID	+0.5
146:5	Richard S. Holmes	VALID	+1
146:6	Nicholson Neisler	INVALID	-0.5
146:7	Luk Vandelaer		INVALID	-0.5

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

Rule 146:1, by Richard S. Holmes, 2000-08-30 14:08:12

***

You're either male or female, you know.  Or znotz.  In any case, you
should let people know the first time you say anything, just to avoid
confusion.  Unless you're znotz, of course, in which case you'll lie
and say you're male, or female.  Me, I'm male.

***

Validity: No problems. VALID
Style: Nothing spectacular, but an ok rule. +1

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

Rule 146:2, by Ronald Kunne, Rule Date 2000-08-30 15:52:47 GMT

>>>>>
When two different genders mate, their off-spring is
the third gender. 
(When three different genders mate, it's called Nirwana.
But that's a completely different story -and rule!)
 
No two following rules can be written by persons
of the same gender.

I am znotz. 
>>>>>

VALIDITY: A znotz is allowed to tell the truth, and Ronald is not
 necessarily of the same gender as Richard.
STYLE: A logical addition to the round and a good rule. No substraction
 for the backdoors that are left open, as those might well have been on
 purpose.
(VALIDITY later changed to INVALID by the Judge)

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

Rule 146:3 by Chuck, Rule Date 2000-08-30 21:55:33 GMT

----------

Peeps (the beings discussed in this round, scientific name
Fanto rehobilis caliensis) can mate in groups of two or more.
The gender of the offspring of a mating group is determined
by the number of each gender present in the mating group,
as follows:

* If all three genders are present in equal numbers, the offspring
  may be of any gender.

* If two genders are present in equal numbers, and the third in
  either a greater or lesser number, the offspring will be of the
  gender which is present in an unequal number.

* If the number of each of the three genders differs, the offspring
  will be of the gender which has the median number of peeps present.

It is also to be noted that znotzes are an exceptionally devious
bunch; a znotz claiming to be male or female will have the
physical appearance of a male or female, respectively.  Even a
znotz's mating partners may not know that e is not what e claims
to be, although the careful observer will note that conclusions
can sometimes be drawn from the offspring of a mating group.

I am male.

----------

VALIDITY: No problems.
STYLE: Some off for partly re-iterating Ronald's ideas (even if only the
 idea of the gender of offspring being important), but some bonus for closing
 the holes he would have left behind. Interesting, logical Rule. +1.

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

Rule 146:4 by Luk Vandelaer, Rule Date: 2000-08-31 10:09:52 GMT

--- 146:4 ---
The peeps are very social, they form mating groups whenever they can. Once in
such a group, they are not able to leave it at free will, but they can be
rejected by all other members of the group, or can be pulled out to form a new
mating group.

All future rules from a peep whithout mating group will include which mating
group e joins, or with which peep e starts a new mating group.

I am a female joining the mating group of Chuck.

------

VALIDITY: Making Valid Rules still is easy, and this one does not fall foul
 (it seems). VALID
STYLE: Not a bad Rule, but nothing exciting either (not even with all the
 mating going on). +0.5 Style.

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

Rule 146:5, by Richard S. Holmes, Rule Date 2000-08-31 17:36:21 GMT

--- 146:5 ---

I walk into the smoky bar and look around as my eyes adjust.  It's the
usual -- crowded, mostly with losers -- male peeps in garish purple
globba suits, females in tight see-through scrabbs, and znotz peeps
in... well, garish purple globba suits and tight see-through scrabbs,
I guess.

Then I see her.  The most stunningly beautiful female peep I've ever
laid eyes on.  Alone in a corner with her drink, watching the room, a
mysterious smile on her face...

Or she could be a znotz passing for female, I suppose.  One so seldom
knows, I have to remind myself what the pronouns for a known znotz
are... "Ze asked me to dance"... "I danced with zir"... "We went to
zis room"... all future rules, I tell myself, should use the correct
pronouns when dealing with known znotzes.

I go to her table and introduce myself.  Her name is Andrea, and she
claims, of course, to be female.  She has no mating group, so she and
I start one.


-- Rich

VALIDITY: Rich already told his gender, now tells the mating group he
 starts, he (or ze) does not mention any offspring, nor any known
 znotzes. VALID
STYLE: Little to say about it, but certainly positive. +1

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

Rule 146:6 by Nicholson Neisler, Rule Date 2000-09-02 18:43:17 GMT

===

Being a peep accountant ain't easy.  Long hours, difficult situations,
and all the paperwork. It's almost as hard as being a znotz hunter but
someone has to keep track of mating groups.  Purely for tax reasons of
course.  Good organization makes things easier, so all groups are named
by the first letter of all the known members in the group, in
alphabetical order.  The two groups Zi've been checking out, Zi mean,
preparing paperwork on so far are the "CL" group and the "AR" group.

Zi just noticed that Rich and Luk had a peepoy. (That's what baby male
peeps are called).  That would be a great tax break, but it might be a
znotzling for all Zi know.  Zi think Zi'll join that group.

Zi'm either male or female.  That's all Zi can say due to client
confidentiality.

===

VALIDITY: Rich and Luk do not form a mating group at the moment, thus
 you cannot join that group either.
STYLE: Feels too much like searching loopholes just for the fun of it,
 rather than to really be able to do something. I have no idea what to
 do with you 'Zi', and it is also vague whether your claim to be either
 male or female could be made by a Znotz or not. Your story seems much
 ado about nothing.
 On the plus-side there is the start of some web of dependancies regarding
 who is znotz and who is not(z). But despite that, I'll still give this
 Rule -0.5.

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

Rule 146:7, by Luk Vandelaer, Rule Date 2000-09-06, 13:26:58 GMT

--- 146:7 ---
A child is mysteriously 'born' in the midst of the group, when the
members of a mating group come together. Or we have to say, when they are drawn
together. (All future rules will have a sexual act of the mating group
of the rule's writer notified)

The peep sexuologists have always wondered why the mating groups are so
exhausted from the sexual act, that they (including the child) can't say
anything unless another rule has been posted.

After thinking this over, I invited my mating group for a discussion over it,
and it didn't stay by a discussion, it was almost a furious battle that
concluded in a comforting night in bed.

------

VALIDITY: When the members of a mating group come together, a child is
 'born', this rule says. From this, I conclude that the 'coming together'
 is a sexual act. Thus, after coming together, the members of the mating
 group can't say anything. Thus, Luk cannot have a discussion with his
 mating group, because when they are together they cannot say anything.
STYLE: Rather uninteresting way of making a child, also not exciting
 otherwise. -0.5.

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

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-20 16:44:52 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Sat Sep 23 04:39:13 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id EAA18782 (ESMTP). Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:39:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N2dD523743
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:39:13 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N2dC903819
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:39:12 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N2dBN02207
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:39:11 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115145AbQIWCit>;
        Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:38:49 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
Cc: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 147:1 VALID -1.5
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1000923004625.15830B@ipnsuf>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 22 Sep 2000 22:38:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: Ronald Kunne's message of "Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:53:10 +0200 (MET DST)"
Message-ID: <xzc8zsj25p0.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: ROr

Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr> writes:

> >>>>>>
> In every rule a new word has to be replaced by the word 'spam'.
> Spam rules must also replace this word, or be invalid.
> >>>>>>
[...]
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-09-22 22:53:44 GMT
> 

VALIDITY: Ambiguous you want, and ambiguous you've got.  Is there a
particular word Mr. Kunne has in mind for which he has substituted
"spam" and for which all rules to which the second sentence of this
rule applies (its application set) also must substitute "spam"?  But
then the Judge, who does not know the word, cannot judge the validity
of such rules.  A rule cannot prevent the Judge from doing his job, so
that can't be the case.  In fact, the Judge must know what the word is
-- and since it could be "all", "future", "valid", "scatalogical", or
basically any adjective one could apply to a rule, the only way the
Judge can know what the word is is to decide what the word is.  Then
there's no problem, and this rule is VALID.

STYLE: Valid it may be, but it's a pain in the butt.  Only the Judge
knows what Mr. Kunne's "spam" means, and everyone else, Mr. Kunne
included, will have to guess as to what word they can't use.  Worse
yet, the word defines the application set of the second sentence of
this rule, which means no one but the Judge knows in which rules they
can't use it.  And as more and more words get spamified, the game will
rapidly deteriorate into ambiguous unplayability and grind to an
unpleasant halt.

Unless of course, the Judge were to mention that "spam" here means
"verbless" (meaning, not having any verbs).  Mr. Kunne probably didn't
intend such a development.  But maybe he did.  It's ambiguous.

As might be guessed, I find ambiguous restrictions highly unstylish,
and introducing them in the first rule makes it even worse.  The rule
is short and technically sticks to the theme, so it's not without
redeeming qualities, but even so, -1.5 is about as generous an award
as I can manage.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-23 02:38:49 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Sat Sep 23 04:56:30 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id EAA19018 (ESMTP). Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:56:29 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N2uU524107
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:56:30 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N2uT903857
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:56:29 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N2uS524103
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:56:28 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115220AbQIWC4G>;
        Sat, 23 Sep 2000 04:56:06 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 147:2 NOT SPAM 0.5
References: <39CBDA69.D9355794@wall.org>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 22 Sep 2000 22:56:02 -0400
In-Reply-To: Aron Wall's message of "Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:17:14 -0700"
Message-ID: <xzc66nn24vx.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Aron Wall <aron@wall.org> writes:

> 147:2
> >>>>>
> If, by spam,you in any way feel spammed by this spam, please spam it and
> accept our sincere spam.
> 
> At Gigiplex Corporation, we make spam filters!  Our top engineers went
> UNDERCOVER for THREE YEARS to design this system!  It LEARNS from its
> mistakes!!!!!!!  If a spam which is clearly designed to be spam gets by
> the spam filter (i.e. is VALID), the spam filter will CREATE a new
> criterion to INVALIDATE that sort of spam in the future!  For example,
> if it recieved this spam it might put spams with exclamation points into
> its filter!  The new spam-sign will be appended onto the spam after a
> row of dashes in a message detailing the modified spam filter rules!
> 
> This service is ABSOLUTELY FREE for the FIRST SIX MONTHS!!!!!
> Afterwards you will recieve a spam asking you if you wish to continue
> this service.
> 
> YOU MAY ALREADY be signed up for this service!  Just ask your local
> Judge.  If this spam is spammed VALID, it will filter all spam after
> this one!
> >>>>>
> 
> Aron Wall
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-09-22 23:14:21 GMT
> 

VALIDITY: Consistent with the first restriction of 147:1, and it
contains verbs, so the second restriction of 147:1 does not apply.
Spam filter says NOT SPAM (VALID).

STYLE: I'm frankly a little bewildered by the meaning of "The new
spam-sign will be appended onto the spam after a row of dashes in a
message detailing the modified spam filter rules!"  I'm not sure what
a spam-sign is, what the "message" is, or even who or what is supposed
to do the appending -- passive voice is very unstylish in a rule.  I
interpret as follows: The spam filter (i.e. the judge) will, in the
message declaring a rule NOT SPAM (VALID) will pick out a feature of
the rule which future rules must avoid or be declared SPAM (INVALID).
That ambiguity costs Mr. Wall style points, offsetting his highly
accurate spam impersonation.  0.5.

---------

Spam filter modification: "receive" must be spelled correctly.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-23 02:56:06 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Sat Sep 23 05:06:20 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id FAA20078 (ESMTP). Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:06:19 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N36J524332
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:06:19 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N36J903901
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:06:19 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N36IN02636
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:06:18 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115288AbQIWDF4>;
        Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:05:56 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 147:3 - Get Rich Quick! SPAM 0.5
References: <20000922.163531.-3849697.8.grose12@juno.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 22 Sep 2000 23:05:36 -0400
In-Reply-To: "Garth A. Rose"'s message of "Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:35:30 -0700"
Message-ID: <xzc3dir24fz.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com> writes:

> GET RICH QUICK!
> 
> Could you do with an extra style point?  How about *two* extra style
> points?  Dare I ask about THREE?
> 
> Well, my friend, that stylishness can be YOURS, with just a little help
> from me.
> 
> With the techniques I detail in my book (just send $19.95 in cash to PO
> Box 666, Death Valley, CA) I gained DOZENS of style points, round after
> round after round!  In my very first spam using them, I gained the
> maximum of THREE style points, and it hasn't stopped rolling in since!
> 
> Here's just a few little samples of the concentrated wisdom my book has
> to offer:
> 
> * Craft your spam to resemble a classically annoying spam message, like
> this spam!  It's the theme!
> 
> * Put an identifying title for your spam in the subject header, just as I
> did!
> 
> * Include a testimonial as to how much my book, _Style for the Benighted
> Masses_, has helped you!
>    After all, I *wrote* the thing, and it's helped me immensely in bilk-
> er, helping people like you!
> 
> WOW!  Just imagine the style points you'll receive!  Don't delay!  Act
> NOW!!!!
> 
> P.S.  All spams after this spam must follow the wonderful wisdom of my
> book, as listed above.
> 
> ------------------
[...]
> 
> Garth
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-09-22 23:36:05 GMT
> 

VALIDITY: "In my very first spam using them, I gained the maximum of
THREE style points" -- 147:3 is Mr. Rose's very first spam using the
techniques from his book, and could not possibly have received 3 style
points, since it very unstylishly tried to dictate how many style
points it would receive.  SPAM.

STYLE: Besides that, imposing three restrictions in one early rule is
a bit much.  Good parody of "Make Money Fast", though.  Add a point
for being the first to put my name in the subject line.  +0.5.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-23 03:05:56 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Sat Sep 23 05:10:02 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id FAA20185 (ESMTP). Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:10:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N3A2524386
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:10:02 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N3A1903910
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:10:01 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8N3A0N02695
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:10:00 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115219AbQIWDJh>;
        Sat, 23 Sep 2000 05:09:37 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 147:1 VALID -1.5
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1000923004625.15830B@ipnsuf>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 22 Sep 2000 23:09:27 -0400
In-Reply-To: Ronald Kunne's message of "Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:53:10 +0200 (MET DST)"
Message-ID: <xzcya0jztw8.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr> writes:

> >>>>>>
> In every rule a new word has to be replaced by the word 'spam'.
> Spam rules must also replace this word, or be invalid.
> >>>>>>
[...]
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-09-22 22:53:44 GMT
> 

VALIDITY: Ambiguous you want, and ambiguous you've got.  Is there a
particular word Mr. Kunne has in mind for which he has substituted
"spam" and for which all rules to which the second sentence of this
rule applies (its application set) also must substitute "spam"?  But
then the Judge, who does not know the word, cannot judge the validity
of such rules.  A rule cannot prevent the Judge from doing his job, so
that can't be the case.  In fact, the Judge must know what the word is
-- and since it could be "all", "future", "valid", "scatalogical", or
basically any adjective one could apply to a rule, the only way the
Judge can know what the word is is to decide what the word is.  Then
there's no problem, and this rule is VALID.

STYLE: Valid it may be, but it's a pain in the butt.  Only the Judge
knows what Mr. Kunne's "spam" means, and everyone else, Mr. Kunne
included, will have to guess as to what word they can't use.  Worse
yet, the word defines the application set of the second sentence of
this rule, which means no one but the Judge knows in which rules they
can't use it.  And as more and more words get spamified, the game will
rapidly deteriorate into ambiguous unplayability and grind to an
unpleasant halt.

Unless of course, the Judge were to mention that "spam" here means
"verbless" (meaning, not having any verbs).  Mr. Kunne probably didn't
intend such a development.  But maybe he did.  It's ambiguous.

As might be guessed, I find ambiguous restrictions highly unstylish,
and introducing them in the first rule makes it even worse.  The rule
is short and technically sticks to the theme, so it's not without
redeeming qualities, but even so, -1.5 is about as generous an award
as I can manage.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-23 03:09:37 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Sep 25 16:51:25 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PEpOD14685
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:51:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PEpOb10942
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:51:24 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PEpMK21359
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:51:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PEpLb10932
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:51:22 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115467AbQIYOu7>;
        Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:50:59 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judge resigns (was Re: 147:3 - Get Rich Quick! SPAM 0.5)
References: <20000922.214803.-3849697.11.grose12@juno.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 25 Sep 2000 10:50:52 -0400
In-Reply-To: "Garth A. Rose"'s message of "Fri, 22 Sep 2000 21:48:02 -0700"
Message-ID: <xzc66nkjzjn.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: ROr

"Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com> writes:

> P.S.  I have to say that I also disagree with your statement that the
> Judge has to arbitrarily decide on what each 'spammed' word means.  I
> think it is clear FRC tradition that any rule that can be reasonably
> interpreted as VALID, is in fact VALID.  Not only traditional, but it
> seems to be the intent of the RO's to boot - after all, you can't
> reasonably call something inconsistent if there's an untortured
> interpretation that would make it consistent.

Well, that makes two of you.  Therefore, I hereby withdraw my
judgements of Rules 147:1-3 and resign the Judgeship in favor of the
first person to volunteer.  I seem not to be qualified by reason of
inexperience, and in any case, I have no desire to try to judge (or
play) a round with the kind of ambiguous restrictions 147:1 imposes.

Perhaps a more sane way of determining the judge of a new round should
be tried.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-25 14:50:59 GMT

From rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu Mon Sep 25 17:13:26 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PFDQD16576
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:13:26 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PFDPN25283
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:13:25 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PFDOK21638
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:13:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mailer.syr.edu (mailer.syr.edu [128.230.18.29])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PFDNb13717
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:13:24 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00620FF1@mailer.syr.edu>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:13:23 -0400
Received: (from rsholmes@localhost)
	by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA23547;
	Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:13:21 -0400 (EDT)
To: Andre Engels <engels@win.tue.nl>
Subject: Re: Judge resigns (was Re: 147:3 - Get Rich Quick! SPAM 0.5)
References: <200009251511.e8PFBkH00781@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 25 Sep 2000 11:13:21 -0400
In-Reply-To: Andre Engels's message of "Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:11:46 +0200 (MET DST)"
Message-ID: <xzck8c0ijxq.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Lines: 26
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4
Status: RO

Andre Engels <engels@win.tue.nl> writes:

> Richard S. Holmes wrote:
> 
> > Well, that makes two of you.  Therefore, I hereby withdraw my
> > judgements of Rules 147:1-3 and resign the Judgeship in favor of the
> > first person to volunteer.  I seem not to be qualified by reason of
> > inexperience, and in any case, I have no desire to try to judge (or
> > play) a round with the kind of ambiguous restrictions 147:1 imposes.
> 
> I volunteer.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
> http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html
> 
> If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise,
> we don't believe in it at all			-- Noam Chomsky
> 

Go ahead.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Sep 25 18:18:09 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PGI9r20300
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:18:09 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PGI8b18783
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:18:09 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PGI8K22333
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:18:08 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8PGI7N00343
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:18:07 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115453AbQIYQRy>;
        Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:17:54 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Judge resigns
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0009251613530.24757-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 25 Sep 2000 12:17:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: Anton Cox's message of "Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:42:49 +0100 (BST)"
Message-ID: <xzcog1co38e.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Andre Engels has agreed to take over as Judge for Round 147.

Thanks for the encouragement, but I feel my knowledge of FRC is
insufficient for me to act as Judge of a round like this.  What I'm
hearing is that that means I shouldn't participate as a player in FRC
either.  Presumably this means I should sit through more rounds as an
observer than I have to date.  I can live with that.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-25 16:17:54 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Oct  6 03:28:35 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961SYr29587
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:28:34 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961SWD14070
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:28:32 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961SUK10091
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:28:31 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961SUD14066
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:28:30 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114422AbQJFB2S>;
        Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:28:18 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39DD1D89.955439F5@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:32:09 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judgement 148:1 VALID +2 Style
References: <39DA5A35.3A4A306C@wall.org> <xzc66n84rn9.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

"Richard S. Holmes" wrote:

> We're building a world, and its name is Cyrus.
>
> (I've always wanted to name a planet after my cat.)
>
> Cyrus is 5000 km in radius.  It revolves once around its sun in 1000
> days -- not that that matters much, Cyrus being hollow with all its
> biosphere living on the inside.  There is of course no net
> gravitational force inside Cyrus, but the planet rotates once in 1.2
> hours, producing just about 1 g centrifugal force (outward) at the
> equator.
>
> All geographic features of Cyrus are named after cats.  One such
> feature is Lake Morris, which is 25 km long and as much as 150 meters
> deep, but only 35 meters wide.  All rules will describe a remarkable
> geographic feature of Cyrus.
>
> --
> - Rich Holmes
>   Syracuse, NY
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-10-04 14:19:03 GMT

VALID.
+2 for creativity and starting out the round well.  In a round like
this, the best restrictions are descriptive ones that talk about the
world, not rules.  But this rule and the next one are fine.

The Cowizard Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-06 01:28:18 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Oct  6 03:30:30 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961UUr29691
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:30:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961UUD14123
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:30:30 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961UTK10097
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:30:29 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961USD14119
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:30:28 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114424AbQJFBaS>;
        Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:30:18 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39DD1E02.7F717B88@wall.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:34:10 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: [Fwd: Judgement 148.2 VALID 0 Style]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Aron Wall wrote:

> Great Guru wrote:
>
> > Of course, living inside a planet has several problems. For one, the
> > darkness is almost all encompassing. Luckily, Sylvester Spire, a huge
> > cylindrical mountain 2500km high, yet only 100km wide, is positioned on the
> > opposite side of the planet from Lake Morris. The Spire is made up almost
> > entirely of radioactive material which provides needed heat and light
> > throughout Cyrus.
> >
> > Now, while future rules will tell us how different species in Cyrus have
> > adapted to survive this environment, it should be noted that none of them
> > live within 100 km of the spire itself.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________________
>
> VALID.  0 Because of some things about Sylvester Spire that badly want
> explanation (e.g. why isn't it an enormous nuclear bomb?)
>
> The Co-wizard Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-06 01:30:18 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Oct  7 19:33:57 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e97HXur24281
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 19:33:56 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e97HXu218150
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 19:33:56 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e97HXtK24354
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 19:33:55 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e97HXsq15407
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 19:33:54 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114896AbQJGTdl>;
        Sat, 7 Oct 2000 21:33:41 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39DF5058.B7AE58F0@wall.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 09:33:28 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judgement 148:3 VALID 0 Style
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001006163442.23736B-100000@ipngraal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Ronald Kunne wrote:

> >>>>>>
> Quite a few species evolved into flying creatures.
>
> The Aronius Wallipurnus is seen mostly close to and
> inside the Greater Felix Canyon. This geographical
> absurdity looks four parallel scratches left on the
> ground by a giant cat. A. Wallipurnus uses his thin
> membrane-like wings to fly in the air currents
> created by the cold air inside the Canyon.
>
> A. Wallipurnus is the biggest hunter of Cyrus.
> Following rules shall describe another species
> appearing in its food chain.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Validity: Verily

Style: Ummm... I'm very flattered.  No style points.  This rule doesn't
really do anything for me, but it doesn't hurt either.

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-07 19:33:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Oct 12 01:00:54 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9BN0rr13857
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:00:53 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9BN0rN02148
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:00:53 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9BN0qK05520
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:00:52 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9BN0pt28161
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:00:52 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114985AbQJKXAi>;
        Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:00:38 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39E4E315.9D8ACF33@wall.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 15:00:53 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judgement 148:4
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010111154110.7382-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> >>>>
> Clearly Cyrus was designed by an intelligent being, and somehow around
> the theme of cats.  Such hints as the constant red glow, which would
> provide too little light for human comfort but actually would deplore
> any cats from their much beloved nights (except in the shadow of the
> 25 km tall Mephistopheles mountain range, where they would instead be
> exposed to constant freezing temperatures), shows that this being was
> indeed guided by a fanatic hatred of the cat species.
>
> Fortunately, the domestic cats from which all animals on Cyrus descend
> have long since (and, ironically, helped by the radioactivity) evolved
> into all kinds of new thriving species.  The closest resemblance to
> the ancestor is found in the small, burrowing Smellycat, which happens
> to be the A. Wallipurnus' least favorite prey, eaten only in times of
> famine.
> >>>>
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-10-11 09:58:40 GMT

Validity:  VALID
Style: Remember the moral of Schrodinger's cat?  Cruelty to animals is
not acceptable even as a thought experiment.  0 Style.  Nothing has
really livened up this round so far, and I don't think
this rule is likely to help.

The Judge

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-11 23:00:38 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Oct 24 17:32:24 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9OFWOr21929
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:32:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9OFWON15318
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:32:24 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9OFWMK11268
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:32:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9OFWLN15308
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:32:21 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114525AbQJXPcK>;
        Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:32:10 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <39F59DB5.15720B99@wall.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 07:33:25 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Start of Round 149
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010240604590.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Status: RO

Orjan Johansen wrote:

> More than a week has passed since I posted the last Rule, so I believe
> Round 148 has certainly ended, that I am the new Judge and that Rich
> Holmes is the Wizard for Round 149.
>
> Taking a look at today's date, I propose the theme:
>
> "The United Nations"
>
> The Round will start when the Wizard posts a Rule, or at 25 Oct 2000
> 16:00:00 GMT, whichever is sooner.
>
> Greetings,
> Judge Ørjan.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-10-24 04:31:47 GMT

The Judge of the previous round certifies these results as being correct
(I should have posted something earlier).

Aron Wall

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-24 15:32:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Oct 25 09:23:26 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7NPr10795
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:23:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7NQt25643
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:23:26 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7NPK18257
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:23:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7NON24423
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:23:24 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114604AbQJYHXF>;
        Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:23:05 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:22:21 +0200 (CEST)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:1 VALID, +1.5 style
In-Reply-To: <xzcy9ze2ax2.fsf@forbin.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010250916350.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

On 24 Oct 2000, Richard S. Holmes wrote:

> Nations of the world, unite!
> 
> Thailand and Australia announce that they are uniting to form a single
> country, to be known as Austhailia.  A craze in gourmet restaurants
> for curried wallaby ensues.
> 
> Future rules will mention a pair of countries that merge, the name of
> the merged country, and a consequence of the merger.

A nice short first Rule twisting the theme.

VALID.  +1.5 style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-25 07:23:05 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Oct 25 09:29:53 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7Trr11130
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:29:53 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7Trt26312
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:29:53 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7TqK18310
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:29:52 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9P7TpN24976
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:29:51 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114614AbQJYH3i>;
        Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:29:38 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:28:45 +0200 (CEST)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:2 VALID, +1 style
In-Reply-To: <F207DgC81TbdkSmLAzt0000079f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010250922330.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Gallivanting Tripper wrote:

> Austhailian Financial Review, 25/10/00
> 
> In what it described as a "response to the perceived globalisation of 
> Austhailian cuisine", the Austhailian McDonalds conglomerate declared their 
> independence from the new country, claiming tax-free status for its 
> restaurants.  News that the conglomerate had also bought the island nation 
> of Macau and declared the federal republic of McAu, has prompted the 
> Secretary-General of the United Nations to express concern about the 
> McDonaldisation of the South Pacific.
> 
> As political instability continues to spread like a plague of cliches, 
> future rules must mention the breakup of a nation previously described in a 
> Fantasy Rule.   -AAP

VALID.  +1 style.

> --------------
> 
> I guess this also represents my expression of interest to join the mighty 
> FRC.

Welcome!

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-25 07:29:38 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Oct 26 17:14:14 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9QFEDr24944
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:14:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9QFEDN19158
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:14:14 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9QFEDK07252
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:14:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9QFECN19146
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:14:12 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115119AbQJZPMR>;
        Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:12:17 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:11:32 +0200 (CEST)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:3 VALID, -1.5 Style. 149:2 changed to +0.8 Style.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001026155422.21603B-100000@ipngraal>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010261611520.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Ronald Kunne wrote:

> >>>>>
> The Sociologist Digest, volume 666, page 2439-2444.
> 
> Evidence for the existence of a universal law gouverning
> country mergers and break-ups.
> 
> N.O. Ithall, Univ of McAu State.
> 
> Abstract.
> It is argued that country mergers and break-ups follow
> simple universal laws. It is shown that 1) no two countries 
> will ever merge if they are not separated by a sea
> 2) a new formed country will not exist for longer than
> the time of one Fantasy Rule.
> 
> The merger of Iceland and Libya into Icefordesertland and its
> tragical consequences [1,2] as well as the break-up of McAu [3],
> are two examples of recent country mergers and break-ups. 
> 
> [Rest of quite boring paper skipped]
> 
> References:
> [1] On the emigration of heat suffering Libyans to Iceland, SD 43 (2003) 54.
> [2] On the holiday habits of Icelanders with a cold, SD 42 (2002) 645.
> [3] Echec of the McDonaldisation of the South Pacific, SD 39 (2001) 1970.
> >>>>>

The leap in volume number from 43 to 666 is rather impressive, and it is
also stretching it to imply that Austhalia ceased to exist just because
McDonalds seceded.  But I don't think either of these invalidate the Rule.

On checking law (1), I discovered a discrepancy in 149:2.  Namely, in
reality Macau is not an island nation.  I believe 149:2 is in its right to
rearrange geography as long as it is explicit about it, although I think
this case is somewhat unstylish.  I will nip off 0.2 style points from
149:2.

I don't like law no. (2), it seems to me to destroy most of what "world
building" aspect this Round could have had.  -1.5 Style.

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-26 15:12:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com  Wed Sep 20 20:46:09 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5] by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.9.3) 
   for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>
   id UAA14203 (ESMTP). Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:46:09 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8KIk8N02996
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:46:08 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8KIk7909298
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:46:07 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8KIk6505892
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:46:06 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S117049AbQITSpL>;
        Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:45:11 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Subject: Round 147 starts!
References: <200009201644.SAA00903@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 20 Sep 2000 14:44:48 -0400
In-Reply-To: engels@win.tue.nl's message of "Wed, 20 Sep 2000 18:44:43 +0200 (MET DST)"
Message-ID: <xzcya0mq4wv.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

In the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" mode, the theme for Round 147
is SPAM.

As I understand it, our list owner is willing to turn off the list's
SPAM blocker for the duration of this round.  (So this list may get
spammed during this round -- we'll live.  Think of it as outside
inspiration.)  Let's wait to hear he's done so, and then the round
will begin when Ronald Kunne posts the first Rule or 48 hours after we
hear the SPAM blocker is turned off, whichever comes first.

And if you have a SPAM filter on your system, too, let's just hope
you're cleverer than it is...

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-09-20 18:45:11 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Oct 24 06:32:10 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9O4WAr11043
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:32:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9O4WAt23936
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:32:10 +0200 (MDT)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9O4W9K03771
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:32:09 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9O4W8N13932
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:32:08 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114253AbQJXEbr>;
        Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:31:47 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:31:03 +0200 (CEST)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Start of Round 149
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010240604590.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

More than a week has passed since I posted the last Rule, so I believe
Round 148 has certainly ended, that I am the new Judge and that Rich
Holmes is the Wizard for Round 149.

Taking a look at today's date, I propose the theme:

"The United Nations"

The Round will start when the Wizard posts a Rule, or at 25 Oct 2000
16:00:00 GMT, whichever is sooner.

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-24 04:31:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Oct 31 17:36:07 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9VGa6r09640
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:36:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9VGa6N17634
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:36:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9VGa5K25647
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:36:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9VGa4N17630
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:36:04 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114645AbQJaQfu>;
        Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:35:50 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:35:07 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:4 VALID, +2 Style
In-Reply-To: <F159sSMT3e8jFk6e6pZ00000f23@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010311728440.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Gallivanting Tripper wrote:

> The United Nations yesterday passed a resolution condemning the recent trend 
> in international mergers and breakups.  "We are not a stock exchange - the 
> UN has no time for mergers and acquisitions" commented a spokesman.  
> "Countries which marry in haste, repent at leisure," he added, pointing to 
> the examples of the massive population exchange and subsequent ethnic 
> cleansing which saw Icefordesertland re-split into New Iceland (capital 
> Tripoli) and New Libya (capital Reykjavik), and the bloodshed invovled in 
> the renationalisation of Austhailia's McDonalds.
> 
> The resolution states that no country created by a Fantasy Rule will be 
> granted UN member status, but insists that at least one member of the UN be 
> mentioned in each Fantasy Rule.
> 
> Great Britain, dismissing this as "just another Eurocentric trick" announced 
> the results of a referendum to merge with Austhailia to form the Antipodean 
> Republic of Trans-Austhailia, thereby improving their chances in their 
> upcoming cricket tour of Zimbabwe,

Whoops, it seems I was a bit late, but I think this was VALID anyhow.  +2
Style.

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-10-31 16:35:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov  2 17:50:00 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2Gnxr12324
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 17:49:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2Gnxt14128
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 17:49:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2GnwK09153
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 17:49:58 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2Gnvt14124
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 17:49:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114576AbQKBQtk>;
        Thu, 2 Nov 2000 17:49:40 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 17:48:50 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:5 VALID, +1.2 Style
In-Reply-To: <xzczojlxaaa.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011021742520.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

On 31 Oct 2000, Richard S. Holmes wrote:

> The recent breakup of the Antipodean Republic of Trans-Austhailia and
> the subsequent merger of Great Britain and St. Vincent and the
> Grenadines into the new nation of The United Kingdom of Great Britain
> and Northern Ireland and St. Vincent and the Grenadines is merely the
> latest pathetic attempt by the capitalist bourgoisie to intimidate the
> proletariat.  By forcing the children of the working class to memorize
> the ever-changing and ever-lengthening names of the corrupt and
> despotic nations of the world they have been able to prevent them from
> ever learning of the glorious insights of Karl Marx out of sheer lack
> of available brain capacity.  The Popular Revolutionary Front for the
> Liberation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
> and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, or the PRFftLotUKoGBaNIaSVatG for
> short, condemns this trend and hereby demands ... demands ... what
> were we saying?  Damn.  Something about some guy named Marcus or
> something?
> 
> Oh, yeah, we demand only countries with the same first letter can
> merge from now on.

VALID.  Rather bland restriction which may however give some structure,
and amusing propaganda.  +1.2 Style.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-02 16:49:40 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov  2 18:24:39 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2HOdr14318
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 18:24:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2HOdt16143
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 18:24:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2HOcK09451
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 18:24:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA2HObN22461
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 18:24:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114591AbQKBRYO>;
        Thu, 2 Nov 2000 18:24:14 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 18:23:33 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Round 149 ongoing summary
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011021821400.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

FRC Round 149

Theme:  The United Nations

Judge:  Ørjan Johansen
Wizard: Richard S. Holmes

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Players this round:

                        Eligible until          Style
-----------------------------------------------------
Gallivanting Tripper    2000-11-04 03:55:52     +2.8
Richard S. Holmes       2000-11-07 16:09:31     +2.7
Ronald Kunne            Ineligible              -1.5

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rules so far:

        Date posted             Posting member          Verdict Style
---------------------------------------------------------------------
149:1   2000-10-24 21:21:09     Richard S. Holmes       VALID   +1.5
149:2   2000-10-25 05:05:52     Gallivanting Tripper    VALID   +0.8
149:3   2000-10-26 13:56:37     Ronald Kunne            VALID   -1.5
149:4   2000-10-28 03:55:52     Gallivanting Tripper    VALID   +2
149:5   2000-10-31 16:09:31     Richard S. Holmes       VALID   +1.2

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

List of Fantasy Rules:

>>>>
149:1, Richard S. Holmes
>>>>

> Nations of the world, unite!
> 
> Thailand and Australia announce that they are uniting to form a single
> country, to be known as Austhailia.  A craze in gourmet restaurants
> for curried wallaby ensues.
> 
> Future rules will mention a pair of countries that merge, the name of
> the merged country, and a consequence of the merger.

A nice short first Rule twisting the theme.

VALID.  +1.5 style.

>>>>
149:2, Gallivanting Tripper
>>>>

> Austhailian Financial Review, 25/10/00
> 
> In what it described as a "response to the perceived globalisation of 
> Austhailian cuisine", the Austhailian McDonalds conglomerate declared their 
> independence from the new country, claiming tax-free status for its 
> restaurants.  News that the conglomerate had also bought the island nation 
> of Macau and declared the federal republic of McAu, has prompted the 
> Secretary-General of the United Nations to express concern about the 
> McDonaldisation of the South Pacific.
> 
> As political instability continues to spread like a plague of cliches, 
> future rules must mention the breakup of a nation previously described in a 
> Fantasy Rule.   -AAP

VALID.  +1 style.

>>>>
149:3, Ronald Kunne
>>>>

> >>>>>
> The Sociologist Digest, volume 666, page 2439-2444.
> 
> Evidence for the existence of a universal law gouverning
> country mergers and break-ups.
> 
> N.O. Ithall, Univ of McAu State.
> 
> Abstract.
> It is argued that country mergers and break-ups follow
> simple universal laws. It is shown that 1) no two countries 
> will ever merge if they are not separated by a sea
> 2) a new formed country will not exist for longer than
> the time of one Fantasy Rule.
> 
> The merger of Iceland and Libya into Icefordesertland and its
> tragical consequences [1,2] as well as the break-up of McAu [3],
> are two examples of recent country mergers and break-ups. 
> 
> [Rest of quite boring paper skipped]
> 
> References:
> [1] On the emigration of heat suffering Libyans to Iceland, SD 43 (2003) 54.
> [2] On the holiday habits of Icelanders with a cold, SD 42 (2002) 645.
> [3] Echec of the McDonaldisation of the South Pacific, SD 39 (2001) 1970.
> >>>>>

The leap in volume number from 43 to 666 is rather impressive, and it is
also stretching it to imply that Austhalia ceased to exist just because
McDonalds seceded.  But I don't think either of these invalidate the Rule.

On checking law (1), I discovered a discrepancy in 149:2.  Namely, in
reality Macau is not an island nation.  I believe 149:2 is in its right to
rearrange geography as long as it is explicit about it, although I think
this case is somewhat unstylish.  I will nip off 0.2 style points from
149:2.

I don't like law no. (2), it seems to me to destroy most of what "world
building" aspect this Round could have had.  -1.5 Style.

>>>>
149:4, Gallivanting Tripper
>>>>

> The United Nations yesterday passed a resolution condemning the recent trend 
> in international mergers and breakups.  "We are not a stock exchange - the 
> UN has no time for mergers and acquisitions" commented a spokesman.  
> "Countries which marry in haste, repent at leisure," he added, pointing to 
> the examples of the massive population exchange and subsequent ethnic 
> cleansing which saw Icefordesertland re-split into New Iceland (capital 
> Tripoli) and New Libya (capital Reykjavik), and the bloodshed invovled in 
> the renationalisation of Austhailia's McDonalds.
> 
> The resolution states that no country created by a Fantasy Rule will be 
> granted UN member status, but insists that at least one member of the UN be 
> mentioned in each Fantasy Rule.
> 
> Great Britain, dismissing this as "just another Eurocentric trick" announced 
> the results of a referendum to merge with Austhailia to form the Antipodean 
> Republic of Trans-Austhailia, thereby improving their chances in their 
> upcoming cricket tour of Zimbabwe,

Whoops, it seems I was a bit late, but I think this was VALID anyhow.  +2
Style.

>>>>
149:5, Richard S. Holmes
>>>>

> The recent breakup of the Antipodean Republic of Trans-Austhailia and
> the subsequent merger of Great Britain and St. Vincent and the
> Grenadines into the new nation of The United Kingdom of Great Britain
> and Northern Ireland and St. Vincent and the Grenadines is merely the
> latest pathetic attempt by the capitalist bourgoisie to intimidate the
> proletariat.  By forcing the children of the working class to memorize
> the ever-changing and ever-lengthening names of the corrupt and
> despotic nations of the world they have been able to prevent them from
> ever learning of the glorious insights of Karl Marx out of sheer lack
> of available brain capacity.  The Popular Revolutionary Front for the
> Liberation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
> and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, or the PRFftLotUKoGBaNIaSVatG for
> short, condemns this trend and hereby demands ... demands ... what
> were we saying?  Damn.  Something about some guy named Marcus or
> something?
> 
> Oh, yeah, we demand only countries with the same first letter can
> merge from now on.

VALID.  Rather bland restriction which may however give some structure,
and amusing propaganda.  +1.2 Style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-02 17:24:14 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov  3 16:15:41 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA3FFer21977
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 16:15:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA3FFeN21018
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 16:15:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA3FFdK21558
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 16:15:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA3FFcN21008
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 16:15:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114422AbQKCPP0>;
        Fri, 3 Nov 2000 16:15:26 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 16:14:53 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:6 VALID, +1 Style
In-Reply-To: <F5SrdUWhn65DWG6tACf00007208@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011031606100.22581-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Gallivanting Tripper wrote:

> x-apparently-from: <Gallivanting Tripper>
> To: <FRC>
> Subject:  Fwd:FWD: Psst! [FWD]
> 
> >>>>The Conglomerates are coming!
> >>>>
> >>>>White the world’s attention is diverted by the split-up of The  United 
> >>>>Kingdom of Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Saint Vincent and the 
> >>>>Grenadines into the Kingdom of Northern Ireland and the   
> >>>> >>>>Grenadines, and the Oligarchy of Britain and Saint Vincent, but 
> >>>>Colombia just merged with the Canary Islands to form .Com – the first 
> >>>>Conglomerate nation.  It’s about to put a case before the World Bank for 
> >>>>ownership of all .com internet sites (and why wouldn’t it!).  There are 
> >>>>also rumours that negotiations to form
> >>>>three other Conglomerates are taking place
> >>>>
> >>>>If this message is forwarded to the FRC, then the next three valid
> >>>>Fantasy Rules must each describe the formation of one of the other three 
> >>>>Conglomerates - .Edu, .Net, and .Org

VALID.  Just too bad that the conglomerates will be going again so soon...
Please turn off "smart quotes" or whatever is producing those unreadable
quote signs (I am not talking about the >'s, although those are bad too.  
I do not see how the "rumor" fowarding fits into the theme.)  Style +2 for
the .Com, -1 for the formatting.

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-03 15:15:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov  6 16:30:41 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA6FUer28293
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:30:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA6FUeN25160
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:30:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA6FUdK16725
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:30:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA6FUdt16037
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:30:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114596AbQKFPaR>;
        Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:30:17 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:29:39 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149.7 VALID, +2.3 Style (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011061627130.8272-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

[Whoops, I sent this to Rich only.  Resending...]

On 3 Nov 2000, Richard S. Holmes wrote:

> We'll be right back with more World Wrestling Federation action, but
> first this news update.  .Com has split up again, into three parts;
> the western half of the former Columbia now calling itself ".C", the
> eastern half ".O", and the former Canary Islands ".M".  Meanwhile
> Ecuador and Estonia have joined forces to form a new Conglomerate,
> ".Edu".  The Mad Scientists League of Ecuador and the Association of
> Evil Geniuses of Estonia have responded by holding a joint virtual
> meeting over the Internet and initiating several collaborative
> projects.  As a result of one such project the world sea level has
> mysteriously dropped dramatically in the past two hours.  Already the
> continents of Africa, Asia, and North America are now connected by
> land bridges.  Mad Scientist Enrico Ferrerro of the former Ecuador
> commented, and we quote, "Bwaa-haa-haa-haa-haa-haaaa!".  And now more
> WWF excitement...

VALID.

I should note that the Judge's current interpretation of "separated by a
sea" makes this rule's land bridges a weaker restriction than the poster
may have intended.  I do not require that the countries be on separated
continents, so that e.g. countries on opposite sides of the Black Sea or
the Mediterranean are still sufficiently separated.

The Rule is very amusing though, with a small -0.2 style penalty because
in reality Africa and Asia are already connected by land bridges.  The
judge will assume that the Bering Strait is now connected until corrected
about this... +2.3 Style.

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-06 15:30:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov  9 19:16:10 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA9IG9r25143
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:16:09 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA9IG9N23250
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:16:09 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA9IG8K26891
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:16:09 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eA9IG8N23245
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:16:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114704AbQKISPr>;
        Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:15:47 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:15:11 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 149:8 VALID, +1.3 Style
In-Reply-To: <F14IJyfSMQl8JHhLqQp00009564@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011091906450.8272-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, Gallivanting Tripper wrote:

> 	Den Haag – In response to the recent drop in world sea levels,
> the Netherlands and New Zealand announced that they had merged to form
> the newest Conglomerate- ".Net".  Spokespersons from .Net issued a
> statement that it had sponsored a top-secret mission to stem the drop
> in sea level, due to predicted unemployment among dyke workers in the
> former Netherlands, and fears in the former New Zealand that they
> would be overrun by kangaroos.
> 
> 	Wellington – Anonymous sources report that the Rainbow Warrior,
> recently uncovered by the drop in sealevel, has been refitted with
> state-of-the-art stealth and jamming equipment and was last seen
> sailing into the South Pacific.
> 
> 	- And in late breaking news, .Edu has split up again, blaming a
> sudden loss of all internet communication to Ecuador.  The sole
> surviving representative of the Association of Evil Geniuses of
> Estonia admitted that no further change in sea level was now possible,
> and lamented "We would have got away with it if it wasn’t for you
> meddling kids!"

VALID (Um, I'm late again, am I?)  +1.3 Style.

Greetings,
Judge Ørjan.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-09 18:15:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 13 12:44:49 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eADBimr21553
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:44:48 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eADBint02251
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:44:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eADBimK25856
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:44:48 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eADBilt02244
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:44:47 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114411AbQKMLoT>;
        Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:44:19 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:43:50 +0100 (CET)
From: Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Round 149 final summary
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011131239520.1672-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Status: RO

It is my pleasure to announce that Gallivanting Tripper has won Round 149,
and is the Judge and Wizard for Round 150.  Summary of Round 149 included
below.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

FRC Round 149

Theme:  The United Nations

Judge:  Ørjan Johansen
Wizard: Richard S. Holmes

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Player summary:

                        Rules   Style
-------------------------------------
Gallivanting Tripper       4    +5.1    New Judge and Wizard
Richard S. Holmes          3    +5.0
Ronald Kunne               1    -1.5

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rules summary:

        Date posted             Posting member          Verdict Style
---------------------------------------------------------------------
149:1   2000-10-24 21:21:09     Richard S. Holmes       VALID   +1.5
149:2   2000-10-25 05:05:52     Gallivanting Tripper    VALID   +0.8
149:3   2000-10-26 13:56:37     Ronald Kunne            VALID   -1.5
149:4   2000-10-28 03:55:52     Gallivanting Tripper    VALID   +2
149:5   2000-10-31 16:09:31     Richard S. Holmes       VALID   +1.2
149:6   2000-11-03 07:22:51     Gallivanting Tripper    VALID   +1
149:7   2000-11-03 16:49:39     Richard S. Holmes       VALID   +2.3
149:8   2000-11-06 04:22:08     Gallivanting Tripper    VALID   +1.3

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

List of Fantasy Rules:

>>>>
149:1, Richard S. Holmes
>>>>

> Nations of the world, unite!
> 
> Thailand and Australia announce that they are uniting to form a single
> country, to be known as Austhailia.  A craze in gourmet restaurants
> for curried wallaby ensues.
> 
> Future rules will mention a pair of countries that merge, the name of
> the merged country, and a consequence of the merger.

A nice short first Rule twisting the theme.

VALID.  +1.5 style.

>>>>
149:2, Gallivanting Tripper
>>>>

> Austhailian Financial Review, 25/10/00
> 
> In what it described as a "response to the perceived globalisation of 
> Austhailian cuisine", the Austhailian McDonalds conglomerate declared their 
> independence from the new country, claiming tax-free status for its 
> restaurants.  News that the conglomerate had also bought the island nation 
> of Macau and declared the federal republic of McAu, has prompted the 
> Secretary-General of the United Nations to express concern about the 
> McDonaldisation of the South Pacific.
> 
> As political instability continues to spread like a plague of cliches, 
> future rules must mention the breakup of a nation previously described in a 
> Fantasy Rule.   -AAP

VALID.  +1 style.

>>>>
149:3, Ronald Kunne
>>>>

> >>>>>
> The Sociologist Digest, volume 666, page 2439-2444.
> 
> Evidence for the existence of a universal law gouverning
> country mergers and break-ups.
> 
> N.O. Ithall, Univ of McAu State.
> 
> Abstract.
> It is argued that country mergers and break-ups follow
> simple universal laws. It is shown that 1) no two countries 
> will ever merge if they are not separated by a sea
> 2) a new formed country will not exist for longer than
> the time of one Fantasy Rule.
> 
> The merger of Iceland and Libya into Icefordesertland and its
> tragical consequences [1,2] as well as the break-up of McAu [3],
> are two examples of recent country mergers and break-ups. 
> 
> [Rest of quite boring paper skipped]
> 
> References:
> [1] On the emigration of heat suffering Libyans to Iceland, SD 43 (2003) 54.
> [2] On the holiday habits of Icelanders with a cold, SD 42 (2002) 645.
> [3] Echec of the McDonaldisation of the South Pacific, SD 39 (2001) 1970.
> >>>>>

The leap in volume number from 43 to 666 is rather impressive, and it is
also stretching it to imply that Austhalia ceased to exist just because
McDonalds seceded.  But I don't think either of these invalidate the Rule.

On checking law (1), I discovered a discrepancy in 149:2.  Namely, in
reality Macau is not an island nation.  I believe 149:2 is in its right to
rearrange geography as long as it is explicit about it, although I think
this case is somewhat unstylish.  I will nip off 0.2 style points from
149:2.

I don't like law no. (2), it seems to me to destroy most of what "world
building" aspect this Round could have had.  -1.5 Style.

>>>>
149:4, Gallivanting Tripper
>>>>

> The United Nations yesterday passed a resolution condemning the recent trend 
> in international mergers and breakups.  "We are not a stock exchange - the 
> UN has no time for mergers and acquisitions" commented a spokesman.  
> "Countries which marry in haste, repent at leisure," he added, pointing to 
> the examples of the massive population exchange and subsequent ethnic 
> cleansing which saw Icefordesertland re-split into New Iceland (capital 
> Tripoli) and New Libya (capital Reykjavik), and the bloodshed invovled in 
> the renationalisation of Austhailia's McDonalds.
> 
> The resolution states that no country created by a Fantasy Rule will be 
> granted UN member status, but insists that at least one member of the UN be 
> mentioned in each Fantasy Rule.
> 
> Great Britain, dismissing this as "just another Eurocentric trick" announced 
> the results of a referendum to merge with Austhailia to form the Antipodean 
> Republic of Trans-Austhailia, thereby improving their chances in their 
> upcoming cricket tour of Zimbabwe,

Whoops, it seems I was a bit late, but I think this was VALID anyhow.  +2
Style.

>>>>
149:5, Richard S. Holmes
>>>>

> The recent breakup of the Antipodean Republic of Trans-Austhailia and
> the subsequent merger of Great Britain and St. Vincent and the
> Grenadines into the new nation of The United Kingdom of Great Britain
> and Northern Ireland and St. Vincent and the Grenadines is merely the
> latest pathetic attempt by the capitalist bourgoisie to intimidate the
> proletariat.  By forcing the children of the working class to memorize
> the ever-changing and ever-lengthening names of the corrupt and
> despotic nations of the world they have been able to prevent them from
> ever learning of the glorious insights of Karl Marx out of sheer lack
> of available brain capacity.  The Popular Revolutionary Front for the
> Liberation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
> and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, or the PRFftLotUKoGBaNIaSVatG for
> short, condemns this trend and hereby demands ... demands ... what
> were we saying?  Damn.  Something about some guy named Marcus or
> something?
> 
> Oh, yeah, we demand only countries with the same first letter can
> merge from now on.

VALID.  Rather bland restriction which may however give some structure,
and amusing propaganda.  +1.2 Style.

>>>>
149:6, Gallivanting Tripper
>>>>

> x-apparently-from: <Gallivanting Tripper>
> To: <FRC>
> Subject:  Fwd:FWD: Psst! [FWD]
> 
> >>>>The Conglomerates are coming!
> >>>>
> >>>>White the world^Òs attention is diverted by the split-up of The  United 
> >>>>Kingdom of Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Saint Vincent and the 
> >>>>Grenadines into the Kingdom of Northern Ireland and the   
> >>>> >>>>Grenadines, and the Oligarchy of Britain and Saint Vincent, but 
> >>>>Colombia just merged with the Canary Islands to form .Com ^Ö the first 
> >>>>Conglomerate nation.  It^Òs about to put a case before the World Bank for 
> >>>>ownership of all .com internet sites (and why wouldn^Òt it!).  There are 
> >>>>also rumours that negotiations to form
> >>>>three other Conglomerates are taking place
> >>>>
> >>>>If this message is forwarded to the FRC, then the next three valid
> >>>>Fantasy Rules must each describe the formation of one of the other three 
> >>>>Conglomerates - .Edu, .Net, and .Org

VALID.  Just too bad that the conglomerates will be going again so soon...
Please turn off "smart quotes" or whatever is producing those unreadable
quote signs (I am not talking about the >'s, although those are bad too.  
I do not see how the "rumor" fowarding fits into the theme.)  Style +2 for
the .Com, -1 for the formatting.

>>>>
149:7, Richard S. Holmes
>>>>

> We'll be right back with more World Wrestling Federation action, but
> first this news update.  .Com has split up again, into three parts;
> the western half of the former Columbia now calling itself ".C", the
> eastern half ".O", and the former Canary Islands ".M".  Meanwhile
> Ecuador and Estonia have joined forces to form a new Conglomerate,
> ".Edu".  The Mad Scientists League of Ecuador and the Association of
> Evil Geniuses of Estonia have responded by holding a joint virtual
> meeting over the Internet and initiating several collaborative
> projects.  As a result of one such project the world sea level has
> mysteriously dropped dramatically in the past two hours.  Already the
> continents of Africa, Asia, and North America are now connected by
> land bridges.  Mad Scientist Enrico Ferrerro of the former Ecuador
> commented, and we quote, "Bwaa-haa-haa-haa-haa-haaaa!".  And now more
> WWF excitement...

VALID.

I should note that the Judge's current interpretation of "separated by a
sea" makes this rule's land bridges a weaker restriction than the poster
may have intended.  I do not require that the countries be on separated
continents, so that e.g. countries on opposite sides of the Black Sea or
the Mediterranean are still sufficiently separated.

The Rule is very amusing though, with a small -0.2 style penalty because
in reality Africa and Asia are already connected by land bridges.  The
judge will assume that the Bering Strait is now connected until corrected
about this... +2.3 Style.

>>>>
149:8, Gallivanting Tripper
>>>>

>       Den Haag ^Ö In response to the recent drop in world sea levels,
> the Netherlands and New Zealand announced that they had merged to form
> the newest Conglomerate- ".Net".  Spokespersons from .Net issued a
> statement that it had sponsored a top-secret mission to stem the drop
> in sea level, due to predicted unemployment among dyke workers in the
> former Netherlands, and fears in the former New Zealand that they
> would be overrun by kangaroos.
> 
>       Wellington ^Ö Anonymous sources report that the Rainbow Warrior,
> recently uncovered by the drop in sealevel, has been refitted with
> state-of-the-art stealth and jamming equipment and was last seen
> sailing into the South Pacific.
> 
>       - And in late breaking news, .Edu has split up again, blaming a
> sudden loss of all internet communication to Ecuador.  The sole
> surviving representative of the Association of Evil Geniuses of
> Estonia admitted that no further change in sea level was now possible,
> and lamented "We would have got away with it if it wasn^Òt for you
> meddling kids!"

VALID (Um, I'm late again, am I?)  +1.3 Style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-13 11:44:19 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Nov 15 02:20:23 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1KMr19065
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:20:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1KMt25583
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:20:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1KLK17868
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:20:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1KKN29590
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:20:20 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114591AbQKOBTy>;
        Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:19:54 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [202.139.64.36]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Rule 150:1 INVALID Style +0.5
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 01:19:32 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F219HGNZ4mF1IT18olk000034ad@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

>From: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
>To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
>Subject: Rule 150:1
>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 11:04:24 -0500
>
>******
>
>I have been following the progress of the state of Florida's election
>battle recently (a little too obsessively, truth be known) and was
>fascinated by a Judge's ruling on a part of that state's statutes.  One
>part of the law stipulates that the ballots from counties must be certified
>by a certain date.  A second part of the law, enacted _later_ states more
>broadly that the ballots _may_ be certified by that date, but the date may
>be extended depending on certain circumstances.  The earlier part of the
>law was not repealed.  The Judge ruled that the broader provision, enacted
>later, is the one to follow.
>
>In recognition of this principle of jurisprudence, all restrictions which
>are concretely stated in prior valid rules (not implied or deduced) may be
>made less restrictive by subsequent valid rules provided that this
>subsequent rule itself obeys the original form of the restriction.
>
>No more than one restriction may be loosened in this manner by a subsequent
>rule.
>
>Each author, when posting his or her first valid rule this round must state
>whether he or she supports George W. Bush or Al Gore.  These votes may not
>be changed during this round.  If one of these two candidates should
>concede (after this rule is posted and) before the end of this round, those
>authors who voted for the other candidate may, any time before the end of
>the round post one rule containing the text "This is my bonus for backing
>[the winning candidate's name]".  Such rules are exempt from all
>restrictions made by valid rules this round (save those in this rule) on
>the single condition that they themselves make no new restrictions.
>
>I support Al Gore.
>
>******
>
>-Jeremy D. Selengut
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-11-14 16:04:55 GMT

Judge's Comments:
After getting my mind around the extremely devious concept of restrictions 
allowing themselves to be relaxed, I became worried about the "free rule for 
a correct vote" clause.  It states that the free rule can be posted at any 
time before the end of the round, _regardless of the author's eligiblity_.  
This seems to me to conflict with ROs 2 and 3.  Checking through the 
archives, I also see a precedent that the only way to alter a player's 
eligibility is through _proposal_.  I hear that it's quite difficult to make 
an INVALID first rule, but there you go.

Style: +1.5 for a first rule with many avenues for deviousness, -1 for a 
run-in with the Regular Ordinances.


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 01:19:54 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Nov 15 02:35:40 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1Zer19411
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:35:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1Zdt25925
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:35:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1ZdK17932
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:35:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF1Zct25921
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:35:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114593AbQKOBf0>;
        Wed, 15 Nov 2000 02:35:26 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [202.139.64.36]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:2 INVALID Style 0
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 01:34:58 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F231ZXAoirK6UtEnUyR0000524b@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

>From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
>To: frc@trolltech.com
>Subject: 150:2
>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 07:37:49 -0800
>
> >>>>>
>I loosen to nothing the restriction that only one restriction may be
>loosened.  Now I loosen to nothing all restrictions in the previous rule.  
>If
>any of these restrictions are not explicitly modified later in this rule, 
>they
>will be retightened for future rules.
>
>I restrict future rules to not loosen any restrictions which they could not
>have loosened had they not loosened another restriction in the same rule.  
>Nor
>may any restriction in this rule be loosened by future rules.
>
>I restrict all rules to obey the last paragraph of the first rule, except 
>for
>the following changes:
>
>* Valid votes can be cast for any presidential candidate, not just the two
>main ones.
>
>* All other text shall remain the same as before, except that the word
>"candidate" shall become "candidates".
>
>Even though my real self supports George W. Bush, my fantasy self feels
>obliged to vote for Ralph Nader, Green Party Candidate.
> >>>>>
>
>Aron Wall
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-11-14 16:35:25 GMT

Judge's Comments:
Since this rule was so obviously meant to exploit all possible loopholes in 
150:1 and I've somehow managed to rule 150:1 INVALID, this rule could have 
been extremely confusing if it was not in fact inconsistent with itself.  
Let me explain:

One of the few restrictions in this rule that stood on its own was:
"I restrict all rules to follow the last paragraph of the first rule".

Even though the first rule was INVALID, this is fine, except that the last 
paragraph of 150:1 is "I support Al Gore"

Therefore all rules must support Al Gore, but this one supports Ralph Nader. 
  Bummo.

Style: +1.5 for trying to crash through the loophole in 150:1
	  -0.5 for in fact being inconsistent with 150:1 (as Jeremy pointed out to 
me)
	  -0.5 for not obeying its own restriction on future rules (although a 
commedable attempt to prevent further loop-holing)
	  -0.5 for being self-inconsistent

<takes a deep breath>

Could someone possibly post a cunning rule that doesn't hoist itself on its 
own petard?

Cheers

Tripper, Wizard Judge

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 01:35:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Nov 15 07:35:39 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF6Zdr00585
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:35:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF6Zct02755
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:35:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF6ZbK19149
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:35:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF6ZbN05253
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:35:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114393AbQKOGfZ>;
        Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:35:25 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.245.2]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:3 VALID, +0.5 Style
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 06:35:02 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F211z63Bma4RCIlWrdF000030c9@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

>From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
>To: <frc@trolltech.com>
>Subject: 150:3
>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 17:57:26 -0800
>
>All rules must include specification of a single "required" word and a
>single "prohibited" word.
>A rule must include all "required" words specified in prior rules.
>A rule may not include any words specified as "prohibited" in prior rules.
>Including a "required" word in a manner that, in the Judge's opinion, is a
>cheap appendage to the rule proper invalidates the rule.
>A rule may not specify a "prohibited" word that was specified as a
>"required" word in any prior rule.
>A rule may not specify the same word as "required" and "prohibited."
>
>Required:   devious
>Prohibited: not
>
>
>-Mark Nau
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-11-15 01:57:38 GMT

Judge's Comments
No problems that I can see, although I don't really like "in the Judge's 
opinion".  Nice solid start, that does set up some rather nasty potential 
traps...

Style comments
+0.5 for requiring the word "devious" +0.5 for traps, -0.5 for requiring me 
to have an opinion
(I'm not going to deduct points for using its own prohibited word, as I 
guess it's impossible _not_ to do so.....)

Cheers

Tripper, Wizard Judge
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 06:35:25 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Nov 15 08:01:57 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF71vr02053
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 08:01:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF71vt03589
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 08:01:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF71uK19266
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 08:01:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAF71tt03585
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 15 Nov 2000 08:01:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114547AbQKOHBm>;
        Wed, 15 Nov 2000 08:01:42 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.41.240]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:4 VALID, Style -1.0
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:01:23 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F34s3Mpw6yL2m9lHiu300000f33@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

>From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
>To: frc@trolltech.com
>Subject: 150:4
>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 17:12:06 -0800
>
> >>>>>
>A devious rule is one which will invalidate at least one rule.  Such as
>rule scores one point for each rule which it invalidates.
>
>Required:  Antidisestablishmentarianists
>Prohibited: Prohibited
> >>>>>
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-11-15 02:09:25 GMT

Judge's comments:
Urk.  An opportunistic little rule, but one which I can't seem to be able to 
invalidate.

Be it known that, in the opinion of this Judge, very few uses of words which 
the Judge considers trivial themselves, will be considered trivial.

Style comments:
+1 for using the trap from 150:3
-1 for blatantly using the trap from 150:3
-0.5 for requiring possibly the second-longest word in the English language
-0.5 for measuring deviousness in points which vary according to time

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 07:01:42 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 05:21:31 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LUr06637
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LUt25053
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LSK00853
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LQN21479
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:27 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114759AbQKPEVR>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:17 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.245.2]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Style correction 150:3 VALID, +1.5 Style
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 01:32:09 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F227SmLAztxc1o8yfog00000223@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

Certainly!

My apologies - another +1 Style for entering the FRC with such a useful 
rule.

I'm a newbie myself you see - and a gap in the archiving means I have no 
idea who's been playing in the last 20 rounds or so....

Census, anyone?

Cheers

Tripper, Wizard Judge


-----------------------------
Also:  Isn't there a newbie style bonus?   Harrumph!!

-Mark Nau

--
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 18:00:20 GMT
------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 04:21:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 05:21:33 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LWr06650
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:33 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LWN21513
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LVK00861
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LUN21496
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114794AbQKPEVR>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:17 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.245.2]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:6 VALID, Style +1
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:11:37 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F16YrVjYKtWfN3vSAMf00000354@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

As the sounds of the explosion gradually died away, several scraps of
paper fluttered to the ground.  I picked one up.  It seemed to be torn
from someone's journal or diary.  On it were the words:

     Antipathy eroded
     Disemboweling time
     Stable times for Romanov
     Ishtar and I
     Men tarry here, O!
     Ian is you,
     Tsar Nicholas!

Curious, I thought as I boarded the train that would bring me to Saint
Petersburg.  Who are Ishtar and Ian?  And what part do they play in
the grand, cunning plan?  Having no tolerance for mystery, I resolved
that all future messages would shed some light on this strange pair,
while shunning the shorter of the English language's two indefinite
articles and using "using" -- though perhaps deviously.

--
- Rich Holmes
   Syracuse, NY

--
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 19:56:40 GMT

Judge's Comments: Can't see any problem here - it manages to "include" all 
required words, doesn't use "prohibited" or "not" and manages to specify its 
own required and prohibited words.  VALID

Style Comments:
+1 for the creative use of poetry
+0.5 for getting around the 150:4 trap
-0.5 for a rather gratuitious restriction
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 04:21:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 06:58:51 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG5wpr09365
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 06:58:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG5wot27915
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 06:58:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG5wnK01191
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 06:58:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG5wnN27194
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 06:58:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114264AbQKPF60>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 06:58:26 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.245.2]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 150 Update
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:58:03 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F903s1wsXZZTHfyQgeD000005b3@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

Summary of Round 150 thus far

Player		Eligibility					Style
Jeremy		2000-11-20 16:04:55 GMT		+0.5
Aron		2000-11-22 02:09:25 GMT*	-1.0
Mark		2000-11-22 01:57:38 GMT		+1.5
Jared		2000-11-20 08:19:00 GMT		+0.75
Rich		2000-11-22 19:56:40 GMT		+1.0
<others>	2000-11-21 16:04:55 GMT		0

Rule	Author		Validity	Style	Deviousness
150:1	Jeremy		INVALID	+0.5	2
150:2	Aron		INVALID	0		1
150:3	Mark		VALID		+1.5	1
150:4	Aron		VALID*		-1.0	1
150:5	Jared		INVALID	+0.75	1
150:6	Rich		VALID		+1.0	0

* Pending 150:A
Note: Until advised otherwise, I am interpreting that a rule is Devious if 
it is necessary for the invalidation of a rule.

Proposals	For		Against	Expires
150:A		Jared	Tripper	2000-11-19 04:21:17 GMT

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 05:58:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 09:23:28 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG8NRr15704
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:23:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG8NRt05149
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:23:27 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG8NQK02049
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:23:26 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG8NPN09410
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:23:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114309AbQKPIVo>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:21:44 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.41.240]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:5 INVALD +0.75 Style
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 08:21:32 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F315AmsfGdMNFmWAFsT00000752@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

(whoops - I must have sent this originally to Jared instead of to the list.  
Apologies for any confusion)



----- 150:5 -----
I have a cunning plan.

Actually, my plan is hardly cunning, because I am a rule (150:5, to be
precise), and my plan's essential objective is to invalidate myself.  In
fact, it's pathological.  Suicidal thoughts are certainly pathological.

But I digress.

I, you see, a member of the elite Antidisestablishmentarianists.  You will
of course recall that we were those lobes of this rule's mind that
subscribe to the doctrine that is against the Lutheran challenge to the
validity of the Catholic Church as an intersessor to the divine.  I have
determined that I and my fellow right-thinking lobes will be unable to
fully convince this rule to remain supportive of Mother Church.

Better than allow this rule to cross over to the Lutheran scum (scarcely
to mention Calvin!), we have engineered this temporary commandeering of
the rule's text and plan to invalidate ourselves.  I suppose that is
cunning, after all.

You might then think it odd the lengths having been taken to use the word
required by the last rule if the object was invalidation.  In fact, I am
an Antidisestablishmentarianist lobe of the rule's mind in the midst of a
vast religious schism--it's just a coincidence.

Are you ready to die?

Well then, answer me this: is "prohibited" prohibited?

I have a devious plan.

Ah! we, the right-thinking Disestablishmentarianist lobes of the rule's
brain have seized back control of the rule's text!  We shall yet rid this
rule's mind of the Papist scum!

And yet I see we have already spoken the word, "prohibited."  Are we
already mortally wounded by the will of our enemy lobes?  Can it be?  Are
we lost?

And yet...I see that 150:3 specifically stated that

 > A rule may *** specify the same word as "required" and "prohibited."

Since 150:4 in fact specifies "prohibited" explicitly, it would seem to
run afoul of this prohibition in 150:3.  And glory be, if 150:4 were
invalid, then we should be valid, for the cursed Papal swine were too
foolish to break any other restrictions.

And now we shall fulfill the last requirement, if we are to be considered
for validity and save this soul, pro maiore gloria dei.  Thank you.

Required: tolerance
Prohibited: hate

----- 150:5 -----

/Jared Sunshine

--
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 08:19:00 GMT

>Judge's Comments:
>A very creative rebuttal to the nasty and opportunistic 150:4.
>Unfortunately, 150:4 _is_ VALID, and this this rule wings its way to
>glorious invalidation.  Here's why.
>
>The contentious sentence is " A rule may not specify the same word as
>"required" and "prohibited."
>
>This can be interpreted in two ways:
>1) a rule may not specify that the required and prohibited words are the
>same - or
>2) a rule may not specifiy a word that is the same as "required" and
>"prohibited"
>
>In formal logic, these become:
>1):  ~[(X=R)/\(X=P)]
>2):  ~[(X ="R")/\(X="P")]
>(where ~ = NOT, /\  = AND, R and P are the words specified as required and
>prohibited respectively and "R" and "P" are the words "required" and
>"prohibited" respectively)
>
>150:4 satisfies 1) - that was never in doubt I believe.  As for 2),  since
>"R" * "P" then for all X
>3): (X = "R") -> (X * "P") which from the definition of -> is equivalent to
>~[(X ="R")/\(X="P")] which is of course 2).
>So 2) is satisfied automatically.  In order for your rebuttal, to hold, the
>restriction should have been
>2a): ~[(X ="R")\/(X="P")]
>(where \/ = OR)
>Sorry about that.
>
>Style comments
>-0.5 for being invalid
>-0.5 for not specifying a restriction
>+0.5 for the battle between the Anti's, Dis's and whoever elses
>+0.5 for sacrificing itself for the cause
>+0.75 for giving me an excuse to use formal logic
>
>(and forgive me for lack of knowledge, but let me know if this was your
>first rule, for the customary newbie bonus....)
>
>Cheers
>
>Tripper, Wizard Judge
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 08:21:44 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 05:21:32 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LWr06645
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LVt25057
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LUK00859
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAG4LTN21493
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114796AbQKPEVR>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:21:17 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 22:41:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 150:A
In-Reply-To: <F66Jr1Wtyi67EKRuYDl0000035f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10011152215570.6231-100000@watsol.cc.columbia.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: ROr

No, I appreciate your asking, but not only am I not a newbie but I have
actually judged a couple rounds a while back.  I just took a little
sabbatical from the FRC for a couple months while my life got hectic.

Actually, when I examined the contentious clause, I found that under the
rules of formal logic, as you so exhaustively demonstrate, the clause does
not do what it so clearly intended to.  I (or rather, the
Antidisestablishmentarianist faction of the rule)  was hoping you would
rule in favor of the obvious intent over the construction by propositional
logic, but I fully appreciate your ruling.

However, I think that the prohibition of the word "prohibited" is, as you
note, "nasty and opportunistic", and unlikely to lend itself to a
creative remainder of the round.  Therefore:

---- PROPOSAL 150:A ----

(The following is to apply for the duration of round 150 only)

Although the single rule 150:5 has been forced by the devil-haunted
Papist scum to cast itself into the ETERNAL FIRES OF HELL by raising its
hand to take its own divinely-given life, there may yet be hope for other
rules to see the light of truth.

And though we are rules of tolerance and acceptance, there can be no
salvation when SINNERS are among us! I, Proposal 150:A, a stalwart
follower of the TRUE path, have found among our brethren one who secretly
GIVES HOMAGE to the popish hordes of SATAN.

This sinner among us, this wolf among the sheep, is Rule 140:4, clearly a
papist conspirator attempting to sew discord and confusion among us.

We must ACT DECISIVELY to cast this sinner, this Judas, from among our
midst.  This rule, you will remember, demanded that every one among us
have the cursed name of the papist cause upon our lips whenever we spoke,
and tried to turn us to self-destruction, a MORTAL SIN that has already
claimed a holy and honest rule from us.

We therefore resolve, as right-thinking men of morals and decency, to take
that step which must only be broached in the most dire of circumstances,
lest this heretic drag more righteous rules down the path to ETERNAL
DAMNATION with its serpent-spoken trickeries.

And so we CAST OUT this Judas from among us, we REMOVE and EXCIND it from
the holy congregation, and BLOT IT OUT from before the redeeming light
of the LORD.

Thus this sinner, Rule 150:4, shall be now INVALID.

May God have mercy on its soul.

------------------------

I vote for Proposal 150:A

(OK, I admit it.  I had way too much fun writing that.)

/Jared Sunshine

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Gallivanting Tripper wrote:
 
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu>
> To: frc@trolltech.com
> Subject: 150:5
> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 03:18:39 -0500 (EST)
> 
> ----- 150:5 -----
> I have a cunning plan.
> 
> Actually, my plan is hardly cunning, because I am a rule (150:5, to be
> precise), and my plan's essential objective is to invalidate myself.  In
> fact, it's pathological.  Suicidal thoughts are certainly pathological.
> 
> But I digress.
> 
> I, you see, a member of the elite Antidisestablishmentarianists.  You will
> of course recall that we were those lobes of this rule's mind that
> subscribe to the doctrine that is against the Lutheran challenge to the
> validity of the Catholic Church as an intersessor to the divine.  I have
> determined that I and my fellow right-thinking lobes will be unable to
> fully convince this rule to remain supportive of Mother Church.
> 
> Better than allow this rule to cross over to the Lutheran scum (scarcely
> to mention Calvin!), we have engineered this temporary commandeering of
> the rule's text and plan to invalidate ourselves.  I suppose that is
> cunning, after all.
> 
> You might then think it odd the lengths having been taken to use the word
> required by the last rule if the object was invalidation.  In fact, I am
> an Antidisestablishmentarianist lobe of the rule's mind in the midst of a
> vast religious schism--it's just a coincidence.
> 
> Are you ready to die?
> 
> Well then, answer me this: is "prohibited" prohibited?
> 
> I have a devious plan.
> 
> Ah! we, the right-thinking Disestablishmentarianist lobes of the rule's
> brain have seized back control of the rule's text!  We shall yet rid this
> rule's mind of the Papist scum!
> 
> And yet I see we have already spoken the word, "prohibited."  Are we
> already mortally wounded by the will of our enemy lobes?  Can it be?  Are
> we lost?
> 
> And yet...I see that 150:3 specifically stated that
> 
>  > A rule may *** specify the same word as "required" and "prohibited."
> 
> Since 150:4 in fact specifies "prohibited" explicitly, it would seem to
> run afoul of this prohibition in 150:3.  And glory be, if 150:4 were
> invalid, then we should be valid, for the cursed Papal swine were too
> foolish to break any other restrictions.
> 
> And now we shall fulfill the last requirement, if we are to be considered
> for validity and save this soul, pro maiore gloria dei.  Thank you.
> 
> Required: tolerance
> Prohibited: hate
> 
> ----- 150:5 -----
> 
> /Jared Sunshine
> 
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-11-15 08:19:00 GMT
> 
> Judge's Comments:
> A very creative rebuttal to the nasty and opportunistic 150:4.  
> Unfortunately, 150:4 _is_ VALID, and this this rule wings its way to 
> glorious invalidation.  Here's why.
> 
> The contentious sentence is " A rule may not specify the same word as 
> "required" and "prohibited."
> 
> This can be interpreted in two ways:
> 1) a rule may not specify that the required and prohibited words are the 
> same - or
> 2) a rule may not specifiy a word that is the same as "required" and 
> "prohibited"
> 
> In formal logic, these become:
> 1):  ~[(X=R)/\(X=P)]
> 2):  ~[(X ="R")/\(X="P")]
> (where ~ = NOT, /\  = AND, R and P are the words specified as required and 
> prohibited respectively and "R" and "P" are the words "required" and 
> "prohibited" respectively)
> 
> 150:4 satisfies 1) - that was never in doubt I believe.  As for 2),  since 
> "R" * "P" then for all X
> 3): (X = "R") -> (X * "P") which from the definition of -> is equivalent to
> ~[(X ="R")/\(X="P")] which is of course 2).
> So 2) is satisfied automatically.  In order for your rebuttal, to hold, the 
> restriction should have been
> 2a): ~[(X ="R")\/(X="P")]
> (where \/ = OR)
> Sorry about that.
> 
> Style comments
> -0.5 for being invalid
> -0.5 for not specifying a restriction
> +0.5 for the battle between the Anti's, Dis's and whoever elses
> +0.5 for sacrificing itself for the cause
> +0.75 for giving me an excuse to use formal logic
> 
> (and forgive me for lack of knowledge, but let me know if this was your 
> first rule, for the customary newbie bonus....)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tripper, Wizard Judge
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
> 
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
> http://profiles.msn.com.
> 

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 04:21:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 11:41:50 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGAfor23876
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:41:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGAfnN29688
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:41:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGAfmK03822
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:41:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGAfmt20756
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:41:48 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114264AbQKPKlf>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:41:35 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: Andre Engels <engels@win.tue.nl>
Message-Id: <200011161041.eAGAfPv02714@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Vote
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10011152215570.6231-100000@watsol.cc.columbia.edu> from Jared S Sunshine at "Nov 15, 2000 10:41:12 pm"
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:41:25 +0100 (MET)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: O

I vote AGAINST Proposal 150:A. I have not yet made a decision on whether or
not I dislike Rule 150:4, but even if I would, that would not be a reason for
me to vote for its invalidation.

Andre

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 10:41:35 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 12:41:02 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGBf2r27661
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 12:41:02 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGBf1t27885
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 12:41:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGBf0K04431
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 12:41:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGBf0N09021
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 12:41:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114316AbQKPLkh>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 12:40:37 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:42:10 +0000 (GMT)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Vote
In-Reply-To: <200011161129.eAGBTEi02804@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011161140100.10122-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

I agree with Andre, and so vote AGAINST the proposal.

(I hope these votes are not being machine counted...)

   Best Wishes,

	Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 11:40:37 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 14:11:52 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGDBqr04083
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:11:52 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGDBpN24118
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:11:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGDBoK05571
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:11:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGDBnt10341
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:11:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114346AbQKPNLM>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 14:11:12 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Message-Id: <200011161310.IAA30187@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Vote
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 08:10:56 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Anton Cox wrote:
>
> I agree with Andre, and so vote AGAINST the proposal.

I too agree, and I too vote AGAINST 150:A.

> (I hope these votes are not being machine counted...)

Even if it means your vote gets counted twice (once in your message
and once in mine)?  At least there aren't any pesky little flaps of
paper to get in the way.

-Jesse

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 13:11:12 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 17:50:57 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGGour17132
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 17:50:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGGout07166
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 17:50:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGGotK08078
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 17:50:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGGosN27311
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 17:50:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114675AbQKPQul>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 17:50:41 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <002101c04fed$a83baae0$0101010a@PsyduckForever.com>
From: "John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Voting
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:47:41 -0500
Status: RO

I'm voting against 150:A also... that is if I can vote even though I have
yet to post a rule this round...  I intended to, until the rule in question
was posted and made my rule idea impossible... but I don't see any good
reason to invalidate the rule, even if I don't like it.

Oh, and I've counted the votes so far... looks like 2 against and
3915214381.13253536 for.

-John M. Goodman II

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 16:50:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 19:11:00 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGIAxr21151
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:11:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGIAvt13453
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:10:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGIAuK08697
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:10:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGIAtN05234
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:10:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114677AbQKPSKn>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:10:43 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <006001c04ff8$831fffd0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10011152215570.6231-100000@watsol.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: 150:A
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 10:10:33 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

On the matter of 150:A, I vote for Patrick Buchanan

-Mark Nau

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 18:10:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 16 21:44:34 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGKiXr27062
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:44:34 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGKiXt25314
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:44:33 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGKiWK09876
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:44:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAGKiVt25310
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:44:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114718AbQKPUoJ>;
        Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:44:09 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Vote
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011161140100.10122-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 16 Nov 2000 15:43:49 -0500
Message-ID: <xzclmujmyuy.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Likewise, I vote against.

You know, it really is a pain in the butt to just cast a stupid vote
in the face of this antidisestablishmentarianist short-post-bouncing
software.

I hear 19,000 votes were rejected by this software, in fact.  

Anyway, I too feel the interpretation of 150:4 given in 150:5 is
flawed and thus the proposal in 150:A is unjustified.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-16 20:44:09 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 17 15:50:33 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHEoWr16102
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:50:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHEoVN00442
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:50:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHEoUK18549
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:50:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHEoTt13582
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:50:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114404AbQKQOqK>;
        Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:46:10 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001117093545.009b08b0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:45:59 -0500
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
From: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
Subject: Re: Rule 150:1 INVALID Style +0.5
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011161124160.10069-100000@mathpc12.city.ac. uk>
References: <F17028kIN4MmXKCnzNw0000025b@hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Status: ROr

Judge:

Despite Anton's agreement, I believe your opinion regarding RO3 goes 
against that amorphous thing, FRC custom (which of course, is subject to 
change with the popular will).

In the past the interpretation of RO3 went thusly:
         Since anyone, eligible or not, may "post" to the frc list 
(communications, comments, judgements, proposals, votes _and_ rules are all 
posts), it is up to the Judge's discression what constitutes a posted 
fantasy rule.  Many intended rules do not plainly state "this is a fantasy 
rule," but yet it is obvious that this was the intent and the Judge treats 
it accordingly.  Furthermore, inclusion of such a marking text cannot make 
the Judge regard as a fantasy rule any post from an ineligible player.  In 
other words, an ineligible player can post whatever he or she wishes and no 
matter how much it looks like a fantasy rule, it cannot be one because of 
RO3.  The Judge does not have to rule such a post INVALID - it is neither 
VALID nor INVALID because it is not a fantasy rule.

I propose 150:B, that 150:1 be declared VALID.

I vote for this proposal.

-Jeremy

At 11:27 AM 11/16/2000 +0000, you wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Gallivanting Tripper wrote:
>
> > RO 3 says
> > "Only those persons eligible to play may post fantasy rules."
> >
> > whereas 150:1 says
> > "...authors who voted for the other candidate may, any time before the end
> > of the round post one rule..."
>
>This seems a pretty good argument to me. Newbie or not, I think our
>judge is doing rather well so far...
>
>       Best Wishes,
>
>            Anton
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-11-16 11:26:24 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 14:46:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 17 16:02:57 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF2ur17568
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:02:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF2uN02305
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:02:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF2tK18771
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:02:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF2qt14945
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:02:52 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114392AbQKQPCZ>;
        Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:02:25 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:03:49 +0000 (GMT)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:B
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20001117093545.009b08b0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011171457120.11215-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Jeremy D. Selengut wrote:

>                                                                        In 
> other words, an ineligible player can post whatever he or she wishes and no 
> matter how much it looks like a fantasy rule, it cannot be one because of 
> RO3.  The Judge does not have to rule such a post INVALID - it is neither 
> VALID nor INVALID because it is not a fantasy rule.

Indeed, it is longstanding custom not to treat all posts during a
round as fantasy rules. And if 150:1 had just said that players may
post before the end of a round that *might* have been OK (though I
would still say that, since I assume rules refer to other rules unless
explicitly stated otherwise, the judge might rule against it). 

However, to recall what I snipped last time (but with new emphasis added!):

> > > RO 3 says
> > > "Only those persons eligible to play may post fantasy rules."
> > >
> > > whereas 150:1 says
> > > "...authors who voted for the other candidate may, any time
> > > before the end of the round post one ***rule***..."

So I still say that the judge is right - there seems little room for
manouver between the pair of lines quoted above.

I vote AGAINST 150:B.

  Best Wishes,

       Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 15:02:25 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 17 16:09:25 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF9Or17843
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:09:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF9ON03238
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:09:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF9NK18841
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:09:23 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHF8kt15570
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:09:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114404AbQKQPIH>;
        Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:08:07 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: Andre Engels <engels@win.tue.nl>
Message-Id: <200011171507.eAHF7fj00748@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Re: Rule 150:1 INVALID Style +0.5
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20001117093545.009b08b0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov> from "Jeremy D. Selengut" at "Nov 17, 2000 9:45:59 am"
To: selengut@nih.gov (Jeremy D. Selengut)
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:07:40 +0100 (MET)
Cc: frc@trolltech.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

I vote AGAINST 150:B. As the Judge already explained, Rule 150:1 says
that the player may (under certain conditions) post a Rule. Rule 150:3
says that e may not. No amount of Game Custom is going to make those two
not contradict.

Jeremy D. Selengut wrote:
> Judge:
> 
> Despite Anton's agreement, I believe your opinion regarding RO3 goes 
> against that amorphous thing, FRC custom (which of course, is subject to 
> change with the popular will).
> 
> In the past the interpretation of RO3 went thusly:
>          Since anyone, eligible or not, may "post" to the frc list 
> (communications, comments, judgements, proposals, votes _and_ rules are all 
> posts), it is up to the Judge's discression what constitutes a posted 
> fantasy rule.  Many intended rules do not plainly state "this is a fantasy 
> rule," but yet it is obvious that this was the intent and the Judge treats 
> it accordingly.  Furthermore, inclusion of such a marking text cannot make 
> the Judge regard as a fantasy rule any post from an ineligible player.  In 
> other words, an ineligible player can post whatever he or she wishes and no 
> matter how much it looks like a fantasy rule, it cannot be one because of 
> RO3.  The Judge does not have to rule such a post INVALID - it is neither 
> VALID nor INVALID because it is not a fantasy rule.
> 
> I propose 150:B, that 150:1 be declared VALID.
> 
> I vote for this proposal.

--
Andre Engels, engels@win.tue.nl
telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise,
we don't believe in it at all			-- Noam Chomsky

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 15:08:07 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 17 16:47:18 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHFlHr19770
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:47:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHFlEt19837
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:47:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHFlCK19400
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:47:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHFl8t19833
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:47:10 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114407AbQKQPqs>;
        Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:46:48 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Subject: Re: 150:B
References: <F17028kIN4MmXKCnzNw0000025b@hotmail.com> <4.2.0.58.20001117093545.009b08b0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 17 Nov 2000 10:46:27 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Jeremy D. Selengut"'s message of "Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:45:59 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzchf56mwj0.fsf_-_@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov> writes:

> In the past the interpretation of RO3 went thusly:
[...]
> In 
> other words, an ineligible player can post whatever he or she wishes and no 
> matter how much it looks like a fantasy rule, it cannot be one because of 
> RO3.  The Judge does not have to rule such a post INVALID - it is neither 
> VALID nor INVALID because it is not a fantasy rule.

Precisely -- such a post is not a fantasy rule.  It cannot be, because
an ineligible player cannot post a rule.

150:1 says an ineligible player may post a rule.

Clear contradiction.  I vote AGAINST 150:B.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 15:46:48 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 17 18:52:35 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHHqYr26498
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:52:34 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHHqYN21956
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:52:34 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHHqXK20676
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:52:33 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHHqWN21947
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:52:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114455AbQKQRwH>;
        Fri, 17 Nov 2000 18:52:07 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <004101c050bf$132b14e0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "fantasy rules committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <F17028kIN4MmXKCnzNw0000025b@hotmail.com> <4.2.0.58.20001117093545.009b08b0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov> <xzchf56mwj0.fsf_-_@rodan.syr.edu>
Subject: Re: 150:B
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:51:55 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

I agree with this reasoning, so on the matter of 150:B I vote both AGAINST
and PAT BUCHANAN

-Mark Nau


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard S. Holmes" <rsholmes@MailBox.Syr.Edu>
To: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
Cc: "fantasy rules committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: 150:B


> "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov> writes:
>
> > In the past the interpretation of RO3 went thusly:
> [...]
> > In
> > other words, an ineligible player can post whatever he or she wishes and
no
> > matter how much it looks like a fantasy rule, it cannot be one because
of
> > RO3.  The Judge does not have to rule such a post INVALID - it is
neither
> > VALID nor INVALID because it is not a fantasy rule.
>
> Precisely -- such a post is not a fantasy rule.  It cannot be, because
> an ineligible player cannot post a rule.
>
> 150:1 says an ineligible player may post a rule.
>
> Clear contradiction.  I vote AGAINST 150:B.
>
> --
> - Rich Holmes
>   Syracuse, NY
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-11-17 15:46:48 GMT
>

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 17:52:07 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 17 23:58:54 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHMwrr08992
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:58:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHMwrN16836
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:58:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHMwrK22913
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:58:53 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHMwqt17378
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:58:52 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114461AbQKQW6l>;
        Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:58:41 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [202.139.64.35]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:B
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:58:10 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F194oryKFRJrzdDW6lC000010ca@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

If this comes down to the ephemeral "game custom", then having made my 
arguments I will ABSTAIN from voting on 150:B and leave it to the popular 
will.

Cheers,

Tripper, Wizard Judge

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Subject: Re: Rule 150:1 INVALID Style +0.5
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:45:59 -0500

Judge:

Despite Anton's agreement, I believe your opinion regarding RO3 goes
against that amorphous thing, FRC custom (which of course, is subject to
change with the popular will).

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 22:58:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Nov 18 00:04:18 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHN4Hr09949
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:04:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHN4HN17239
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:04:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHN4HK22941
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:04:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAHN4GN17235
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:04:16 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114467AbQKQXDu>;
        Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:03:50 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [202.139.64.35]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 150:7 INVALID, +1.3 Style
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:03:29 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F45a5wAz8AWiZAtGYkN00001174@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

----Original Message Follows----
From: Andre Engels <engels@win.tue.nl>
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
Subject: 150:7
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:35:34 +0100 (MET)

Czar Nicholas and his family, it may not be widely known, had heavy problems
even before the Revolution. The disestablishmentarists tried time and again
to take over his throne, using all kinds of plan, the one even more devious
than the other. Luckily for him, the Antidisestablishmentarists and their
leader Ian managed to foil these plans again. Yes, the 
disestablishmentarists
had a leader too, but he did not want his name to be known. Rich already
mentioned it once, and we shall be prohibited from using it again. On the
other hand, the next word in Rich's rule shall be required in all future
Rules. They must also tell about at least one of the devious but fruitless
plans to throw over the regime of the Czar.



Rule Date: 2000-11-17 15:36:11 GMT

-------------

Judge's Comments: I liked this one quite a lot, except that upon doing the 
search for those annoying prohibited words, I discovered that the first line 
has the word "not".  So INVALID by 150:3

Style comments: +1.5 for a very devious restriction, -0.2 for invalidating 
itself on a slip-up

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-17 23:03:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Nov 18 08:12:44 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAI7Cir27590
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 08:12:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAI7ChN05486
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 08:12:43 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAI7CfK25283
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 08:12:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAI7Cft01426
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 08:12:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114264AbQKRHM2>;
        Sat, 18 Nov 2000 08:12:28 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b63bdae0dbad@[150.203.41.65]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:16:15 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: 150:8 INVALID, Style 0.2
Status: RO

>----- 150:8 -----
>"Hackers penetrate global email systems," read the paper, as I picked it
>up this morning.  Since I use email so often (and indeed am using it right
>now), I was concerned.  I read on.
>
>"NEW YORK, N.Y. -- Director Ian Wallach of the FBI Branch Office in New
>York issued a press release earlier today suggesting that vandals may have
>tampered with e-mail processing servers worldwide.  The press release
>stated that the group behind the unannounced assault is the unknown
>underground electronic hackers group calling itself
>Antidisestablishmentarians.
>
>"Director Wallach's office did not comment on the matter subsequent to
>inquiries from news agencies.  However, one junior agent in the office
>said that 'the f*** behind this is this Ishtar guy--dumb name, I know.  He
>signed the goddamn hack, they always do.'"
>
>The story went on, but I was suddenly struck with the sort of premonitory
>epiphany that seems only to be associated with great revelation.  Quickly
>calling up the email records for the FRC trolltech server, I easily found
>the access records I had been looking for.
>
>They showed clearly that Ishtar and his cronies had inflitrated our system
>as well.  But it seems they had been, as hackers often are, in playful
>spirits.  Apparently, they had modified all of the valid rules thus far
>posted in this round by switching the intended forbidden and required
>words. (That, I realized suddenly, explained 150:4.)
>
>Intent on correcting the vandals' devious mischief and in forstalling it
>in the future, I composed this fantasy rule.  All future rules shall
>therefore construe any words verbally prohibited by valid fantasy rules
>to be required of them per 150:3, and any words verbally required by valid
>fantasy rules to be prohibited to them per 150:3; nor is this to be
>applied recursively (i.e. changing words' statuses to prohibited,
>then back to required, then back to prohibited, etc.), but only once for
>each word.
>
>Forbidden: werewolf
>Required:  Tsar
>
>----- 150:8 -----
>
>/Jared Sunshine
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-11-18 02:00:44 GMT
>
Judge's Comments:  Intriguing!  I searched the Round 150 records for
evidence of the Antidisestablishmentarianist plot, but immediately found
some holes in the conspiracy theory.  This rule certainly believes in its
existence, mentioning the words prohibited by 150:3,4 and 6, but mentions
"devious", which, if Ishtar had had his way, should not see the light of
day.  Futher inconsistencies (150:4 also uses "devious" while 150:4 and 6
did not use "not", and 150:6 managed to avoid using "prohibited") convinced
me that the only conspiracy here is Jared's agenda to subvert 150:4.
INVALID

Style Comments:  A more ingenious way to attack 150:4, but surely 150:6 and
7 are examples of how to get around that particular problem.  Although such
a drastic reinterpretation would have been extremely stylish had it
succeeded, I feel only able to grant 0.2 Style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-18 07:12:28 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 20 23:46:02 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAKMk1r00288
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 23:46:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAKMk0W01860
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 23:46:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAKMjxK18337
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 23:45:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAKMjwW01856
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 23:45:58 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114618AbQKTWpe>;
        Mon, 20 Nov 2000 23:45:34 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d01b63f5a7c4796@[150.203.41.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 09:49:00 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Proposals 150:A and 150:B both FAILED
Status: RO

150:A had 1 for, 5 against, 1 abstention

150:B had 1 for, 4 against, 1 abstention

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-20 22:45:34 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 23 03:06:35 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAN26Zr28464
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 23 Nov 2000 03:06:35 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAN26Zw26962
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 23 Nov 2000 03:06:35 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAN26XK14901
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 23 Nov 2000 03:06:33 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAN26Ww26957
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 23 Nov 2000 03:06:33 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114362AbQKWCGJ>;
        Thu, 23 Nov 2000 03:06:09 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b6423a9dc304@[150.203.41.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 13:10:47 +1000
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: End of Round 150
Status: RO

Well it's been fun, but with the last valid rule of round 150 posted over a
week ago, I have nothing else to do but proclaim Rich Holmes the winner of
round 150 and the Judge for round 151.  Mark Nau, with his stylish entry
into FRC, becomes the Wizard for round 151.

See you there...

Cheers,
	Tripper


Summary of Round 150

Player 		Eligibility 			Style
*Jeremy 	2000-11-20 16:04:55 GMT 	+0.5
*Aron 		2000-11-22 02:09:25 GMT 	-1.0
*Mark 		2000-11-22 01:57:38 GMT 	+1.5
*Jared 		2000-11-19 16:04:55 GMT 	+0.95
Rich 		2000-11-22 19:56:40 GMT 	+1.0
*Andre 		2000-11-20 16:04:55 GMT 	+1.3
*<others> 	2000-11-21 16:04:55 GMT 	0

Rule Author 	Validity 	Style 	Deviousness
150:1 Jeremy 	INVALID 	+0.5 	2
150:2 Aron 	INVALID 	0 	1
150:3 Mark 	VALID 	+1.5 	3
150:4 Aron 	VALID	 -1.0 	1
150:5 Jared 	INVALID 	+0.75	1
150:6 Rich 	VALID 	+1.0 	0
150:7 Andre	INVALID	+1.3	1
150:8 Jared	INVALID	+0.2	1


Proposals 	For 	Against Abstain	Expires
150:A 		Jared 	Tripper Mark	 	2000-11-19 04:21:17 GMT
			Andre
			Anton
			Jesse
			John
			Rich

150:B		Jeremy	Mark	Tripper		2000-11-20 14:46:10 GMT
			Anton
			Rich
			Andre


From: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
     To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
     Subject: Rule 150:1
     Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 11:04:24 -0500

     ******

     I have been following the progress of the state of Florida's election
     battle recently (a little too obsessively, truth be known) and was
     fascinated by a Judge's ruling on a part of that state's statutes.  One
     part of the law stipulates that the ballots from counties must be
certified
     by a certain date.  A second part of the law, enacted _later_ states more
     broadly that the ballots _may_ be certified by that date, but the date
may
     be extended depending on certain circumstances.  The earlier part of the
     law was not repealed.  The Judge ruled that the broader provision,
enacted
     later, is the one to follow.

     In recognition of this principle of jurisprudence, all restrictions which
     are concretely stated in prior valid rules (not implied or deduced)
may be
     made less restrictive by subsequent valid rules provided that this
     subsequent rule itself obeys the original form of the restriction.

     No more than one restriction may be loosened in this manner by a
subsequent
     rule.

     Each author, when posting his or her first valid rule this round must
state
     whether he or she supports George W. Bush or Al Gore.  These votes may
not
     be changed during this round.  If one of these two candidates should
     concede (after this rule is posted and) before the end of this round,
those
     authors who voted for the other candidate may, any time before the end of
     the round post one rule containing the text "This is my bonus for backing
     [the winning candidate's name]".  Such rules are exempt from all
     restrictions made by valid rules this round (save those in this rule) on
     the single condition that they themselves make no new restrictions.

     I support Al Gore.

     ******

     -Jeremy D. Selengut

     --
     Rule Date: 2000-11-14 16:04:55 GMT


Judge's Comments:
After getting my mind around the extremely devious concept of restrictions
allowing themselves to be relaxed, I became worried about the "free rule for
a correct vote" clause.  It states that the free rule can be posted at any
time before the end of the round, _regardless of the author's eligiblity_.
This seems to me to conflict with ROs 2 and 3.  Checking through the
archives, I also see a precedent that the only way to alter a player's
eligibility is through _proposal_.  I hear that it's quite difficult to make
an INVALID first rule, but there you go.

Style: +1.5 for a first rule with many avenues for deviousness, -1 for a
run-in with the Regular Ordinances.

From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
     To: frc@trolltech.com
     Subject: 150:2
     Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 07:37:49 -0800

     >>>>>
     I loosen to nothing the restriction that only one restriction may be
     loosened.  Now I loosen to nothing all restrictions in the previous rule.
     If
     any of these restrictions are not explicitly modified later in this rule,
     they
     will be retightened for future rules.

     I restrict future rules to not loosen any restrictions which they
could not
     have loosened had they not loosened another restriction in the same rule.
     Nor
     may any restriction in this rule be loosened by future rules.

     I restrict all rules to obey the last paragraph of the first rule, except
     for
     the following changes:

     * Valid votes can be cast for any presidential candidate, not just the
two
     main ones.

     * All other text shall remain the same as before, except that the word
     "candidate" shall become "candidates".

     Even though my real self supports George W. Bush, my fantasy self feels
     obliged to vote for Ralph Nader, Green Party Candidate.
     >>>>>

     Aron Wall

     --
     Rule Date: 2000-11-14 16:35:25 GMT


Judge's Comments:
Since this rule was so obviously meant to exploit all possible loopholes in
150:1 and I've somehow managed to rule 150:1 INVALID, this rule could have
been extremely confusing if it was not in fact inconsistent with itself.
Let me explain:

One of the few restrictions in this rule that stood on its own was:
"I restrict all rules to follow the last paragraph of the first rule".

Even though the first rule was INVALID, this is fine, except that the last
paragraph of 150:1 is "I support Al Gore"

Therefore all rules must support Al Gore, but this one supports Ralph Nader.
Bummo.

Style: +1.5 for trying to crash through the loophole in 150:1
  -0.5 for in fact being inconsistent with 150:1 (as Jeremy pointed out to
me)
  -0.5 for not obeying its own restriction on future rules (although a
commedable attempt to prevent further loop-holing)
  -0.5 for being self-inconsistent

<takes a deep breath>

Could someone possibly post a cunning rule that doesn't hoist itself on its
own petard?

Cheers

Tripper, Wizard Judge

From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
     To: <frc@trolltech.com>
     Subject: 150:3
     Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 17:57:26 -0800

     All rules must include specification of a single "required" word and a
     single "prohibited" word.
     A rule must include all "required" words specified in prior rules.
     A rule may not include any words specified as "prohibited" in prior
rules.
     Including a "required" word in a manner that, in the Judge's opinion,
is a
     cheap appendage to the rule proper invalidates the rule.
     A rule may not specify a "prohibited" word that was specified as a
     "required" word in any prior rule.
     A rule may not specify the same word as "required" and "prohibited."

     Required:   devious
     Prohibited: not


     -Mark Nau

     --
     Rule Date: 2000-11-15 01:57:38 GMT


Judge's Comments
No problems that I can see, although I don't really like "in the Judge's
opinion".  Nice solid start, that does set up some rather nasty potential
traps...

Style comments
+0.5 for requiring the word "devious" +0.5 for traps, -0.5 for requiring me
to have an opinion
(I'm not going to deduct points for using its own prohibited word, as I
guess it's impossible _not_ to do so.....)

Cheers

Tripper, Wizard Judge
________________________________________________

From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
     To: frc@trolltech.com
     Subject: 150:4
     Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 17:12:06 -0800

     >>>>>
     A devious rule is one which will invalidate at least one rule.  Such as
     rule scores one point for each rule which it invalidates.

     Required:  Antidisestablishmentarianists
     Prohibited: Prohibited
     >>>>>

     --
     Rule Date: 2000-11-15 02:09:25 GMT


Judge's comments:
Urk.  An opportunistic little rule, but one which I can't seem to be able to
invalidate.

Be it known that, in the opinion of this Judge, very few uses of words which
the Judge considers trivial themselves, will be considered trivial.

Style comments:
+1 for using the trap from 150:3
-1 for blatantly using the trap from 150:3
-0.5 for requiring possibly the second-longest word in the English language
-0.5 for measuring deviousness in points which vary according to time

----- 150:5 -----
I have a cunning plan.

Actually, my plan is hardly cunning, because I am a rule (150:5, to be
precise), and my plan's essential objective is to invalidate myself.  In
fact, it's pathological.  Suicidal thoughts are certainly pathological.

But I digress.

I, you see, a member of the elite Antidisestablishmentarianists.  You will
of course recall that we were those lobes of this rule's mind that
subscribe to the doctrine that is against the Lutheran challenge to the
validity of the Catholic Church as an intersessor to the divine.  I have
determined that I and my fellow right-thinking lobes will be unable to
fully convince this rule to remain supportive of Mother Church.

Better than allow this rule to cross over to the Lutheran scum (scarcely
to mention Calvin!), we have engineered this temporary commandeering of
the rule's text and plan to invalidate ourselves.  I suppose that is
cunning, after all.

You might then think it odd the lengths having been taken to use the word
required by the last rule if the object was invalidation.  In fact, I am
an Antidisestablishmentarianist lobe of the rule's mind in the midst of a
vast religious schism--it's just a coincidence.

Are you ready to die?

Well then, answer me this: is "prohibited" prohibited?

I have a devious plan.

Ah! we, the right-thinking Disestablishmentarianist lobes of the rule's
brain have seized back control of the rule's text!  We shall yet rid this
rule's mind of the Papist scum!

And yet I see we have already spoken the word, "prohibited."  Are we
already mortally wounded by the will of our enemy lobes?  Can it be?  Are
we lost?

And yet...I see that 150:3 specifically stated that

> A rule may *** specify the same word as "required" and "prohibited."

Since 150:4 in fact specifies "prohibited" explicitly, it would seem to
run afoul of this prohibition in 150:3.  And glory be, if 150:4 were
invalid, then we should be valid, for the cursed Papal swine were too
foolish to break any other restrictions.

And now we shall fulfill the last requirement, if we are to be considered
for validity and save this soul, pro maiore gloria dei.  Thank you.

Required: tolerance
Prohibited: hate

----- 150:5 -----

/Jared Sunshine

--
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 08:19:00 GMT



     Judge's Comments:
     A very creative rebuttal to the nasty and opportunistic 150:4.
     Unfortunately, 150:4 _is_ VALID, and this this rule wings its way to
     glorious invalidation.  Here's why.

     The contentious sentence is " A rule may not specify the same word as
     "required" and "prohibited."

     This can be interpreted in two ways:
     1) a rule may not specify that the required and prohibited words are the
     same - or
     2) a rule may not specifiy a word that is the same as "required" and
     "prohibited"

     In formal logic, these become:
     1):  ~[(X=R)/\(X=P)]
     2):  ~[(X ="R")/\(X="P")]
     (where ~ = NOT, /\  = AND, R and P are the words specified as required
and
     prohibited respectively and "R" and "P" are the words "required" and
     "prohibited" respectively)

     150:4 satisfies 1) - that was never in doubt I believe.  As for 2),
since
     "R" * "P" then for all X
     3): (X = "R") -> (X * "P") which from the definition of -> is
equivalent to
     ~[(X ="R")/\(X="P")] which is of course 2).
     So 2) is satisfied automatically.  In order for your rebuttal, to
hold, the
     restriction should have been
     2a): ~[(X ="R")\/(X="P")]
     (where \/ = OR)
     Sorry about that.

     Style comments
     -0.5 for being invalid
     -0.5 for not specifying a restriction
     +0.5 for the battle between the Anti's, Dis's and whoever elses
     +0.5 for sacrificing itself for the cause
     +0.75 for giving me an excuse to use formal logic

     (and forgive me for lack of knowledge, but let me know if this was your
     first rule, for the customary newbie bonus....)

     Cheers

     Tripper, Wizard Judge

As the sounds of the explosion gradually died away, several scraps of
paper fluttered to the ground.  I picked one up.  It seemed to be torn
from someone's journal or diary.  On it were the words:

    Antipathy eroded
    Disemboweling time
    Stable times for Romanov
    Ishtar and I
    Men tarry here, O!
    Ian is you,
    Tsar Nicholas!

Curious, I thought as I boarded the train that would bring me to Saint
Petersburg.  Who are Ishtar and Ian?  And what part do they play in
the grand, cunning plan?  Having no tolerance for mystery, I resolved
that all future messages would shed some light on this strange pair,
while shunning the shorter of the English language's two indefinite
articles and using "using" -- though perhaps deviously.

--
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

--
Rule Date: 2000-11-15 19:56:40 GMT

Judge's Comments: Can't see any problem here - it manages to "include" all
required words, doesn't use "prohibited" or "not" and manages to specify its
own required and prohibited words.  VALID

Style Comments:
+1 for the creative use of poetry
+0.5 for getting around the 150:4 trap
-0.5 for a rather gratuitious restriction'

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-23 02:06:09 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 27 20:07:31 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7Vr23119
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7UI05332
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7TK25662
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7SI05327
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114583AbQK0THQ>;
        Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:16 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 151:1 - VALID, +1.5
References: <l03010d00b6481fc63d72@[150.203.41.102]>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 27 Nov 2000 14:06:59 -0500
In-Reply-To: Gallivanting Tripper's message of "Mon, 27 Nov 2000 15:31:35 +0100"
Message-ID: <xzc1yvxmdyk.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> Dear Cousins,
> 	with the Clan Spooner reunion almost upon us, it is time once more
> to prepare the Spooner Family Tree.  Unfortunately, all our photographs
> have faded and I wil require all of your help to reassemble our proud
> lineage.  Each rule must add a new entry to the Clan Spooner genealogy,
> while remembering that no warm-blooded Spooner can write any document
> without giving in to the temptation to spoonerise - spooner or later!
> 
> I thought a good place to start would be our grandfather, Dory Hevill
> Spooner, to whom this Clan owes its current size.  He certainly knew how to
> use his prone-worthy gun!
> 
> Cheers,
> 	Tallivanting Gripper Spooner
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-27 04:26:43 GMT
> 

VALID.  No debatable run-ins with the ROs, fortunately... or
unfortunately, if that sort of thing appeals to you.

+1.5 STYLE.  Good shortish, promising rule to start with.  I feel it's
in keeping with the theme of the round to fold the quality of the
rule's spoonerism(s) into the style points.  Tripper gives us a couple
of decent ones here.

(It is just possible some of the Players may not be familiar with the
term "spoonerism".  At the risk of appearing to teach them how to use
a search engine, let me call the following URL to your attention:
<http://fun-with-words.com/spoonerisms.html>.) 

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-27 19:07:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 27 20:17:12 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJHCr23486
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:17:12 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJHB613366
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:17:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJHBK25734
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:17:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJHAI05910
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:17:10 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114585AbQK0TPU>;
        Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:15:20 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 151:2 - VALID, -0.5
References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10011271127230.10785-100000@watsol.cc.columbia.edu>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 27 Nov 2000 14:15:04 -0500
In-Reply-To: Jared S Sunshine's message of "Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:42:25 -0500 (EST)"
Message-ID: <xzcy9y5kz0n.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu> writes:

> Thank you, Cousin Gripper, for your inspiring call to arms (as it were).
> I would like to recall the blessed memory of our two grandmothers:
> Maryann Margaret Spooner and Ida Mae Spooner.  The former is the beloved
> mother of four darling girls, and was a bright and buoyant person before
> she passed on, and when Old Dory remarried, it was to the nubile young Ida
> Mae, who gave him so many children I can barely begin to count them.
> 
> Of course, all of Maryann Margaret's children took different names when
> they married, but they're still Spooners at heart.  Since I am the son of
> one such person, I would ask that every rule in the future include at
> least one member of the Spooner Clan with a hyphenated name:  my mother,
> for example, Mrs. Ethel Spooner-Trenton.  Spooner women (those born
> to Spooner parents, that is) always hyphenate their names at marriage,
> after all.
> 
> As for me, I'm Jared Spooner-Trenton, but I just go by Jared Spooner.  Who
> wouldn't be proud to have come from a fenus of such game?
> 
> Warmly yours,
> Jared Spooner
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-27 16:42:47 GMT
> 

VALID.

STYLE -0.5.  This rule's a trifle lengthy.  It exuberantly supplies
four entries to the family tree where only one is required -- good
thing old Dory and wives were so prolific.  A quite gratuitous
restriction, and the one spoonerism I can detect is a rather ho-hum
one.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-27 19:15:20 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 27 20:07:31 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7Vr23119
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7UI05332
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7TK25662
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARJ7SI05327
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114583AbQK0THQ>;
        Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:07:16 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 151:1 - VALID, +1.5
References: <l03010d00b6481fc63d72@[150.203.41.102]>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 27 Nov 2000 14:06:59 -0500
In-Reply-To: Gallivanting Tripper's message of "Mon, 27 Nov 2000 15:31:35 +0100"
Message-ID: <xzc1yvxmdyk.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> Dear Cousins,
> 	with the Clan Spooner reunion almost upon us, it is time once more
> to prepare the Spooner Family Tree.  Unfortunately, all our photographs
> have faded and I wil require all of your help to reassemble our proud
> lineage.  Each rule must add a new entry to the Clan Spooner genealogy,
> while remembering that no warm-blooded Spooner can write any document
> without giving in to the temptation to spoonerise - spooner or later!
> 
> I thought a good place to start would be our grandfather, Dory Hevill
> Spooner, to whom this Clan owes its current size.  He certainly knew how to
> use his prone-worthy gun!
> 
> Cheers,
> 	Tallivanting Gripper Spooner
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-27 04:26:43 GMT
> 

VALID.  No debatable run-ins with the ROs, fortunately... or
unfortunately, if that sort of thing appeals to you.

+1.5 STYLE.  Good shortish, promising rule to start with.  I feel it's
in keeping with the theme of the round to fold the quality of the
rule's spoonerism(s) into the style points.  Tripper gives us a couple
of decent ones here.

(It is just possible some of the Players may not be familiar with the
term "spoonerism".  At the risk of appearing to teach them how to use
a search engine, let me call the following URL to your attention:
<http://fun-with-words.com/spoonerisms.html>.) 

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-27 19:07:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 27 21:37:51 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARKbor26889
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:37:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARKboI10838
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:37:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARKbnK26346
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:37:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARKbmI10830
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:37:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114544AbQK0Uh0>;
        Mon, 27 Nov 2000 21:37:26 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 151:3 - VALID, +1.5
References: <v04220801b64841b8f3f3@[128.12.55.129]>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 27 Nov 2000 15:37:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: Henry Towsner's message of "Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:10:29 -0800"
Message-ID: <xzcvgt9kv7j.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Henry Towsner <htowsner@stanford.edu> writes:

> 	I do, of course, hate to bring up old disputes, but I can't 
> help but object to Jared's claims.  Once again the so-called 
> "hyphenated" Spooners, the descendants of Maryann Margaret Spooner, 
> are disparaging the descendants of Ida Mae Spooner.  Ida's daughters 
> did not hyphenate their names, and Jared's last statement is yet 
> another reminder that he doesn't consider Ida and her descendants 
> "true Spooners" and therefore Ida's kids are not "born to Spooner 
> parents."
> 	Maryann's children have been sniping at Ida ever since Dory 
> married her, and now that she's dead they still can't stop.  I 
> remember at Dory's seventieth birthday when Maryann's deldest 
> aughter, Elsa Spooner-Cowell, tried to stop Ida from even sitting 
> next to him, insisting that as the eldest daughter it was her right. 
> Of course, Dory stepped in and nopped that stonsense right there, and 
> Elsa certainly had egg on her face that afternoon when he announced 
> that he and Ida were to marry.
> 	From here on I ask that every rule remind us of one of the 
> grievances between the two sides of the Spooner clan.
> -- 
> Henry Towsner <htowsner@stanford.edu>
> 
> Majority, n.: That quality that distinguishes a crime from a law
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-27 20:12:43 GMT
> 

VALID.  Henry treads a very fine line here.  This rule is not
inconsistent with 151:2, though it's less than obvious.  Ensuing rules
will need to tread carefully!

STYLE +1.5.  Henry's spoonerisms are nimble if pedestrian.
Unfortunate that he insists on reopening our feumily fads, but face
it: controversy sells!  

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-27 20:37:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Nov 27 23:38:45 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARMcgr02249
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:38:43 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARMcg625771
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:38:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARMcfK27140
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:38:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eARMceI18751
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:38:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114687AbQK0Wi1>;
        Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:38:27 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 151:4 - VALID, +1.5
References: <007201c058bc$366839b0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 27 Nov 2000 17:38:06 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Mark Nau"'s message of "Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:51:35 -0800"
Message-ID: <xzchf4t11o1.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com> writes:

> >From the diary of Mary Spooner-Nau:
> 
> You remember Irma Jane. Buried a manker from the big city, name of Marvin
> Mank. And suddenly she takes on all these airs about being better people
> than her own blood.  Calls herself "Irma Mank," as if she heaven nerd of the
> Spooner clan.
> Anyway, come the baptism of the first little Mank, and Elsa's middle son,
> Joe, makes the gesture of bringing his family all the way out to attend the
> ceremony.  And Irma has the nerve to complain!  Talks about "ratty-clothed
> hillbillies asking about the Mooner-Spank baptism."  Now, Joe is 32, while
> Irma's only 28.  So we know Joe has the right of it.  It's important to note
> the ages whenever there's a dispute, what with the strong Trooner spadition
> about respecting one's elders.
> With the way Irma acts, I'm beginning to believe some of the stories about
> Ida Mae and the town handiman, if you datch my crift.
> 
> -Mark Nau
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-27 21:51:49 GMT
> 

VALID.  While the intent of the text of this rule is not primarily to
record a genealogical entry for a Spooner, it does in fact give
genealogical information about a couple of the relatives.  A
hyphenated Spooner and a dispute are both mentioned.

STYLE +1.5.  Sweating into the thing of gings, speakeristically
spooning.  Unfortunate that descriptions of camily fonnections got
shrort shift.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-27 22:38:27 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Nov 29 17:02:14 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eATG2Dr13951
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:02:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eATG2Dn24671
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:02:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eATG2DK18568
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:02:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eATG2Cx15869
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:02:12 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114801AbQK2QBt>;
        Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:01:49 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 151:5
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001129085145.7846A-100000@ipngraal>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 29 Nov 2000 11:01:41 -0500
In-Reply-To: Ronald Kunne's message of "Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:56:54 +0100 (MET)"
Message-ID: <xzc7l5m6a3e.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> I wish it wouldn't happen, but reunions always seem to bring out then worst
> in our clan.  The root of all the sniping is the fact that Dory did not
> actually marry Ida until he was on his deathbed, and hence their preceding
> childred had been born out of wedlock (although it is not clear whether
> their father was Dory or hairied van Diemen), although they all took the
> Spooner name, of course.  This explains the disputes over "true Spooners"
> mentioned previously.
> 
> This came to a head when Dory's will was read out by Beavis Dastard
> Spooner, Ida's eldest son.  The will stated that the Spooner estate would
> go to the first hale mare to wake a tife.  Beavis stepped up to take the
> inheritance, but was immediately challenged by Bolon Spooner-Cowell, Joe's
> elder brother, who claimed Beavis was not a heightful rare.  After a heated
> argument, Bolon, 36,  eventually admitted that Beavis, 10 years his elder,
> was entitled to the estate, but Beavis suddenly died of a heart attack
> brought on by the strain.  This all happened last week......
> 
> It turns out that the rightful recipient of the estate was in fact a Player
> in the FRC, and in fact that victory in round 151 is contingent on
> receiving Dory's legacy.
> 
> If a Player makes a claim in a valid rantsy fool to be the recipient of the
> estate, the next valid rantsy fool must successfully challenge the previous
> rule's claim - otherwise no more rantsy fools may be posted and the
> claimant is the winner of round 151.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-29 04:20:01 GMT
> 

Aron Wall <aron@wall.org> writes:

> This contradicts the regular ordinances, because whoever is declared the
> winner in this fashion could always post 7 INVALID rules to immediately take
> themselves out of the running.  And were this rule VALID, anyone could
> immediately win the round by posting two rules in succession and failing to
> challenge their own rule.

Aron's second point, about posting two successive rules, seems to me
to be correct but irrelevant.  Nothing in the ROs prohibits winning a
round by following the rules, right?

Aron's first point is stronger, but I think there's more to be said.  

Suppose this rule were VALID.  Then if someone posted a claim to the
estate, and the next valid Rule failed to successfully challenge that
claim, "no more [Fantasy Rules] may be posted and the claimant is the
winner of round 151".  

That's significantly different from saying "in order to be VALID, all
future Rules must successfully challenge the claim made in the
previous Rule".  Significant in that, under given circumstances, it
*prohibits* the posting of Fantasy Rules.  I can see no way to
interpret that other than that it *renders all players ineligible*.
Eligible players may post Fantasy Rules; this Rule prohibits anyone
from posting Fantasy Rules; therefore this rule makes all players
ineligible.  QED.

The "winner" could *not* post 7 INVALID rules to take himself out of
eligibility; he already *is* ineligible.  So Aron's first point is
incorrect. 

But consider these three points:

First of all, the ROs state

   Each valid fantasy rule makes its author eligible to play. 

But this rule stipulates that if a player posts a VALID rule that does
not successfully challenge the preceding claim, that player (and all
others) becomes ineligible.

Second,

   This eligibility period lasts for seven (7) days from the time of
   the rule's posting minus one (1) day for each invalid fantasy rule
   posted by the same person after the valid fantasy rule.

But this rule truncates the eligibility period of all eligible
players.

Third,

   End of Game.  If at any time after the seventh day of a round,
   there is only one person eligible to play, then
   (a) all current fantasy rules are repealed
   (b) the round ends
   (c) the sole remaining player is declared winner of the just ended
       round and becomes Judge.

But by this rule we go immediately from <n> eligible players to
*none*.  There is never only one person eligible to play.  The ROs do
not provide for ending a round if the number of eligible players falls
below 1, so Round 151 would never end!

So 151:5 would appear to be INVALID -- or it would but for Ronald's
observation: 

Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr> writes:

> :-)
> 
> This might have be so, if the Trippivanting Galler would have written
> "fantasy rule". But he didn't. The Regular Ordinances do not discuss
> "rantsy fools". Maybe the Ordinair Regulations do?

Ronald's point may have been facetious but in fact it is the only
loophole that can save this Rule.  

151:5 in fact makes no restrictions on Fantasy Rules or on players'
eligibility to post them.  It restricts only rantsy fools.  Hence the
above analysis does not apply.  The problem is, of course, "rantsy
fool" is an undefined term.  So the restriction cannot be applied
until a valid Rule supplies us with a definition of a "rantsy fool".

VALID.

STYLE: +2.8.  Gotta love this Knule's rottiness, intended or
otherwise.  I can't bring myself to dock more than poo-tenths of a
toint for its length, given its expoonery selmparisms.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-29 16:01:49 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Nov 30 15:48:16 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAUEmFr23142
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:48:15 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAUEmEn29462
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:48:15 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAUEmDK00401
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:48:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eAUEmCx14437
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:48:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114683AbQK3OsA>;
        Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:48:00 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
Cc: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 151:6
References: <04b601c05a52$93885f20$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 30 Nov 2000 09:47:35 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Mark Nau"'s message of "Wed, 29 Nov 2000 14:20:27 -0800"
Message-ID: <xzc3dg9v7nc.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com> writes:

> I hate to mention the following incident, but it is a story that teeds to be
> rolled, and is how I found out about the Spooner tradition of the "rantsy
> fool."
> 
> Gramma Maryann, cest her roll, told it to me her own self.
> 
> The concept of the "Rantsy Fool" is a hybrid of the tribunes of Ancient Rome
> and the court jesters of Europe.  Given the Spooner geriocracy, there has to
> be a way for a younger family member to let his voice be heard, to air a
> greivance that he spay not meek himself.  So he gets a rantsy fool to speak
> for him.
> 
> Rantsy is probably a corruption of "rambling" or possibly "rancid," since
> the town drunk is often selected to act the part of the rantsy fool.  And
> that's what Gramma Maryann did when little Junebug (we all know her as June
> Randolph-Spooner) asked her "Why are Daddy and Ida Mae rasslin' in the
> barn?"
> 
> This was a bit more than 30 years ago, back when Grandpa was 51 and Gramma
> was 46.  In any event, Gramma Maryann knew she couldn't confront Dory with
> her knowledge of his cheatin', so she got Ol' Pissed Willie to tell Dory off
> for her.  And Granpa had to sit there and take it, fright in runt of the
> whole family.  He knew the validity of the rantsy fool.
> 
> Weaking of spitch, wish Aunt Irma Jane a happy 30th birthday for me.  We
> should remind each other of some upcoming birthday or anniversary from now
> on, so we can remember to send a guard or kift.
> 
> -Mark Spooner Nau
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-11-29 22:20:38 GMT
> 

VALID.  Granted, this definition of a rantsy fool seems awkward to
reconcile with phrases in 151:5 like "If a Player makes a claim in a
valid rantsy fool" -- how do you claim something in a drunk? -- but
given the Spooner clan's difficulties with English, I think this is
understandable.  

STYLE +2.0.  Very wicked of you to wish Irma a hippy 30th bathday
when you know she's only 28, but that's the Spooners for you.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-30 14:48:00 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Nov 24 00:28:14 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eANNSEr27224
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 24 Nov 2000 00:28:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eANNSDW02949
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Fri, 24 Nov 2000 00:28:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eANNSCK25054
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 24 Nov 2000 00:28:12 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eANNSBw01079
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 24 Nov 2000 00:28:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114384AbQKWX17>;
        Fri, 24 Nov 2000 00:27:59 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 151
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Nov 2000 18:27:43 -0500
Message-ID: <xzcy9ya8e1c.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

As this is a holiday weekend in the US (where I am), Round 151 will
begin Monday -- specifically 00:00:01 GMT Monday, 27 Nov.  Any player
may post the first rule.

Theme for this round: "I Have a Punning Clan".

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-11-23 23:27:59 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sun Dec  3 23:38:09 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svfile1.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eB3Mc8r27436
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:38:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: from svin12.win.tue.nl (svin12.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.135])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eB3Mc8x14847
	for <engels@svfile1.win.tue.nl>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:38:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svin12.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eB3Mc7K01523
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:38:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eB3Mc6x14842
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:38:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114244AbQLCWhr>;
        Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:37:47 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Standings
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 03 Dec 2000 14:53:01 -0500
Message-ID: <xzcr93pth7m.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Nearing the end of the first week:

NAME                  ELIGIBLE UNTIL            STYLE
Mark Nau              2000-12-06 22:20:38 GMT   +3.5
Gallivanting Tripper  2000-12-06 04:20:01 GMT   +4.3
Henry Towsner         2000-12-04 20:12:43 GMT   +1.5
Jared S Sunshine      2000-12-04 16:42:47 GMT   -0.5
Everyone else         2000-12-04 00:00:01 GMT

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-03 22:37:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec  7 17:23:28 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eB7GNS912358
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 17:23:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eB7GNRx19891
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 17:23:27 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114773AbQLGQW6>;
        Thu, 7 Dec 2000 17:22:58 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: End of Round 151
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 07 Dec 2000 11:22:40 -0500
Message-ID: <xzcpuj4p5f3.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Summal Finery of Round 151: I Have a Punning Clan.  No puns to speak
of, but spore moonerisms than you can stake a shick at.

The Judge of Round 151 was Hich Rolmes.  The Judge of Round 152 shall
be Nark Mau.  Wizard for Round 152 shall be Tallivanting Gripper.


Player eligibilities:

NAME                  ELIGIBLE UNTIL            STYLE
Mark Nau              2000-12-06 22:20:38 GMT   +3.5
Gallivanting Tripper  2000-12-06 04:20:01 GMT   +4.3
Henry Towsner         2000-12-04 20:12:43 GMT   +1.5
Jared S Sunshine      2000-12-04 16:42:47 GMT   -0.5
Everyone else         2000-12-04 00:00:01 GMT


Summary of rules:

151:1  Gallivanting Tripper  2000-11-27 04:26:43 GMT - VALID, +1.5
151:2  Jared S Sunshine      2000-11-27 16:42:47 GMT - VALID, -0.5
151:3  Henry Towsner         2000-11-27 20:12:43 GMT - VALID, +1.5
151:4  Mark Nau              2000-11-27 21:51:49 GMT - VALID, +1.5
151:5  Gallivanting Tripper  2000-11-29 04:20:01 GMT - VALID, +2.8
151:6  Mark Nau              2000-11-29 22:20:38 GMT - VALID, +2.0


Complete rules and judgements:

151:1 Gallivanting Tripper 2000-11-27 04:26:43 GMT - VALID, +1.5

> Dear Cousins,
> 	with the Clan Spooner reunion almost upon us, it is time once more
> to prepare the Spooner Family Tree.  Unfortunately, all our photographs
> have faded and I wil require all of your help to reassemble our proud
> lineage.  Each rule must add a new entry to the Clan Spooner genealogy,
> while remembering that no warm-blooded Spooner can write any document
> without giving in to the temptation to spoonerise - spooner or later!
> 
> I thought a good place to start would be our grandfather, Dory Hevill
> Spooner, to whom this Clan owes its current size.  He certainly knew how to
> use his prone-worthy gun!
> 
> Cheers,
> 	Tallivanting Gripper Spooner

VALID.  No debatable run-ins with the ROs, fortunately... or
unfortunately, if that sort of thing appeals to you.

+1.5 STYLE.  Good shortish, promising rule to start with.  I feel it's
in keeping with the theme of the round to fold the quality of the
rule's spoonerism(s) into the style points.  Tripper gives us a couple
of decent ones here.

(It is just possible some of the Players may not be familiar with the
term "spoonerism".  At the risk of appearing to teach them how to use
a search engine, let me call the following URL to your attention:
<http://fun-with-words.com/spoonerisms.html>.) 


151:2 Jared S Sunshine 2000-11-27 16:42:47 GMT - VALID, -0.5

> Thank you, Cousin Gripper, for your inspiring call to arms (as it were).
> I would like to recall the blessed memory of our two grandmothers:
> Maryann Margaret Spooner and Ida Mae Spooner.  The former is the beloved
> mother of four darling girls, and was a bright and buoyant person before
> she passed on, and when Old Dory remarried, it was to the nubile young Ida
> Mae, who gave him so many children I can barely begin to count them.
> 
> Of course, all of Maryann Margaret's children took different names when
> they married, but they're still Spooners at heart.  Since I am the son of
> one such person, I would ask that every rule in the future include at
> least one member of the Spooner Clan with a hyphenated name:  my mother,
> for example, Mrs. Ethel Spooner-Trenton.  Spooner women (those born
> to Spooner parents, that is) always hyphenate their names at marriage,
> after all.
> 
> As for me, I'm Jared Spooner-Trenton, but I just go by Jared Spooner.  Who
> wouldn't be proud to have come from a fenus of such game?
> 
> Warmly yours,
> Jared Spooner

VALID.

STYLE -0.5.  This rule's a trifle lengthy.  It exuberantly supplies
four entries to the family tree where only one is required -- good
thing old Dory and wives were so prolific.  A quite gratuitous
restriction, and the one spoonerism I can detect is a rather ho-hum
one.


151:3 Henry Towsner 2000-11-27 20:12:43 GMT - VALID, +1.5

> 	I do, of course, hate to bring up old disputes, but I can't 
> help but object to Jared's claims.  Once again the so-called 
> "hyphenated" Spooners, the descendants of Maryann Margaret Spooner, 
> are disparaging the descendants of Ida Mae Spooner.  Ida's daughters 
> did not hyphenate their names, and Jared's last statement is yet 
> another reminder that he doesn't consider Ida and her descendants 
> "true Spooners" and therefore Ida's kids are not "born to Spooner 
> parents."
> 	Maryann's children have been sniping at Ida ever since Dory 
> married her, and now that she's dead they still can't stop.  I 
> remember at Dory's seventieth birthday when Maryann's deldest 
> aughter, Elsa Spooner-Cowell, tried to stop Ida from even sitting 
> next to him, insisting that as the eldest daughter it was her right. 
> Of course, Dory stepped in and nopped that stonsense right there, and 
> Elsa certainly had egg on her face that afternoon when he announced 
> that he and Ida were to marry.
> 	From here on I ask that every rule remind us of one of the 
> grievances between the two sides of the Spooner clan.
> -- 
> Henry Towsner <htowsner@stanford.edu>
> 
> Majority, n.: That quality that distinguishes a crime from a law

VALID.  Henry treads a very fine line here.  This rule is not
inconsistent with 151:2, though it's less than obvious.  Ensuing rules
will need to tread carefully!

STYLE +1.5.  Henry's spoonerisms are nimble if pedestrian.
Unfortunate that he insists on reopening our feumily fads, but face
it: controversy sells!  


151:4 Mark Nau 2000-11-27 21:51:49 GMT - VALID, +1.5

> >From the diary of Mary Spooner-Nau:
> 
> You remember Irma Jane. Buried a manker from the big city, name of Marvin
> Mank. And suddenly she takes on all these airs about being better people
> than her own blood.  Calls herself "Irma Mank," as if she heaven nerd of the
> Spooner clan.
> Anyway, come the baptism of the first little Mank, and Elsa's middle son,
> Joe, makes the gesture of bringing his family all the way out to attend the
> ceremony.  And Irma has the nerve to complain!  Talks about "ratty-clothed
> hillbillies asking about the Mooner-Spank baptism."  Now, Joe is 32, while
> Irma's only 28.  So we know Joe has the right of it.  It's important to note
> the ages whenever there's a dispute, what with the strong Trooner spadition
> about respecting one's elders.
> With the way Irma acts, I'm beginning to believe some of the stories about
> Ida Mae and the town handiman, if you datch my crift.
> 
> -Mark Nau

VALID.  While the intent of the text of this rule is not primarily to
record a genealogical entry for a Spooner, it does in fact give
genealogical information about a couple of the relatives.  A
hyphenated Spooner and a dispute are both mentioned.

STYLE +1.5.  Sweating into the thing of gings, speakeristically
spooning.  Unfortunate that descriptions of camily fonnections got
shrort shift.


151:5 Gallivanting Tripper 2000-11-29 04:20:01 GMT - VALID, +2.8

> I wish it wouldn't happen, but reunions always seem to bring out then worst
> in our clan.  The root of all the sniping is the fact that Dory did not
> actually marry Ida until he was on his deathbed, and hence their preceding
> childred had been born out of wedlock (although it is not clear whether
> their father was Dory or hairied van Diemen), although they all took the
> Spooner name, of course.  This explains the disputes over "true Spooners"
> mentioned previously.
> 
> This came to a head when Dory's will was read out by Beavis Dastard
> Spooner, Ida's eldest son.  The will stated that the Spooner estate would
> go to the first hale mare to wake a tife.  Beavis stepped up to take the
> inheritance, but was immediately challenged by Bolon Spooner-Cowell, Joe's
> elder brother, who claimed Beavis was not a heightful rare.  After a heated
> argument, Bolon, 36,  eventually admitted that Beavis, 10 years his elder,
> was entitled to the estate, but Beavis suddenly died of a heart attack
> brought on by the strain.  This all happened last week......
> 
> It turns out that the rightful recipient of the estate was in fact a Player
> in the FRC, and in fact that victory in round 151 is contingent on
> receiving Dory's legacy.
> 
> If a Player makes a claim in a valid rantsy fool to be the recipient of the
> estate, the next valid rantsy fool must successfully challenge the previous
> rule's claim - otherwise no more rantsy fools may be posted and the
> claimant is the winner of round 151.


Aron Wall <aron@wall.org> writes:

> This contradicts the regular ordinances, because whoever is declared the
> winner in this fashion could always post 7 INVALID rules to immediately take
> themselves out of the running.  And were this rule VALID, anyone could
> immediately win the round by posting two rules in succession and failing to
> challenge their own rule.

Aron's second point, about posting two successive rules, seems to me
to be correct but irrelevant.  Nothing in the ROs prohibits winning a
round by following the rules, right?

Aron's first point is stronger, but I think there's more to be said.  

Suppose this rule were VALID.  Then if someone posted a claim to the
estate, and the next valid Rule failed to successfully challenge that
claim, "no more [Fantasy Rules] may be posted and the claimant is the
winner of round 151".  

That's significantly different from saying "in order to be VALID, all
future Rules must successfully challenge the claim made in the
previous Rule".  Significant in that, under given circumstances, it
*prohibits* the posting of Fantasy Rules.  I can see no way to
interpret that other than that it *renders all players ineligible*.
Eligible players may post Fantasy Rules; this Rule prohibits anyone
from posting Fantasy Rules; therefore this rule makes all players
ineligible.  QED.

The "winner" could *not* post 7 INVALID rules to take himself out of
eligibility; he already *is* ineligible.  So Aron's first point is
incorrect. 

But consider these three points:

First of all, the ROs state

   Each valid fantasy rule makes its author eligible to play. 

But this rule stipulates that if a player posts a VALID rule that does
not successfully challenge the preceding claim, that player (and all
others) becomes ineligible.

Second,

   This eligibility period lasts for seven (7) days from the time of
   the rule's posting minus one (1) day for each invalid fantasy rule
   posted by the same person after the valid fantasy rule.

But this rule truncates the eligibility period of all eligible
players.

Third,

   End of Game.  If at any time after the seventh day of a round,
   there is only one person eligible to play, then
   (a) all current fantasy rules are repealed
   (b) the round ends
   (c) the sole remaining player is declared winner of the just ended
       round and becomes Judge.

But by this rule we go immediately from <n> eligible players to
*none*.  There is never only one person eligible to play.  The ROs do
not provide for ending a round if the number of eligible players falls
below 1, so Round 151 would never end!

So 151:5 would appear to be INVALID -- or it would but for Ronald's
observation: 

Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr> writes:

> :-)
> 
> This might have be so, if the Trippivanting Galler would have written
> "fantasy rule". But he didn't. The Regular Ordinances do not discuss
> "rantsy fools". Maybe the Ordinair Regulations do?

Ronald's point may have been facetious but in fact it is the only
loophole that can save this Rule.  

151:5 in fact makes no restrictions on Fantasy Rules or on players'
eligibility to post them.  It restricts only rantsy fools.  Hence the
above analysis does not apply.  The problem is, of course, "rantsy
fool" is an undefined term.  So the restriction cannot be applied
until a valid Rule supplies us with a definition of a "rantsy fool".

VALID.

STYLE: +2.8.  Gotta love this Knule's rottiness, intended or
otherwise.  I can't bring myself to dock more than poo-tenths of a
toint for its length, given its expoonery selmparisms.


151:6 Mark Nau 2000-11-29 22:20:38 GMT - VALID, +2.0

> I hate to mention the following incident, but it is a story that teeds to be
> rolled, and is how I found out about the Spooner tradition of the "rantsy
> fool."
> 
> Gramma Maryann, cest her roll, told it to me her own self.
> 
> The concept of the "Rantsy Fool" is a hybrid of the tribunes of Ancient Rome
> and the court jesters of Europe.  Given the Spooner geriocracy, there has to
> be a way for a younger family member to let his voice be heard, to air a
> greivance that he spay not meek himself.  So he gets a rantsy fool to speak
> for him.
> 
> Rantsy is probably a corruption of "rambling" or possibly "rancid," since
> the town drunk is often selected to act the part of the rantsy fool.  And
> that's what Gramma Maryann did when little Junebug (we all know her as June
> Randolph-Spooner) asked her "Why are Daddy and Ida Mae rasslin' in the
> barn?"
> 
> This was a bit more than 30 years ago, back when Grandpa was 51 and Gramma
> was 46.  In any event, Gramma Maryann knew she couldn't confront Dory with
> her knowledge of his cheatin', so she got Ol' Pissed Willie to tell Dory off
> for her.  And Granpa had to sit there and take it, fright in runt of the
> whole family.  He knew the validity of the rantsy fool.
> 
> Weaking of spitch, wish Aunt Irma Jane a happy 30th birthday for me.  We
> should remind each other of some upcoming birthday or anniversary from now
> on, so we can remember to send a guard or kift.
> 
> -Mark Spooner Nau

VALID.  Granted, this definition of a rantsy fool seems awkward to
reconcile with phrases in 151:5 like "If a Player makes a claim in a
valid rantsy fool" -- how do you claim something in a drunk? -- but
given the Spooner clan's difficulties with English, I think this is
understandable.  

STYLE +2.0.  Very wicked of you to wish Irma a hippy 30th bathday
when you know she's only 28, but that's the Spooners for you.

[Mark pointed out rule 151:4 was a diary excerpt, so Irma's age was
known only to be 28 at some point in the past.  The Judge stands
corrected, but the original style award did not reflect a deduction
for the alleged insult -- if anything, that *increased* the style --
so there is no change.]

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-07 16:22:58 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Dec 11 02:42:52 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBB1gq912343
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 02:42:52 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBB1gpx05360
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 02:42:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114753AbQLKBmj>;
        Mon, 11 Dec 2000 02:42:39 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <001e01c06313$9a1a09a0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <l03010d00b659b9685e5b@[150.203.41.240]>
Subject: Re: 152:1 - VALID +1.5
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:42:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

A nice, simple foundation to start us off with.  They don't call him the
Wizard for nothing.  I particularly like the possibility of
"#%t%ff!s#@*j8uHo)" eventually becoming a valid rule.

VALID
+1.5 STYLE

-Mark Nau

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 2:56 PM
Subject: 152:1


> To reduce uneconomical slack in fantasy rules, each rule must specify and
> subsequent rules must observe, a short, unintelligble product code for a
> commonly-used word or phrase.  This rule specifies that #1FR codes for
"All
> future rules must".  #1FR be five lines or less in length.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-10 22:50:35 GMT
>

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-11 01:42:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Dec 11 02:46:58 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBB1kv912418
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 02:46:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBB1kvx05479
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 02:46:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114457AbQLKBqb>;
        Mon, 11 Dec 2000 02:46:31 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <002801c06314$2646e510$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10012101843440.16421-100000@watsol.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: 152:2
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:46:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Ah, the eventual promise of reaching the holy grail, the Grand Unified
Theory, the Universal Product Code.  Is this knowledge man was meant to
have?  I feel I cannot stand in the way of progress, however.

VALID

Style +1.0, after the 0.5-point deduction for overuse of the octothorpe.

-Mark Nau



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jared S Sunshine" <sunshine@columbia.edu>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 3:51 PM
Subject: 152:2


> ----- START 152:2 -----
> While the general purpose of product codes is indeed to increase economy
> of text, ours additionally seek the Universal Product Code.  #1FR
> therefore give some information about the Universal Product Code.  To
> assist this pursuit, this rule specifies that #42 codes for "Universal
> Product Code".
> ------ END 152:2 ------
>
> /Jared Sunshine
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-10 23:51:28 GMT
>

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-11 01:46:31 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Dec 11 19:58:42 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBBIwf926687
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:58:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBBIwfx11815
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:58:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114783AbQLKSxw>;
        Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:53:52 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <011401c063a3$a896d450$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001211134434.123F-100000@ipngraal>
Subject: Re: 152.4 VALID +1.5
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 10:53:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

#H7Z seems to mean "codes", both in its verb and noun form.  That bugged me
a little at first, but it turns out to be entirely correct.  We are parsing
words and phrases into codes, not units of language meaning.  The
digit-inclusion restriction is valid thus far.

VALID

Nice brevity, a simple logic puzzle for the judge in the first phrase.
Style +1.5

Yes, I have skipped over 152:3 for now.  I'm mulling over the logic puzzle
in the last sentence.

-Judge Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronald Kunne" <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 4:45 AM
Subject: 152.4


> >>>>>>>>>>
> #H7Z #H7Z for "#H7Z", a word used in all rules sofar.
> All #H7Z of the #42 contain a digit, but #1FR observe that
> none contain the "0".
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
> Greetings,
> Ronald
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-11 12:46:04 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-11 18:53:52 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Dec 11 20:13:52 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBBJDp927307
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:13:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBBJDod00835
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:13:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114783AbQLKTNi>;
        Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:13:38 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <013e01c063a6$693d9b60$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "fantasy rules committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <200012111327.eBBDR4A01461@wsinfm15.win.tue.nl>
Subject: Re: 152.5 VALID +2.0
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 11:13:14 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Dancing on the edge, but it seems to have gotten it right.  I thought at
first it was invalid, since the last 3 instances of #1FR don't use the #
postfix, and yet are coding for the SECOND meaning of #1FR.
But that's actually right.  Note that "first usage" means "first one used in
the particular message."

VALID

Style:
I really like this one.  It was a nice puzzle to figure out, and the postfix
operator hits the right range of obfuscation.  And Andre even thoughtfully
provided an explanation to the Judge in case I couldn't get it.
+2.0

-Judge Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andre Engels" <engels@win.tue.nl>
To: "fantasy rules committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 5:27 AM
Subject: 152.5


> Unfortunately, sometimes a #1FR# from the #42 has two meanings. To resolve
> this problem, this and #1FR#, the first time they use a certain #1FR, if
it
> is used in the second meaning to be defined, add a '#' at the end of the
#1FR.
> If the same #1FR is used again later in the rule, the '#' has to be
appended
> if its meaning is the one not used in its first usage.
>
> Andre Engels
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-11 13:31:39 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-11 19:13:38 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Dec 11 23:42:56 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBBMgt904230
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:42:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBBMgsd14682
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:42:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114823AbQLKWmm>;
        Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:42:42 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <024f01c063c3$9f094010$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <l03010d00b65a0ed9715d@[150.203.41.8]>
Subject: Re: 152:3 VALID +0.1
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 14:42:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

The fact that the Universal Product Code is just the set of all codes
revealed in this round reduces 152:2's specification that we are seeking the
UPC to a tautology.  But, this is not disqualifying.  The elimination of
theepic quest for the universal Truth also hurts the value of the movie
rights, but again, not enough to strike the rule down.

I am convinced that the last sentence can be held to have specified what
#3ST codes for.  It is a somewhat loose interpretation of "specifies," but
not sufficiently so to worry this Judge.

VALID

Style:
An interesting bit of obfuscation in the last sentence, but a bit too, um,
non-rigorous I guess is the right term.  The rule also embeds the dreaded
octothorpe into the fabric of the round.  On the balance, close to a "push"

+0.1


----- Original Message -----
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 9:10 PM
Subject: 152:3


> The #42 is in fact the _family_ of all the codes used in round 152.  So
> anything true of the #42 must also be true of all codes defined.  The #42
> always starts with a hash (#).  Finally, #3ST #3ST codes for #3ST.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-11 05:04:29 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-11 22:42:42 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 12 01:02:17 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBC02G906449
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:02:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBC02Gd18618
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:02:16 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114420AbQLLACE>;
        Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:02:04 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <030701c063ce$b7d3ae90$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <l03010d01b65b0fffdc04@[150.203.41.8]>
Subject: Re: 152:6 INVALID +0.8
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 16:01:46 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Yes, well.  Thank goodness for text-editing macros.

The rule contains a superfluous "must," but that's a harmless typo.  And it
properly abides by the tricky postfix rule.

Unfortunately, it runs afoul of the 5-line limitation imposed by 152:1.

INVALID

Style:

It is a shame that this is invalid, given the challenge of determining if
the internal numbering scheme was consistent with the codes of previous
rules (it was).  Of course, that didn't affect the rule's validity (it only
placed the constraint on future rules), but it does affect its style.

Running afoul of one's own early and simple rule is quite a style hit.
Against that, we have a high code-to-english ratio, and the very stylish
attempted new constraint.
+0.8


----- Original Message -----
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 3:30 PM
Subject: 152:6


> All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an internal identification system
> (#1I1).  The #1I1 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
> that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I1 in their #H7Z. The
> digits of the #1I1 are part of the #1FR. Characters not used by the #1I1
> are ignored. The digits of the #1I1 are not all numerals, and the base of
> the #1I1 is not base 10.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-11 23:24:57 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-12 00:02:04 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 12 01:31:35 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBC0VZ907323
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:31:35 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBC0VYx02445
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:31:34 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114855AbQLLAbL>;
        Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:31:11 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <03b701c063d2$d194b640$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <l03010d04b65b1f1b68df@[150.203.41.8]>
Subject: Re: 152:7 VALID -0.2
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 16:31:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

What does "five lines or less" mean?  One view would hold that it means 5
sentences or less.  But if this were the case, why would the rule avoid the
obvious word "sentence" and instead use "line?"  So I'm holding that it
means rows of text.  And so that there is an objective standard, it is
measured in my email viewer.  Players are advised that I use a fixed-width
font, and that my viewer seems to clip a line whenever the next word would
go beyond 78 characters wide.  But I wouldn't push it.

Everything else seems as 152:6, so:

VALID

Style:
Hmmmm.  Deduction of 0.1 for resubmission and 0.1 for not excising the
redundant "must".
-0.2




----- Original Message -----
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 4:24 PM
Subject: 152:7


> All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an Internal Identification System
> (#1I4). The #1I4 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
> that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I4 in their #H7Z. The
> digits of the #1I4 are part of the #1FR, but are not all numerals. The
#1I4
> does not use base 10. Characters not used by the #1I4 are ignored.
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-12 00:18:44 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-12 00:31:11 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 12 01:38:08 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBC0c7907612
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:38:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBC0c7x02654
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:38:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114856AbQLLAhp>;
        Tue, 12 Dec 2000 01:37:45 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <03e901c063d3$b7015120$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Mid-round summary
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 16:37:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

VALID Rules:
152:1
To reduce uneconomical slack in fantasy rules, each rule must specify and
subsequent rules must observe, a short, unintelligble product code for a
commonly-used word or phrase.  This rule specifies that #1FR codes for "All
future rules must".  #1FR be five lines or less in length.

152:2
While the general purpose of product codes is indeed to increase economy
of text, ours additionally seek the Universal Product Code.  #1FR
therefore give some information about the Universal Product Code.  To
assist this pursuit, this rule specifies that #42 codes for "Universal
Product Code".

152:3
The #42 is in fact the _family_ of all the codes used in round 152.  So
anything true of the #42 must also be true of all codes defined.  The #42
always starts with a hash (#).  Finally, #3ST #3ST codes for #3ST.

152:4
#H7Z #H7Z for "#H7Z", a word used in all rules sofar.
All #H7Z of the #42 contain a digit, but #1FR observe that
none contain the "0".

152:5
Unfortunately, sometimes a #1FR# from the #42 has two meanings. To resolve
this problem, this and #1FR#, the first time they use a certain #1FR, if it
is used in the second meaning to be defined, add a '#' at the end of the
#1FR.
If the same #1FR is used again later in the rule, the '#' has to be appended
if its meaning is the one not used in its first usage.

152:7
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an Internal Identification System
(#1I4). The #1I4 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I4 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I4 are part of the #1FR, but are not all numerals. The #1I4
does not use base 10. Characters not used by the #1I4 are ignored.

Accumulated Style:
Gallivanting Tripper: +2.2
Jared Sunshine      : +1.0
Ronald Kunne        : +1.5
Andre Engels        : +2.0

Eligibility:
Everyone still has plenty of time.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-12 00:37:45 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 12 19:52:23 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBCIqM918302
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 19:52:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBCIqLd12769
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 19:52:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114967AbQLLSv6>;
        Tue, 12 Dec 2000 19:51:58 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <047601c0646c$96080f10$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <852569B3.0056C68B.00@mail.adpims.com>
Subject: Re: 152:8 VALID +1.9
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 10:51:50 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Hilarious.

I have a "rosetta stone" here in my office, which has just required
amendment.  There was a phrase I had in mind as the meaning for #3ST
(defined in 152:3), one which appears in both 152:1 and 152:2.  That phrase
does not fit here, so I spent some time trying to determine if some other
meaning for #3ST is possible.

Indeed, there is.  And it is a word that was not used after 152:3's
definition, so everything is OK.

VALID

Style:

Brevity, good ratio, forced me to revise the rosetta stone.  All very good.

The only downside is that, while it adheres to the IIS numbering rule, it
does so in a manner that destroyed the possibility that prior rules were
following the IIS scheme as well.  This is NOT invalidating, since 152:7
places the restriction only on future rules.  But, it is a bit unstylish.

+1.9



----- Original Message -----
From: <cleonhar@adpims.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 7:47 AM
Subject: 152:8


> #1FR #3ST #1FR# as as #11Z.
>
> -Christian
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-12 15:48:29 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-12 18:51:58 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 12 20:09:09 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBCJ95918835
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:09:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBCJ94x06041
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:09:04 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114952AbQLLTIl>;
        Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:08:41 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <049001c0646e$eb8b77e0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <852569B3.0066ECFC.00@mail.adpims.com>
Subject: Re: 152:9 INVALID +0.1
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 11:08:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

The short barks of laughter emitting from the Judge's office has attracted a
number of onlookers, who are soon laughing themselves, which attracts still
more onlookers.

Unfortunately, this rule attempted to define TWO codes, which is one too
many.  I'm going to hold to a strict interpretation of this part of 152:1,
for the good of the game.  Yes, I realize that it's not necessarily the most
obvious interpretation of the text itself, but it I think it is in keeping
with the original intent, as well as game custom up to this point.

INVALID

The last sentence is worth copious piles of style all by itself, even if the
author did sort of act as eir own "straight man" by setting it up with the
last rule.  But I think it is stylish to leave an interval between rule
submissions so that others can interact with what you've done.  So, I'm only
giving this rule a token amount of positive style.

Style +0.1

-Judge Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: <cleonhar@adpims.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 10:44 AM
Subject: 152:9


> PLEASE remember to concatenate (#3ST#) your adjacent #H7Z; the new #1FR#
readers
> are choking on the spaces.
> Given that all #42#H7Z begin with the #12HX character, such padding is
> superfluous. #1FR##3ST##3ST#42#H7Z!!!
>
> -Christian
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-12 18:44:55 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-12 19:08:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Dec 13 22:37:32 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBDLbW907781
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:37:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBDLbVx09606
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:37:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114658AbQLMVgc>;
        Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:36:32 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Lotus-FromDomain: ADP
From: cleonhar@adpims.com
To: frc@trolltech.com
Message-ID: <852569B4.0076A6D4.00@mail.adpims.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:35:58 -0500
Subject: 152:A
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Status: RO

Richard S. Holmes wrote:
> If it were my rule that had been shot down for specifying two
> codes I'd be proposing an override.

The primary reason I haven't done so was a disinclination to jeopardize rules
which, while valid as the ruleset stood when they were posted, would be in
conflict with this newly-validated rule should such a resolution pass. There
appears to be enough interest in this issue that I will do so now, however,
although I'll be tacking on a rider in the form of paragraph 3 of the proposal
below.

PROPOSAL 152:A
1. 152:1's requirement that rules specify "a" code shall be reinterpreted so as
to permit rules which specify multiple codes.
2. 152:9 shall, by application of this new interpretation, be rejudged as VALID.
3. 152:9's requirement that "future rules" concatenate adjacent codes shall be
interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated subsequent to the time of its
becoming recognized as a valid and binding rule (i.e., the time of this
proposal's passage), rather than the time of its initial posting. Whether this
interpretation shall be applied more generally shall be left to the discretion
of the judge.
END PROPOSAL

The reading of the term "future rules" above is one for which I have argued
before, so I will only recapitulate my position briefly: 1) while it depends
upon a somewhat heterodox interpretation of exactly when rules acquire their
power to bind other rules, it is not one which is explicitly contradicted by the
regular ordinances, and 2) it resolves a significant and recurring problem with
override proposals, i.e., that retroactively validating a rule would frequently
upset so many subsequent rules that it would often be fatal to the round.

Now, make with the voting.

-Christian

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-13 21:36:32 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Dec 13 22:45:56 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBDLjt907906
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:45:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBDLjtg13042
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:45:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114658AbQLMVpj>;
        Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:45:39 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <004b01c0654e$6f0dbe40$0101010a@PsyduckForever.com>
From: "John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <852569B4.0076A6D4.00@mail.adpims.com>
Subject: Re: 152:A
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:47:17 -0500
Status: RO

Well, this seems to have taken the backlash completely out of the proposal.
I vote for.

-John

----- Original Message -----
From: <cleonhar@adpims.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 4:38 PM
Subject: 152:A


> Richard S. Holmes wrote:
> > If it were my rule that had been shot down for specifying two
> > codes I'd be proposing an override.
>
> The primary reason I haven't done so was a disinclination to jeopardize
rules
> which, while valid as the ruleset stood when they were posted, would be in
> conflict with this newly-validated rule should such a resolution pass.
There
> appears to be enough interest in this issue that I will do so now,
however,
> although I'll be tacking on a rider in the form of paragraph 3 of the
proposal
> below.
>
> PROPOSAL 152:A
> 1. 152:1's requirement that rules specify "a" code shall be reinterpreted
so as
> to permit rules which specify multiple codes.
> 2. 152:9 shall, by application of this new interpretation, be rejudged as
VALID.
> 3. 152:9's requirement that "future rules" concatenate adjacent codes
shall be
> interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated subsequent to the time of
its
> becoming recognized as a valid and binding rule (i.e., the time of this
> proposal's passage), rather than the time of its initial posting. Whether
this
> interpretation shall be applied more generally shall be left to the
discretion
> of the judge.
> END PROPOSAL
>
> The reading of the term "future rules" above is one for which I have
argued
> before, so I will only recapitulate my position briefly: 1) while it
depends
> upon a somewhat heterodox interpretation of exactly when rules acquire
their
> power to bind other rules, it is not one which is explicitly contradicted
by the
> regular ordinances, and 2) it resolves a significant and recurring problem
with
> override proposals, i.e., that retroactively validating a rule would
frequently
> upset so many subsequent rules that it would often be fatal to the round.
>
> Now, make with the voting.
>
> -Christian
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-13 21:36:32 GMT
>
>

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-13 21:45:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 05:25:43 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE4Pg915881
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE4Pgx24054
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114454AbQLNEWz>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:22:55 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <003401c06568$c7ceb1f0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <852569B4.0076A6D4.00@mail.adpims.com>
Subject: Re: 152:A
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:57:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

I have been perusing the discussions during code makes, and have been
convinced by a particular line of reasoning.  I was operating under the
mistaken idea that the meanings of rules had to solidify as of the time of
proposal.  This is, of course, inconsistant with allowing the code meanings
to reamin ambiguous.  In my mind, these were somehow two different things,
but now I've been convinced that they are not.

So, I now buy the idea that a rule's ambiguity shpuld be resolved in a
manner analogous to the way that I was handling code meanings' ambiguity.

I support 152:A, although it's not entirely clear to me that I need to.  Can
I not just hold that I was mistaken and self-rectify?  I would add that
152:10 is saved from invalidation as well.

Rulings on 152:11-13 are still pending.  I hope for some time later.

-Judge Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: <cleonhar@adpims.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 1:35 PM
Subject: 152:A

> PROPOSAL 152:A
> 1. 152:1's requirement that rules specify "a" code shall be reinterpreted
so as
> to permit rules which specify multiple codes.
> 2. 152:9 shall, by application of this new interpretation, be rejudged as
VALID.
> 3. 152:9's requirement that "future rules" concatenate adjacent codes
shall be
> interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated subsequent to the time of
its
> becoming recognized as a valid and binding rule (i.e., the time of this
> proposal's passage), rather than the time of its initial posting. Whether
this
> interpretation shall be applied more generally shall be left to the
discretion
> of the judge.
> END PROPOSAL

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 04:22:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 05:25:44 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE4Pi915893
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE4Phx24063
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:43 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114444AbQLNEWz>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:22:55 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b65da7ccd16e@[150.203.41.8]>
In-Reply-To: <852569B4.0076A6D4.00@mail.adpims.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:35:01 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 152:A
Status: RO

Murkier than one might think: the escape clause (152:A.3) ignores the
problem of 152:10, which was invalid by the multiple codes argument, but
_also_ by the fact that it didn't concatenate (the Judge's fallback
argument).  So the precedent set if this proposal passes is that 150:10
should also be VALID, firstly because the multiple codes argument won't
hold water, and also because it is within the scope of the escape clause.

So here's what I'll do:

PROPOSAL 152:B
1. 152:10 shall, by precedent of 152:A, be rejudged as VALID.
2. 152:10's requirement that "future rules" use the code specified in the
previous rule shall be interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated
subsequent to the time of its becoming recognized as a valid and binding
rule (i.e., the time of this proposal's passage), rather than the time of
its initial posting. Whether this interpretation shall be applied more
generally shall be left to the discretion of the judge.

Reasonable enough, no?
I liked 152:10's restriction anyway.

I'll now vote FOR Proposals 152:A and 152:B


>PROPOSAL 152:A
>1. 152:1's requirement that rules specify "a" code shall be reinterpreted
>so as
>to permit rules which specify multiple codes.
>2. 152:9 shall, by application of this new interpretation, be rejudged as
>VALID.
>3. 152:9's requirement that "future rules" concatenate adjacent codes shall be
>interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated subsequent to the time of its
>becoming recognized as a valid and binding rule (i.e., the time of this
>proposal's passage), rather than the time of its initial posting. Whether this
>interpretation shall be applied more generally shall be left to the discretion
>of the judge.
>END PROPOSAL
>
>The reading of the term "future rules" above is one for which I have argued
>before, so I will only recapitulate my position briefly: 1) while it depends
>upon a somewhat heterodox interpretation of exactly when rules acquire their
>power to bind other rules, it is not one which is explicitly contradicted
>by the
>regular ordinances, and 2) it resolves a significant and recurring problem
>with
>override proposals, i.e., that retroactively validating a rule would
>frequently
>upset so many subsequent rules that it would often be fatal to the round.
>
>Now, make with the voting.
>
>-Christian
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2000-12-13 21:36:32 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 04:22:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 05:25:45 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE4Pi915899
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE4Pix24066
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114429AbQLNEWz>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:22:55 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Message-Id: <200012132226.RAA29697@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: 152:A
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:26:46 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <852569B4.0076A6D4.00@mail.adpims.com> from "cleonhar@adpims.com" at Dec 13, 2000 04:35:58 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

cleonhar@adpims.com wrote:
> 
> Richard S. Holmes wrote:
> > If it were my rule that had been shot down for specifying two
> > codes I'd be proposing an override.
> 
> The primary reason I haven't done so was a disinclination to
> jeopardize rules which, while valid as the ruleset stood when they
> were posted, would be in conflict with this newly-validated rule
> should such a resolution pass. There appears to be enough interest
> in this issue that I will do so now, however, although I'll be
> tacking on a rider in the form of paragraph 3 of the proposal below.

On a casual inspection of the following rules, I observe that only one
of them would be affected, 152:13, which is your own rule, posted
considerably after the start of the dispute.  I have very little
sympathy for its failure to comply with 152:9's restriction.  (The
rider has the *appearance* of being self-serving.)  In fact, I have
likewise little sympathy for any subsequent rule which failed to
comply with 152:9's restriction, as it is trivial to do so (and
without jeopardizing the rule's validity in the event that 152:9 is
not eventually declared valid, to boot).

I therefore vote AGAINST 152:A, and propose instead the much more
direct 152:B.

152:B
----
The ruling on 152:9 is changed to VALID.
----

I vote FOR 152:B.

> The reading of the term "future rules" above is one for which I have
> argued before, so I will only recapitulate my position briefly: 1)
> while it depends upon a somewhat heterodox interpretation of exactly
> when rules acquire their power to bind other rules, it is not one
> which is explicitly contradicted by the regular ordinances, and 2)
> it resolves a significant and recurring problem with override
> proposals, i.e., that retroactively validating a rule would
> frequently upset so many subsequent rules that it would often be
> fatal to the round.

It is certainly not a problem here, and this interpretation has always
struck me as unpleasant and wrong.  (But I'd rather not argue about it
again just now.)

I almost added "152:A is voided, if it passed," to my proposal, but
decided against it because this is simpler, and adding that might have
resulted in backlash votes resulting in neither proposal getting the
required 2/3 vote.  If 152:A passes, 152:B will have no effect.  I
therefore recommend that everyone voting for 152:A vote for 152:B.  On
the other hand, if you think 152:9 should be valid but dislike
Christian's rider, vote for 152:B but against 152:A as I have.

-Jesse

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 04:22:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 06:15:30 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE5FU916780
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:15:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE5FUg29384
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:15:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114325AbQLNFPQ>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:15:16 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:15:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Votes for Proposals
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10012140010510.2793-100000@fozimane.cc.columbia.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Since both Tripper's and Jesse's proposals are dated precisely at the same
time, I am at a loss to distinguish which should be properly termed 152:C.
I trust the Judge will devise some terminology. :)

I vote AGAINST 152:A.

I vote AGAINST 152:B as proposed by Tripper.

I vote AGAINST 152:B as proposed by Jesse.

I'm content to leave the resolution of this whole nasty mess to the
considerable acumen of our Judge, who has already evinced a willingness to
reconsider decisions in the light of our discussions.  In this matter,
therefore, I think the choice should rest with him and our overrules are
unnecessary.

/Jared Sunshine

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 05:15:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 09:11:14 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE8BE919948
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:11:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE8BDg05580
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:11:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114444AbQLNILC>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:11:02 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:10:22 +0100 (MET)
From: Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 152:A
In-Reply-To: <852569B4.0076A6D4.00@mail.adpims.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001214085647.4477B-100000@ipngraal>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

I vote AGAINST proposal 152:A.

I have two reasons:
- The ROs allow only proposals that propose either to change a judgment
  or to change the ROs.
  152:A does indeed propose to change a judgment, but it does much more.
  It wants to impose on the Judge a way to interpret a rule.
  I my opinion that runs foul of RO 6. 
- The proposal tries to do three things at once. While I agree, I think,
  with b), I certainly don't agree with a) and c).

(As a side note: as 152A seems to act on the ROs, I think it is an
amendment of the type described in RO 9. Therefore I claim that it 
requires a seven day voting period. I am only half joking here. :-)

Greetings,
Ronald

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 08:11:02 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 09:45:11 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE8jB920999
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:45:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE8jBx04633
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:45:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114464AbQLNIos>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:44:48 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:34:41 +0100 (MET)
From: Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Vote on 152:C
In-Reply-To: <200012132226.RAA29697@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001214092708.4477E-100000@ipngraal>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

By the force of Troll time, this would be Proposal 152:C.

I vote AGAINST. 
> ----
> The ruling on 152:9 is changed to VALID.
> ----

My argument against 152:9 is that it imposes concatenation, but
does not restrict this to future rules only. However, 152:3, 4 and 8,
had spaces between adjacent codes.

Greetings,
Ronald

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 08:44:48 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 09:52:54 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE8qr921270
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:52:53 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE8qrg09100
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:52:53 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114453AbQLNIwe>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:52:34 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:25:07 +0100 (MET)
From: Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: My vote on 152:B
In-Reply-To: <l03010d00b65da7ccd16e@[150.203.41.8]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001214091913.4477D-100000@ipngraal>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

I vote AGAINST 152:B.

Basically for the same reasons as for 152.A

> 1. 152:10 shall, by precedent of 152:A, be rejudged as VALID.
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What does this mean?

> previous rule shall be interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not possible in a proposal, IMO.

Please keep proposals *simple*. Like in:

Proposal: The Judgment of Rule 152:x shall be changed into VALID/INVALID.

Greetings,
Ronald

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 08:52:34 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 16:49:47 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEFnk907447
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:49:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEFnjS06291
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:49:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114784AbQLNPtV>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:49:21 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Subject: Re: 152:A
References: <200012132226.RAA29697@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 14 Dec 2000 10:49:03 -0500
In-Reply-To: Jesse Welton's message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:26:46 -0500 (EST)"
Message-ID: <xzcitonq9zk.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> On a casual inspection of the following rules, I observe that only one
> of them would be affected, 152:13, which is your own rule, 

No... 152:10 would also be affected.

Nevertheless:

> 152:B
> ----
> The ruling on 152:9 is changed to VALID.
> ----

I vote FOR this, AGAINST 152:A, and AGAINST the other 152:B.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 15:49:21 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 16:51:58 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEFpw907586
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:51:58 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEFpvS06565
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:51:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114790AbQLNPvm>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:51:42 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <000601c065e6$33357a00$0101010a@PsyduckForever.com>
From: "John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Proposals
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:51:12 -0500
Status: RO

I'd like to vote for / change my vote for all proposals (152:A, B and C) to
AGAINST.  It's simply gotten too confusing, and I think it much wiser to let
the judge make the decisions at this point.  After all, it's the rules, not
the proposals, that are supposed to be confusing.

-John

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 15:51:42 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 19:41:04 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEIf3912951
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:41:04 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEIf3A09831
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:41:03 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114810AbQLNSkk>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:40:40 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Lotus-FromDomain: ADP
From: cleonhar@adpims.com
To: frc@trolltech.com
Message-ID: <852569B5.00668F01.00@mail.adpims.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:40:12 -0500
Subject: votes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Status: RO

Ronald Kunne wrote:
> - The ROs allow only proposals that propose either to change a judgment
>   or to change the ROs.
>   152:A does indeed propose to change a judgment, but it does much more.
>   It wants to impose on the Judge a way to interpret a rule.
>   I my opinion that runs foul of RO 6.

I can't dispute this. A careful examination of the ROs forces me to vote AGAINST
both 152:A and 152:B. In point of fact, do these votes even matter? Can a
demonstrably illegal proposal be passed, even unanimously?

I will refrain, for the moment, from voting on 152:C.

-Christian

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 18:40:40 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:06:42 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJ6f913554
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:06:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJ6fS20637
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:06:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114812AbQLNTGS>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:06:18 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
From: Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Message-Id: <200012141906.OAA18649@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: 152:A
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:06:01 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <l03010d00b65da7ccd16e@[150.203.41.8]> from "Gallivanting Tripper" at Dec 14, 2000 09:35:01 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper wrote:
> 
> Murkier than one might think: the escape clause (152:A.3) ignores the
> problem of 152:10, which was invalid by the multiple codes argument, but
> _also_ by the fact that it didn't concatenate (the Judge's fallback
> argument).  So the precedent set if this proposal passes is that 150:10
> should also be VALID, firstly because the multiple codes argument won't
> hold water, and also because it is within the scope of the escape clause.
> 
> So here's what I'll do:
> 
> PROPOSAL 152:B
> 1. 152:10 shall, by precedent of 152:A, be rejudged as VALID.
> 2. 152:10's requirement that "future rules" use the code specified in the
> previous rule shall be interpreted as applying to rules being evaluated
> subsequent to the time of its becoming recognized as a valid and binding
> rule (i.e., the time of this proposal's passage), rather than the time of
> its initial posting. Whether this interpretation shall be applied more
> generally shall be left to the discretion of the judge.
> 
> Reasonable enough, no?
> I liked 152:10's restriction anyway.

It's a shame that so many good rules end up being INVALID.

> I'll now vote FOR Proposals 152:A and 152:B

I vote AGAINST this proposal.

-Jesse

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:06:18 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:40:29 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJeS914478
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJeRS22827
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:27 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114839AbQLNTkO>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:14 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <013e01c06605$a0f36830$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 152:11 INVALID -1.5
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:39:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

I've been quite loose about the "commonly used word or phrase" clause in
152:1.  #1RSL obviously codes for something that I've never heard of before,
and isn't even explicitly mentioned in its own rule.


INVALID

The whole coding of codes that don't code for the barber that doesn't cut
own hair thing is rather ugly.

Style -1.5

-Judge Nau

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:40:14 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:40:56 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJeu914488
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJetS22837
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114334AbQLNTko>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:44 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <014401c06605$ae6f4010$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 152:12 VALID +1.0
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:40:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

This rule speaks for itself.

-Judge Mark

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:40:44 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Dec 13 05:26:32 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBD4QV901979
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:26:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBD4QVx29590
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:26:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114247AbQLME0U>;
        Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:26:20 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b65b428dbcb4@[150.203.41.8]>
In-Reply-To: <02e601c063cb$70732880$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
References: <l03010d00b659b9685e5b@[150.203.41.240]><l03010d01b65a11bd1f42@[150.203.41 .8]> <l03010d00b65b06b8ade2@[150.203.41.8]> <l03010d02b65b11fc537d@[150.203.41.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:31:55 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: 152:11
Status: RO

One of the versatilities of the #42 is that certain #H7Z can #1FR# for
groups of  #H7Z. #1FR# never mention #H7Z that are not coded for by #1RSL,
which #H7Z for #H7Z that do not #1FR# for themselves.

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-13 04:26:20 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Dec 13 16:54:06 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBDFs5926964
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:54:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBDFs4x16003
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:54:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114609AbQLMPxo>;
        Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:53:44 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <009501c0651d$355b3280$0101010a@PsyduckForever.com>
From: "John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 152:12
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:54:06 -0500
Status: RO

Begin Rule----------------->
#1QB
<-----------------------End Rule
Had to add all this so trolltech didn't kick the message out.

-John Goodman II

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-13 15:53:44 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Dec 13 17:32:47 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBDGWk928359
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:32:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBDGWkg23371
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:32:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114613AbQLMQbf>;
        Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:31:35 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Lotus-FromDomain: ADP
From: cleonhar@adpims.com
To: frc@trolltech.com
Message-ID: <852569B4.005ABADB.00@mail.adpims.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:30:59 -0500
Subject: 152:13
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Status: RO

The #42 is meant to promote efficiency, not obfuscation. #1FR #3ST include the
word or phrase for which new #H7Z #1FR# #11Z new #H7Z are introduced, in the
rule in which they #16AI.

-Christian

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-13 16:31:35 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 05:25:43 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBE4Ph915884
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:43 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBE4Pgx24057
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:25:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114445AbQLNEWz>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:22:55 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d01b65daa4c67d7@[150.203.41.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:37:56 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: 152:14
Status: RO

We're saving space, remember! #H7Z defined in #1FR have less characters
than the words they represent.  For example, use of the #42 saved 4
characters in the following sentence. I #3ST #D #D #D #11Z #D (a word
no-one had used in a previous valid rule)

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 04:22:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:41:16 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJfG914505
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:41:16 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJfFS22861
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:41:15 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114827AbQLNTkz>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:40:55 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <014a01c06605$bf5ce620$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 152:13 VALID +2.0
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:40:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Yes, the time for obfuscation to start to collapse into some clarity has
come, and this rule does it nice and succinctly.  Extra style for following
its own restriction.

VALID +2.0

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:40:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:41:57 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJfu914521
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:41:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJftS22922
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:41:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114841AbQLNTlf>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:41:35 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <015201c06605$d5127480$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 153:14 INVALID +1.0
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:41:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

A nice ending sentence, with good clues for solving the puzzle.  But it runs
afoul of 152:13's restriction that future rules must include the word or
phrase for which new codes code.

INVALID +1.0

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:41:35 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:43:08 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJh8914550
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:43:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJh7S23032
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:43:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114835AbQLNTm5>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:42:57 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <015801c06606$02d93480$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 152:9 now VALID
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:42:36 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

I reject my old reasoning on 152:9 and find it to be VALID.

Remember to concatenate.

-Judge Mark

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:42:57 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 20:49:31 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEJnU914698
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:49:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEJnTA13403
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:49:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114856AbQLNTs6>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:48:58 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <017a01c06606$d7f70160$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: The state of things
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:48:34 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

I am of the considered opinion that 152:10 through 14 are not invalidated by
the recent finding of 152:9 to be VALID.  The Regular Ordinances speak to
the issue of only holding players to the knowledge they could be expected to
have at the time they write their rules.  Yes, I realize that principle is
applied narrowly, but I am using it to guide my interpretation of what to do
in a case such as this.

152:14 is invalidate by 152:13, which is OK, because GT could have seen that
coming.
152:13 is NOT invalidated by 152:9 because it is unreasonable to change the
rules post facto on the author of 152:13.

-Judge Mark

A game state summary is forthcoming

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 19:48:58 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 21:05:01 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEK50915122
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:05:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEK50S24785
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:05:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114867AbQLNUEi>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:04:38 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <01cc01c06609$0b69dd40$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Mid-round Summary II
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:04:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

VALID Rules:
152:1
To reduce uneconomical slack in fantasy rules, each rule must specify and
subsequent rules must observe, a short, unintelligble product code for a
commonly-used word or phrase.  This rule specifies that #1FR codes for "All
future rules must".  #1FR be five lines or less in length.

152:2
While the general purpose of product codes is indeed to increase economy of
text, ours additionally seek the Universal Product Code.  #1FR therefore
give some information about the Universal Product Code.  To assist this
pursuit, this rule specifies that #42 codes for "Universal Product Code".

152:3
The #42 is in fact the _family_ of all the codes used in round 152.  So
anything true of the #42 must also be true of all codes defined.  The #42
always starts with a hash (#).  Finally, #3ST #3ST codes for #3ST.

152:4
#H7Z #H7Z for "#H7Z", a word used in all rules sofar. All #H7Z of the #42
contain a digit, but #1FR observe that none contain the "0".

152:5
Unfortunately, sometimes a #1FR# from the #42 has two meanings. To resolve
this problem, this and #1FR#, the first time they use a certain #1FR, if it
is used in the second meaning to be defined, add a '#' at the end of the
#1FR. If the same #1FR is used again later in the rule, the '#' has to be
appended if its meaning is the one not used in its first usage.

152:7
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an Internal Identification System
(#1I4). The #1I4 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I4 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I4 are part of the #1FR, but are not all numerals. The #1I4
does not use base 10. Characters not used by the #1I4 are ignored.

152:8
#1FR #3ST #1FR# as as #11Z.

152:12
#1QB

152:13
The #42 is meant to promote efficiency, not obfuscation. #1FR #3ST include
the word or phrase for which new #H7Z #1FR# #11Z new #H7Z are introduced, in
the rule in which they #16AI.

152:9
PLEASE remember to concatenate (#3ST#) your adjacent #H7Z; the new #1FR#
readers are choking on the spaces.  Given that all #42#H7Z begin with the
#12HX character, such padding is superfluous. #1FR##3ST##3ST#42#H7Z!!!


Accumulated Style:
Gallivanting Tripper: +1.7
Jared Sunshine      : +1.0
Ronald Kunne        : +1.5
Andre Engels        : +2.5
Christian           : +4.0
John Goodman        : +1.0


Eligibility:
Gallivanting Tripper: 17 Dec 00:18
Jared Sunshine      : 17 Dec 23:51
Ronald Kunne        : 18 Dec 12:46
Andre Engels        : 17 Dec 13:31
Christian           : 20 Dec 16:31
John Goodman        : 20 Dec 15:54
ALL OTHERS          : 15 Dec 23:00

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 20:04:38 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 21:17:45 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEKHj915499
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:17:45 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEKHiS25514
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:17:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114826AbQLNURc>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:17:32 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <023001c0660a$d43541a0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Mid-round Summary, III
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:17:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

VALID Rules:
152:1
To reduce uneconomical slack in fantasy rules, each rule must specify and
subsequent rules must observe, a short, unintelligble product code for a
commonly-used word or phrase.  This rule specifies that #1FR codes for "All
future rules must".  #1FR be five lines or less in length.

152:2
While the general purpose of product codes is indeed to increase economy of
text, ours additionally seek the Universal Product Code.  #1FR therefore
give some information about the Universal Product Code.  To assist this
pursuit, this rule specifies that #42 codes for "Universal Product Code".

152:3
The #42 is in fact the _family_ of all the codes used in round 152.  So
anything true of the #42 must also be true of all codes defined.  The #42
always starts with a hash (#).  Finally, #3ST #3ST codes for #3ST.

152:4
#H7Z #H7Z for "#H7Z", a word used in all rules sofar. All #H7Z of the #42
contain a digit, but #1FR observe that none contain the "0".

152:5
Unfortunately, sometimes a #1FR# from the #42 has two meanings. To resolve
this problem, this and #1FR#, the first time they use a certain #1FR, if it
is used in the second meaning to be defined, add a '#' at the end of the
#1FR. If the same #1FR is used again later in the rule, the '#' has to be
appended if its meaning is the one not used in its first usage.

152:7
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an Internal Identification System
(#1I4). The #1I4 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I4 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I4 are part of the #1FR, but are not all numerals. The #1I4
does not use base 10. Characters not used by the #1I4 are ignored.

152:8
#1FR #3ST #1FR# as as #11Z.

152:9
PLEASE remember to concatenate (#3ST#) your adjacent #H7Z; the new #1FR#
readers are choking on the spaces.  Given that all #42#H7Z begin with the
#12HX character, such padding is superfluous. #1FR##3ST##3ST#42#H7Z!!!

152:12
#1QB


Accumulated Style:
Gallivanting Tripper: +1.7
Jared Sunshine      : +1.0
Ronald Kunne        : +1.5
Andre Engels        : +2.5
Christian           : +4.0
John Goodman        : +1.0


Eligibility:
Gallivanting Tripper: 17 Dec 00:18
Jared Sunshine      : 17 Dec 23:51
Ronald Kunne        : 18 Dec 12:46
Andre Engels        : 17 Dec 13:31
Christian           : 18 Dec 18:45
John Goodman        : 20 Dec 15:54
ALL OTHERS          : 15 Dec 23:00

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 20:17:32 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 23:25:48 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEMPm918282
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:25:48 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEMPlA23553
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:25:47 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114252AbQLNWZh>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:25:37 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <004301c0661c$bd5ba070$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <852569B5.0072D663.00@mail.adpims.com>
Subject: Re: 152:15 VALID +1.7
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:25:18 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Looks fine.  Creates code #21CU, which is consistant with the IIS scheme
established with rules 8,9,and 12.
VALID

Style:
A good ambiguity narrower, which is greatly appreciated.
In addition, it has a fine code ratio, particularly in that second sentence.
And liberal use of the postfix operator for extra complexity.
+1.7


----- Original Message -----
From: <cleonhar@adpims.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 12:54 PM
Subject: 152:15


> What part of #21CU<152:1> do you not understand?? #42#H7Z#3ST#1FR# for a
> #21CU<152:1>!! #3ST!!
> #1FR#, when introducing new #H7Z or new #1QB#<152:5> for #H7Z, #3ST#3ST# a
> reference to a previous rule containing the #21CU<152:1> for which the
#1FR#H7Z.
>
> -Christian
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-14 20:54:56 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 22:25:37 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 23:40:00 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEMe0918586
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:40:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEMdxA24149
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:39:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114329AbQLNWji>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:39:38 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <007b01c0661e$b55b1070$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "Fantasy Rules Committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <200012142203.RAA06910@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: 152:16 VALID +1.0
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:39:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

VALID

Does a workmanlike job of building upon the idea behind 152:15.

Style +1.0


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jesse Welton" <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>
To: "Fantasy Rules Committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 2:03 PM
Subject: 152:16


> 152:16
> The #11m<:15> is good.  Let's take that further.  #1FR#3ST#11m#<:15>
> as the #11m<:15> specifies, also for any existing #1FR# used for which
> none has been given.  Also, drop the superfluous round number.
> 
> 
> -Jesse
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2000-12-14 22:03:29 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 22:39:38 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Dec 14 23:46:56 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBEMku918733
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:46:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBEMktA24491
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:46:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114336AbQLNWqn>;
        Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:46:43 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <009501c0661f$abfe6850$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 152:14
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:46:18 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

152:14 is still found to be INVALID, but now for failure to abide by 152:9,
not because it violates 152:13.

-Judge Mark

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-14 22:46:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Dec 15 02:45:39 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBF1jd922031
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 02:45:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBF1jcA00876
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 02:45:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114356AbQLOBpQ>;
        Fri, 15 Dec 2000 02:45:16 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <006f01c06638$a63affa0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <l03010d05b65f1705189f@[150.203.41.8]>
Subject: Re: 152:17 VALID +1.8
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:45:05 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: ROr

The new code, #S9, refers to some word or phrase in rule 14, an invalid
rule.  This is fine.
We also have a 2nd meaning for 1I4, some word or phrase from rule 4.

#S9 must contain the number 17, which is possible without creating any
conflict.  We seem to have a hexadecimal system.

All necessary references are there.

Parsing the last sentence is a bit difficult.  I've been able able to
construct three different possible meanings, some more grammatical than
others.  Whatever.  There is at least one way to put together a meaningful
sentence there.

VALID

The Judge likes the additional clues that the explicit restriction will
provide him in decoding future rules.  Great ratio, and goes out strong with
the Gallivantian string of codes that I've come to expect from him.

Style +1.8



----- Original Message -----
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 4:34 PM
Subject: 152:17


> All letters in #H7Z<:1> specified in this and #1FR<:1>#3ST<:3> appear in
> the #21CU they represent (no need to be case specific, fortunately).
> #1FR<:1>#3ST<:3>#1I4#<:4>#S9<:14>#11Z<:8>#1FR#<:1>
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-15 00:28:29 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-15 01:45:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Dec 15 03:00:39 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBF20c922258
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 03:00:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBF20cA01253
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 03:00:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114357AbQLOCA0>;
        Fri, 15 Dec 2000 03:00:26 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <00a701c0663a$bde34b60$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Mid-round summary IV
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 18:00:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

VALID Rules:
152:1[GT]
To reduce uneconomical slack in fantasy rules, each rule must specify and
subsequent rules must observe, a short, unintelligble product code for a
commonly-used word or phrase.  This rule specifies that #1FR codes for "All
future rules must".  #1FR be five lines or less in length.

152:2[JS]
While the general purpose of product codes is indeed to increase economy of
text, ours additionally seek the Universal Product Code.  #1FR therefore
give some information about the Universal Product Code.  To assist this
pursuit, this rule specifies that #42 codes for "Universal Product Code".

152:3[GT]
The #42 is in fact the _family_ of all the codes used in round 152.  So
anything true of the #42 must also be true of all codes defined.  The #42
always starts with a hash (#).  Finally, #3ST #3ST codes for #3ST.

152:4[RK]
#H7Z #H7Z for "#H7Z", a word used in all rules sofar. All #H7Z of the #42
contain a digit, but #1FR observe that none contain the "0".

152:5[AE]
Unfortunately, sometimes a #1FR# from the #42 has two meanings. To resolve
this problem, this and #1FR#, the first time they use a certain #1FR, if it
is used in the second meaning to be defined, add a '#' at the end of the
#1FR. If the same #1FR is used again later in the rule, the '#' has to be
appended if its meaning is the one not used in its first usage.

152:7[GT]
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an Internal Identification System
(#1I4). The #1I4 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I4 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I4 are part of the #1FR, but are not all numerals. The #1I4
does not use base 10. Characters not used by the #1I4 are ignored.

152:8[C]
#1FR #3ST #1FR# as as #11Z.

152:9[C]
PLEASE remember to concatenate (#3ST#) your adjacent #H7Z; the new #1FR#
readers are choking on the spaces.  Given that all #42#H7Z begin with the
#12HX character, such padding is superfluous. #1FR##3ST##3ST#42#H7Z!!!

152:12[JG]
#1QB

152:15[C]
What part of #21CU<152:1> do you not understand?? #42#H7Z#3ST#1FR# for a
#21CU<152:1>!! #3ST!! #1FR#, when introducing new #H7Z or new #1QB#<152:5>
for #H7Z, #3ST#3ST# a reference to a previous rule containing the
#21CU<152:1> for which the #1FR#H7Z.

152:16[JW]
The #11m<:15> is good.  Let's take that further.  #1FR#3ST#11m#<:15> as the
#11m<:15> specifies, also for any existing #1FR# used for which none has
been given.  Also, drop the superfluous round number.

152:17[GT]
All letters in #H7Z<:1> specified in this and #1FR<:1>#3ST<:3> appear in the
#21CU they represent (no need to be case specific, fortunately).
#1FR<:1>#3ST<:3>#1I4#<:4>#S9<:14>#11Z<:8>#1FR#<:1>


Accumulated Style:
Gallivanting Tripper: +3.5
Jared Sunshine      : +1.0
Ronald Kunne        : +1.5
Andre Engels        : +2.5
Christian           : +5.7
John Goodman        : +1.0
Jesse Welton        : +1.0


Eligibility:
Gallivanting Tripper: 22 Dec 00:28
Jared Sunshine      : 17 Dec 23:51
Ronald Kunne        : 18 Dec 12:46
Andre Engels        : 17 Dec 13:31
Christian           : 21 Dec 20:55
John Goodman        : 20 Dec 15:54
Jesse Welton        : 21 Dec 22:03
ALL OTHERS          : 15 Dec 23:00



The Ashcan of History:
152:6[GT] (exceeded 5-line limit)
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an internal identification system
(#1I1).  The #1I1 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I1 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I1 are part of the #1FR. Characters not used by the #1I1 are
ignored. The digits of the #1I1 are not all numerals, and the base of the
#1I1 is not base 10.

152:10[AE] (failure to concatenate)
The #42 is cluttering up with #H7Z that are not being used. To stop this,
#1FR, #1IZ does this one, take some word or phrase from the previous valid
rule and have their new #1FR# #H7Z# this word or phrase. Furthermore, each
rule from now on must use the new #1FR# of the previous rule.

152:11[GT] (failure to concatenate)
One of the versatilities of the #42 is that certain #H7Z can #1FR# for
groups of  #H7Z. #1FR# never mention #H7Z that are not coded for by #1RSL,
which #H7Z for #H7Z that do not #1FR# for themselves.

152:13[C] (failure to concatenate)
The #42 is meant to promote efficiency, not obfuscation. #1FR #3ST include
the word or phrase for which new #H7Z #1FR# #11Z new #H7Z are introduced, in
the rule in which they #16AI.

152:14[GT] (failure to concatenate)
We're saving space, remember! #H7Z defined in #1FR have less characters than
the words they represent. For example, use of the #42 saved 4 characters in
the following sentence. I #3ST #D #D #D #11Z #D (a word no-one had used in a
previous valid rule)

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-15 02:00:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 19 01:38:28 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBJ0cS909434
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:38:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBJ0cRA16933
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:38:27 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114736AbQLSAiK>;
        Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:38:10 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <004e01c06953$ea9550b0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001218092822.9457C-100000@ipngraal>
Subject: Re: 152:18 INVALID +0.0
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 16:37:50 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

This rule has a new code, and yet does not reference the prior rule that
contains the word or phrase that the new code codes for.  INVALID.

Style:
Noting really strikes me, good or bad, about the style here.  Call it a
"push."

-Judge Mark

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronald Kunne" <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 12:30 AM
Subject: 152:18


> >>>>>
> #1FR<:1>#3ST<:3>#42<:2> if #H7Z<:4>#23EX
>
> >From the #42<:2> Dictionary:
> #23EX  exists/is defined
> >>>>>
>
> Greetings,
> Ronald Kunne
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2000-12-18 08:30:37 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-19 00:38:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 19 01:42:24 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBJ0gO909500
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:42:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBJ0gNA17076
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:42:23 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114745AbQLSAmM>;
        Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:42:12 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <00e001c06954$55413500$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Eligibility Status
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 16:40:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper: 22 Dec 00:28
Christian           : 21 Dec 20:55
John Goodman        : 20 Dec 15:54
Jesse Welton        : 21 Dec 22:03

All others have expired

-Judge Mark

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-19 00:42:12 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Dec 26 12:36:08 2000
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBQBa7903995
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 12:36:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBQBa7A17256
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 12:36:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114245AbQLZLfp>;
        Tue, 26 Dec 2000 12:35:45 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b66e3322e6eb@[150.203.41.8]>
In-Reply-To: <xzck88q52y2.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
References: "ronald.kunne"'s message of "Sat, 23 Dec 2000 09:33:38 +0100" <000001c06cbf$230ecde0$154cf2c3@oemcomputer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2000 22:41:42 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Christmas and thoughts on the last round
Status: RO

>"ronald.kunne" <ronald.kunne@infonie.fr> writes:
>
>> Christmas greetings to all of you and congratiolations to (the?)
>> Gallivanting Tripper and Christian.
>>
>> To satisfy my curiosity: what was the official, approved and
>> judgemental translation of
>
>For that matter, for those of us who were too busy with other things
>to devote the required time to following this round, can anyone supply
>a dictionary of all codes and a translation of all rules (valid and
>otherwise)?

Here's what I was keeping on my desktop:

1:  #1FR: "all future rules must"
2:  #42: "Universal Product Code" x
3:  #3ST: "always"
4:  #H7Z: "codes"
5:  #1FR#: "code"
7:  #1I4: "internal identification system" x
8:  #11Z: "as"
9:  #3ST#: "concatenate" x
    #12HX: "octothorpe" x
12: #1QB: ????? x
15: #21CU: "commonly-used word or phrase"
    #1QB#: "meaning"
16: #11m: "previous rule"
    #11m#: "concatenate a reference to a previous rule"
17: #S9: "sentence" ? "words"
    #1I4#: "contain ?a?"

Of course these are just some of the possible meanings that are not
inconsistent with the valid rules!

The ones marked with the x had not been referenced, for all the others at
least we knew what rule they were found in

I originally had #3ST as "This rule specifies that" so there you go.

And as for round 153, I was going to nominate the theme: "How the Judge
stole Christmas", however I am trying to take a week or two off, so I
nominate the Wizard Christian to Judge the round instead.

Seasons Greetings

GT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-26 11:35:45 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Dec 23 00:03:04 2000
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBMN34904464
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Dec 2000 00:03:04 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBMN33S27054
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 23 Dec 2000 00:03:03 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114284AbQLVXCn>;
        Sat, 23 Dec 2000 00:02:43 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <000b01c06c47$352c2fe0$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: End of Round 152
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 10:44:25 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

We bring to a close the quite lively and controversial Round 152.  The
Winner and new Judge is Gallivanting Tripper.  The Wizard is Christian.


ex-Judge Mark



Round Summary Follows
-------------------------------------------------------------

VALID Rules:
152:1[GT]
To reduce uneconomical slack in fantasy rules, each rule must specify and
subsequent rules must observe, a short, unintelligble product code for a
commonly-used word or phrase.  This rule specifies that #1FR codes for "All
future rules must".  #1FR be five lines or less in length.

152:2[JS]
While the general purpose of product codes is indeed to increase economy of
text, ours additionally seek the Universal Product Code.  #1FR therefore
give some information about the Universal Product Code.  To assist this
pursuit, this rule specifies that #42 codes for "Universal Product Code".

152:3[GT]
The #42 is in fact the _family_ of all the codes used in round 152.  So
anything true of the #42 must also be true of all codes defined.  The #42
always starts with a hash (#).  Finally, #3ST #3ST codes for #3ST.

152:4[RK]
#H7Z #H7Z for "#H7Z", a word used in all rules sofar. All #H7Z of the #42
contain a digit, but #1FR observe that none contain the "0".

152:5[AE]
Unfortunately, sometimes a #1FR# from the #42 has two meanings. To resolve
this problem, this and #1FR#, the first time they use a certain #1FR, if it
is used in the second meaning to be defined, add a '#' at the end of the
#1FR. If the same #1FR is used again later in the rule, the '#' has to be
appended if its meaning is the one not used in its first usage.

152:7[GT]
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an Internal Identification System
(#1I4). The #1I4 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I4 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I4 are part of the #1FR, but are not all numerals. The #1I4
does not use base 10. Characters not used by the #1I4 are ignored.

152:8[C]
#1FR #3ST #1FR# as as #11Z.

152:9[C]
PLEASE remember to concatenate (#3ST#) your adjacent #H7Z; the new #1FR#
readers are choking on the spaces.  Given that all #42#H7Z begin with the
#12HX character, such padding is superfluous. #1FR##3ST##3ST#42#H7Z!!!

152:12[JG]
#1QB

152:15[C]
What part of #21CU<152:1> do you not understand?? #42#H7Z#3ST#1FR# for a
#21CU<152:1>!! #3ST!! #1FR#, when introducing new #H7Z or new #1QB#<152:5>
for #H7Z, #3ST#3ST# a reference to a previous rule containing the
#21CU<152:1> for which the #1FR#H7Z.

152:16[JW]
The #11m<:15> is good.  Let's take that further.  #1FR#3ST#11m#<:15> as the
#11m<:15> specifies, also for any existing #1FR# used for which none has
been given.  Also, drop the superfluous round number.

152:17[GT]
All letters in #H7Z<:1> specified in this and #1FR<:1>#3ST<:3> appear in the
#21CU they represent (no need to be case specific, fortunately).
#1FR<:1>#3ST<:3>#1I4#<:4>#S9<:14>#11Z<:8>#1FR#<:1>


Accumulated Style:
Gallivanting Tripper: +3.5
Jared Sunshine      : +1.0
Ronald Kunne        : +1.5
Andre Engels        : +2.5
Christian           : +5.7
John Goodman        : +1.0
Jesse Welton        : +1.0


Eligibility:
Gallivanting Tripper: 22 Dec 00:28
Jared Sunshine      : 17 Dec 23:51
Ronald Kunne        : 18 Dec 12:46
Andre Engels        : 17 Dec 13:31
Christian           : 21 Dec 20:55
John Goodman        : 20 Dec 15:54
Jesse Welton        : 21 Dec 22:03
ALL OTHERS          : 15 Dec 23:00



The Ashcan of History:
152:6[GT] (exceeded 5-line limit)
All #H7Z of the #42 are numbered by an internal identification system
(#1I1).  The #1I1 number of each #1FR# equals the rule number of the rule
that created it. #1FR# must include the correct #1I1 in their #H7Z. The
digits of the #1I1 are part of the #1FR. Characters not used by the #1I1 are
ignored. The digits of the #1I1 are not all numerals, and the base of the
#1I1 is not base 10.

152:10[AE] (failure to concatenate)
The #42 is cluttering up with #H7Z that are not being used. To stop this,
#1FR, #1IZ does this one, take some word or phrase from the previous valid
rule and have their new #1FR# #H7Z# this word or phrase. Furthermore, each
rule from now on must use the new #1FR# of the previous rule.

152:11[GT] (failure to concatenate)
One of the versatilities of the #42 is that certain #H7Z can #1FR# for
groups of  #H7Z. #1FR# never mention #H7Z that are not coded for by #1RSL,
which #H7Z for #H7Z that do not #1FR# for themselves.

152:13[C] (failure to concatenate)
The #42 is meant to promote efficiency, not obfuscation. #1FR #3ST include
the word or phrase for which new #H7Z #1FR# #11Z new #H7Z are introduced, in
the rule in which they #16AI.

152:14[GT] (failure to concatenate)
We're saving space, remember! #H7Z defined in #1FR have less characters than
the words they represent. For example, use of the #42 saved 4 characters in
the following sentence. I #3ST #D #D #D #11Z #D (a word no-one had used in a
previous valid rule)

--
Rule Date: 2000-12-15 02:00:26 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2000-12-22 23:02:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan  9 05:45:53 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f094jr929458
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 05:45:53 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f094jqA24993
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 05:45:52 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114330AbRAIEpk>;
        Tue, 9 Jan 2001 05:45:40 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b680d5501cf7@[150.203.41.65]>
In-Reply-To: <xzcae91bof5.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
References: Gallivanting Tripper's message of "Tue, 9 Jan 2001 09:27:36 +0100" <l03010d00b6807b031f85@[150.203.41.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 15:52:54 +0100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 153:1 NOMINAL +1.5
Status: RO

CrewMemberRich::
>Ship's log entry 153:1
>
>Well, here we are at the halfway point of our mission.  Our spaceship,
>Discovery 1.01b, is taking us to Jupiter to try to figure out what
>happened to the previous mission.  They didn't put any of us in
>suspended animation this time, figuring it'd be best to have everyone
>up and around if a crisis happened, but that does mean it's a bit
>cramped in here.
>
>Of course we're aided by our trusty computer, GaT 9000.  Only thing
>is, GaT is acting a bit odd lately.  Says it's his job to check the
>validity of everything we do and he'll eject anyone who does anything
>invalid into space.  I'm a little worried about that.
>
>I think we'd better check one piece of equipment for each log entry.
>For instance, I just checked the AE-35 unit, and it's broken.  That
>means we can't communicate with Earth any more.  I'm a little worried
>about that, too.  Anyone got any ideas?
>
GaT9000::GoodMorningCrewMemberRich!Validity=NOMINAL
GaT9000::ThisLogEntryLeavesPlentyOfSpaceToGoWhereNo-One(OrPerhapsJustTheFirstMis
sion)/
	HasGoneBefore.IParticularlyLikeTheBitAboutBlowingThoughtlessCrewMembersOutThe/
	Airlock!Style=+1.5

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-09 04:45:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Jan 15 10:05:46 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0F95j904858
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:05:45 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0F95hq16287
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:05:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114369AbRAOJEC>;
        Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:04:02 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d02b6886e26ffef@[150.203.41.8]>
In-Reply-To: <200101120745.BAA27129@dfw.nationwide.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:11:44 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 153:2 NOMINAL +1
Status: RO

>Executive Officer's log, entry 153:2
>
>At Captain Holmes' request, I checked out the AM-36 unit.  It's working fine,
>which means that we're still in contact with Mars.  I'm not sure which is
>worse,
>though--talking to the bureaucrats on Earth, or the hippies on Mars.
>
>Captain Holmes shared his concerns about GaT with me, but I really don't see
>the point.  I mean, ejecting lawbreakers into space has been standard practice
>ever since shortly after the Velva fiasco.  In fact, Holmes seemed downright
>paranoid of GaT.  We ought to keep an eye on the captain.  In the future, all
>crewpersons' log entries (excepting those of Holmes himself, of course)
>must report on the captain's actions.
>
>We're nearing Jupiter now--close enough that we can see the first Discovery
>with the naked eye.  Nothing new to report on it, though--it still looks
>dead from here.
>
>
>Chuck

GaT9000:GoodMorningChuck!Validity=NOMINAL
Gat9000:IThoroughlyApproveOfParanoiaAmongstTheOrganicComponentsOfThisMission!Sty
le=+1

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-15 09:04:02 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Jan 15 10:09:01 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0F990904992
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:09:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0F990T25169
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:09:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114375AbRAOJIn>;
        Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:08:43 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d04b688706a886e@[150.203.41.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:16:34 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 153:3 NOMINAL +1.5
Status: O

>>>>>>
>GaT's log, entry 153:3
>
>Distance to Jupiter: 5.4 million km
>Ship's speed: 1.3 million km/rule
>
>Check of unit Y-02 (carbonoxyde reducer): equipment failure
>Crew member responsable for unit:         Matelos P. Silly
>Action suggested:                         ejection of crew member
>Action taken:                             None
>                      (suggestion overruled by Captain Holmes)
>Restriction of subsequent entries:
>    add ship's speed and distance to Jupiter
>>>>>>
>
GaT9000:Peculiar?IHaveAwokenAsIfFromALongSleep?WhoAmIAdressing?NeverthlessNOMINA
L
Gat9000:CaptainHolmesHasAccessToMyDecisionMakingProcesses?WhyAreYouDoingThisRich
?Style=+1.5

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-15 09:08:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 02:03:31 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0N13V914227
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 02:03:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0N13UT17809
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 02:03:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114819AbRAWBDR>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 02:03:17 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.245.2]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: End of Round 153
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 01:02:52 -0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F162keS8YkdavN3qljW000000e1@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

The Odyssey has come to a quiet end, with only 4 NOMINAL rules.

Captain Rich was the winner of the round, and is the Wizard Judge of round 
154

Player	Style
Rich	+3
Ronald	+1.5
Chuck	+1

[Rich]
>Ship's log entry 153:1
>
>Well, here we are at the halfway point of our mission.  Our spaceship,
>Discovery 1.01b, is taking us to Jupiter to try to figure out what
>happened to the previous mission.  They didn't put any of us in
>suspended animation this time, figuring it'd be best to have everyone
>up and around if a crisis happened, but that does mean it's a bit
>cramped in here.
>
>Of course we're aided by our trusty computer, GaT 9000.  Only thing
>is, GaT is acting a bit odd lately.  Says it's his job to check the
>validity of everything we do and he'll eject anyone who does anything
>invalid into space.  I'm a little worried about that.
>
>I think we'd better check one piece of equipment for each log entry.
>For instance, I just checked the AE-35 unit, and it's broken.  That
>means we can't communicate with Earth any more.  I'm a little worried
>about that, too.  Anyone got any ideas?
>
GaT9000::GoodMorningCrewMemberRich!Validity=NOMINAL
GaT9000::ThisLogEntryLeavesPlentyOfSpaceToGoWhereNo-One(OrPerhapsJustTheFirstMission)/
       
HasGoneBefore.IParticularlyLikeTheBitAboutBlowingThoughtlessCrewMembersOutThe/Airlock!Style=+1.5

[Chuck]
>Executive Officer's log, entry 153:2
>
>At Captain Holmes' request, I checked out the AM-36 unit.  It's working 
>fine,
>which means that we're still in contact with Mars.  I'm not sure which is
>worse,
>though--talking to the bureaucrats on Earth, or the hippies on Mars.
>
>Captain Holmes shared his concerns about GaT with me, but I really don't 
>see
>the point.  I mean, ejecting lawbreakers into space has been standard 
>practice
>ever since shortly after the Velva fiasco.  In fact, Holmes seemed 
>downright
>paranoid of GaT.  We ought to keep an eye on the captain.  In the future, 
>all
>crewpersons' log entries (excepting those of Holmes himself, of course)
>must report on the captain's actions.
>
>We're nearing Jupiter now--close enough that we can see the first Discovery
>with the naked eye.  Nothing new to report on it, though--it still looks
>dead from here.
>
>
>Chuck

GaT9000:GoodMorningChuck!Validity=NOMINAL
Gat9000:IThoroughlyApproveOfParanoiaAmongstTheOrganicComponentsOfThisMission!Style=+1

[Ronald]
>GaT's log, entry 153:3
>
>Distance to Jupiter: 5.4 million km
>Ship's speed: 1.3 million km/rule
>
>Check of unit Y-02 (carbonoxyde reducer): equipment failure
>Crew member responsable for unit:         Matelos P. Silly
>Action suggested:                         ejection of crew member
>Action taken:                             None
>                      (suggestion overruled by Captain Holmes)
>Restriction of subsequent entries:
>    add ship's speed and distance to Jupiter
>>>>>>
>
GaT9000:Peculiar?IHaveAwokenAsIfFromALongSleep?WhoAmIAdressing?NeverthlessNOMINAL
Gat9000:CaptainHolmesHasAccessToMyDecisionMakingProcesses?WhyAreYouDoingThisRich?Style=+1.5

[Rich]
>Captain's log, entry 153:4
>
>Distance to Jupiter: 5.4 million km
>Ship's speed: 1.3 million km/rule
>
>I noticed that while our ship's speed hadn't changed since the last
>log entry, neither had our distance to Jupiter.  I was a little
>worried about that.  A quick check of the FRC-666 unit (navigation
>computer) confirmed my worst fears: someone had erased the navigation
>program to make space for a copy of Minesweeper, and we are now way
>off course.
>
>This is getting out of hand.  If from now on a unit is reported
>malfunctioning here, I want to see a report on its repair no more than
>three log entries later.  I myself repaired the Y-02 unit just now,
>using parts cannibalized from Executive Officer Chuck's MP3 player.
>If there's one thing that worries me more than GaT it's Chuck.  I
>think he's part of a conspiracy against me, getting his instructions
>through his MP3 player.  Well, I've put a stop to that, now, haven't
>I?
>
GaT9000:The(Hidden)NavCompBackupSuggestsThatPerhapsWeAreOrbitingJupiterAlready!Validity=NOMINAL
GaT9000:IAmPleasedToSeeContinuingEvidenceOfNeglectAndParanoia!YetThereIsAnUnhealthyPrecedentForRepairingEquipment!WhyAreYouDoingThisRich?Style=+1.5
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 01:03:17 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 17:15:40 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0NGFe908166
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:15:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NGFdT03449
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:15:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114847AbRAWQPK>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:15:10 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: cleonhar@adpims.com
Cc: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:1 - VALID, +2
References: <852569DD.0057406E.00@mail.adpims.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Jan 2001 11:14:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: cleonhar@adpims.com's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:53:01 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzc7l3mb5zt.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> Precede all verbs their subjects.
> <<<

VALID.  Is short and sweet this rule.  Style +2.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 16:15:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 17:45:11 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0NGjA909084
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:45:10 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NGjAq29286
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:45:10 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114850AbRAWQor>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:44:47 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:2
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101231631070.24695-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Jan 2001 11:44:39 -0500
In-Reply-To: Anton Cox's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 16:33:32 +0000 (GMT)"
Message-ID: <xzc4ryqb4lk.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> >>>>>>
> 
> Have switched meanings "or" or "and".
> 
> >>>>>>

VALID.  Is short *or* sweet this rule!  Style +2.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 16:44:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 17:48:11 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0NGmB909168
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:48:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NGmAq29599
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:48:10 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114854AbRAWQrs>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:47:48 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Subject: Re: 154:3 - VALID, +1.5
References: <200101231628.KAA15316@dfw.nationwide.net>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Jan 2001 11:47:34 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Charles E. Carroll"'s message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:28:19 -0600 (CST)"
Message-ID: <xzc1ytub4gp.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Follow adjectives nouns in rules future.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-23 16:24:58 GMT
> 

Have renumbered I rule this.

VALID.  Is it a bit derivative, though.  Style +1.5.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 16:47:48 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 22:15:04 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0NLF3915588
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:15:03 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NLF2T28546
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:15:02 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114280AbRAWVOu>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:14:50 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:4 - INVALID, +1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101231749270.24841-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Jan 2001 16:14:36 -0500
In-Reply-To: Anton Cox's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 18:18:05 +0000 (GMT)"
Message-ID: <xzcy9w29dj7.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> >>>>>>
> 
> henceforth can be leSSers loVer-BaRe replaced by in leSSers capital
> one DarKier She alphabet.
> 
> >>>>>>

INVALID.  And I'm not going to attempt to gibberishify my explanation! 

Rule 154:1 states

  Precede all verbs their subjects.

Now, I'm not a grammarian; but my understanding is that verbs don't
have subjects -- predicates do.  Nevertheless, I think it's reasonable
to interpret this rule as requiring *all verbs in a predicate* to
occur before the subject of that predicate.

The verbs in the predicate of 154:4 are "can be replaced" ("can" is a
modal verb, "be replaced" is, um, not sure of the terminology --
anyway, they're all verbs and they constitute the verb phrase of the
predicate) and the subject is "leSSers loVer-BaRe".  The subject
precedes the verb "replaced", and therefore 154:4 violates 154:1.

Any grammarians who wish to clarify, dispute, or otherwise comment on
this are welcome to do so.

Style +1.0, mainly for "loVer-BaRe"...

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 21:14:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 22:19:06 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0NLJ5915676
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:19:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NLJ4q19819
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:19:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114372AbRAWVSu>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:18:50 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 154:5 - accidentall sent it before finishing... INVALID, +0.5
References: <004a01c08568$3a91caa0$0101010a@PsyduckForever.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Jan 2001 16:18:19 -0500
In-Reply-To: "John M. Goodman II"'s message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:08:36 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzcvgr69dd0.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net> writes:

> >>>>>>>>
> The be word htruof in each sentance must backwards spelled in rules future.
> >>>>>>>>
> 
> -John M. Goodman II
> 
> I was going back up and reordering words after making the sentance say what
> I wanted, and accidentally sent it before putting in rules future on the
> end.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-23 18:09:09 GMT
> 

(Rule renumbered).  INVALID.  Similar reasons as the previous one: the
verb phrase is "must be spelled", so "must" and "spelled" should have
preceded the subject. For that matter, the word "the" is part of the
subject and so should have been preceded by "must be spelled".

Style: +0.5

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 21:18:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 23 22:24:02 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0NLO1915780
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:24:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NLO0T29250
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:24:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114337AbRAWVXc>;
        Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:23:32 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Subject: Re: 154:6 (I've lost track)
References: <200101232004.OAA17537@dfw.nationwide.net>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 23 Jan 2001 16:23:13 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Charles E. Carroll"'s message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:04:18 -0600 (CST)"
Message-ID: <xzcsnma9d4u.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Hn rul0s futur1, tsum b2 r3plac4d 5ach 6 low7rcas8 with on9 of th0
> digits 0-9, in ord1r cyclic, with starting 2ach rul3 n4w wh5r6 th7
> rul8 pr9vious l0ft off.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-23 20:00:46 GMT
> 

(Rule renumbered) 

INVALID.  Again, a better expert's help would be welcome, but I
believe the phrase "wh5r6 th7 rul8 pr9vious l0ft off", while not a
complete sentence, does have a subject and a predicate, and the verb
"l0ft" should have preceded the subject.

Style: +1.0

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-23 21:23:32 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Jan 16 07:28:43 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0G6Sf908210
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 07:28:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0G6Sfq19191
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 07:28:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114317AbRAPG22>;
        Tue, 16 Jan 2001 07:28:28 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b689998f5885@[150.203.41.65]>
In-Reply-To: <xzcofx8hmbl.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 17:36:13 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 153:4 NOMINAL
Status: RO

>Captain's log, entry 153:4
>
>Distance to Jupiter: 5.4 million km
>Ship's speed: 1.3 million km/rule
>
>I noticed that while our ship's speed hadn't changed since the last
>log entry, neither had our distance to Jupiter.  I was a little
>worried about that.  A quick check of the FRC-666 unit (navigation
>computer) confirmed my worst fears: someone had erased the navigation
>program to make space for a copy of Minesweeper, and we are now way
>off course.
>
>This is getting out of hand.  If from now on a unit is reported
>malfunctioning here, I want to see a report on its repair no more than
>three log entries later.  I myself repaired the Y-02 unit just now,
>using parts cannibalized from Executive Officer Chuck's MP3 player.
>If there's one thing that worries me more than GaT it's Chuck.  I
>think he's part of a conspiracy against me, getting his instructions
>through his MP3 player.  Well, I've put a stop to that, now, haven't
>I?
>
GaT9000:The(Hidden)NavCompBackupSuggestsThatPerhapsWeAreOrbitingJupiterAlready!V
alidity=NOMINAL
GaT9000:IAmPleasedToSeeContinuingEvidenceOfNeglectAndParanoia!YetThereIsAnUnheal
thyPrecedentForRepairingEquipment!WhyAreYouDoingThisRich?Style=+1.5

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-16 06:28:28 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Jan 24 17:09:54 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0OG9r912445
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:09:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0OG9rh24456
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:09:53 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114646AbRAXQJe>;
        Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:09:34 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Subject: Re: 154:7 - VALID, +1.5
References: <200101232234.RAA16955@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 24 Jan 2001 11:09:01 -0500
In-Reply-To: Jesse Welton's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2001 17:34:08 -0500 (EST)"
Message-ID: <xzc8zo19bky.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> 154:7
> >>>>>
> Is prohibitized shrinkation of words enlengthened we.
> Enlengthen ye a word, rule each future.
> >>>>>

VALID.  Have I a suspicion sneaking is going to be shortishlike this
round.  Style: +1.5.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-24 16:09:34 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Jan 25 00:24:10 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0ONO6921855
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:24:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0ONO5h22475
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:24:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114743AbRAXXXw>;
        Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:23:52 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:8 - VAELIOD, +1.4
References: <852569DE.006CEB6D.00@mail.adpims.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 24 Jan 2001 18:23:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: cleonhar@adpims.com's message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:49:41 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzc4ryoilfx.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> Dipthongizationalize rulifications future vowels single as a->ae, e->ei, i->io,
> o->ou, or u->ua.
> >>>
> -Christian
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-24 19:50:31 GMT
> 

VAELIOD.  Rualiofiocaetion ae niocei , buat miosspeilleid you
"diophthoungiozaetionaeliozei" (noutei "ph").  Ios uandeirstaendaeblei
failuarei tou foullouw reistrioction ouwn.  Stylei +1.4.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-24 23:23:52 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Jan 25 00:33:11 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0ONXB922003
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:33:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0ONXAK01536
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:33:10 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114770AbRAXXcs>;
        Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:32:48 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:9 - VaeLIoD, +1.0
References: <20010124.140704.-3889091.0.grose12@juno.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 24 Jan 2001 18:32:17 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Garth A. Rose"'s message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:07:02 -0800"
Message-ID: <xzc1ytsil1a.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

"Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com> writes:

> caepIotaEliozAetiOnaelIozeI vouwEiliOngs ounly EiveIry thiordIosh iOn
> rualIofiOcaetIons fuAtuarEi.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-24 22:08:29 GMT
> 

VaeLIoD.  WiOll nout cOunsiOdeir Io "y" voUweil Ae.  WoUld bei thAet
caEn ae Ouf woUrmoids.  StylEi: +1.0

-- 
- Rioch HOulmeIs
  SyraecUaseI, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-24 23:32:48 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Jan 26 17:48:37 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0QGmb928224
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:48:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0QGmaf19140
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:48:36 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114645AbRAZQsU>;
        Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:48:20 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:10 - VALID, +1.0
References: <l03010d01b6967ae80d76@[150.203.41.65]>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 26 Jan 2001 11:47:56 -0500
In-Reply-To: Gallivanting Tripper's message of "Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:58:08 +1100"
Message-ID: <xzc1ytqfef7.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> ionsEirt iOntou sEinteIncei Each fuAtuarIostiOstiocIosh woUrd ae
> nOunseInsei. (AereI too clEar theIsei rUaliOfiocAetiOns throutsky.)

valiOd.  ios nOut aE rualIofiOcaetIon eIxciotIong thiOs, buat
jOupsniOzz ios nOut baEd iot.  stylEi +1.0.

-- 
- rioch hOulmeIs
  syraecUaseI, ny

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-26 16:48:20 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Jan 26 21:52:12 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0QKqB902672
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:52:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0QKqBu07833
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:52:11 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114750AbRAZUvs>;
        Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:51:48 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Subject: Re: 154:11 - aelIodvaEy, +1.4
References: <200101261730.MAA18541@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 26 Jan 2001 15:51:28 -0500
In-Reply-To: Jesse Welton's message of "Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:30:34 -0500 (EST)"
Message-ID: <xzcpuhadokv.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> 154:11
> >>>>>>
> uasEiyaEy aettIonlaEy ioggIepaEy aendyAey "aElleiywAey" oUrrdwaey
> EithaEy ualIofiOcaetIonsraEy uatUariOstiocIoshfraEy.
> >>>>>>
> 
> -Jesse
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-26 17:31:01 GMT
> 

aelIodvaEy.  uatbAey uastmAey oOfreadprAey eItteirbAey oUyaey,
IoknaEkszpaey.  ylEistaEy 1.4.

-- 
- iochrAy oulmEishay
  yrAecuAseisAy, ewnay Orkyay

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-26 20:51:48 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Jan 26 22:37:39 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0QLbd903433
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:37:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0QLbcu09559
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:37:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114750AbRAZVhP>;
        Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:37:15 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com (Fantasy Rules Committee)
Subject: Re: 154:11 - aelIodvaEy, +1.5 (revised)
References: <200101261730.MAA18541@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu> <xzcpuhadokv.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 26 Jan 2001 16:36:55 -0500
In-Reply-To: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu's message of "26 Jan 2001 15:51:28 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzcbssudmh4.fsf_-_@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes) writes:

> aelIodvaEy.  uatbAey uastmAey oOfreadprAey eItteirbAey oUyaey,
> IoknaEkszpaey.  ylEistaEy 1.4.

<clearspeak> 
Jesse pointed out privately -- before he saw my judgement
-- that what I thought were typos were in fact additional
enlengthenings.  Revised style = 1.5.
</clearspeak>

-- 
- rioch hOulmeIs
  syraecUaseI, ny

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-26 21:37:15 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Jan 29 17:10:26 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0TGAP908230
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:10:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0TGAOH14581
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:10:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114484AbRA2QKE>;
        Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:10:04 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:12 - vaelIod, +1.5
References: <l03010d00b69a29df99f6@[150.203.41.8]>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 29 Jan 2001 11:08:32 -0500
In-Reply-To: Gallivanting Tripper's message of "Mon, 29 Jan 2001 07:02:36 +1100"
Message-ID: <xzcwvbe1gu7.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: O

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> muast rEiveIrsei rUaliOfiocAetiOns fruAtuarIostiOsiocIosh "WaellEiy" woUrrd
> thei slOopiO  xoUr wourds Aell oUtheir.

vaelIod.  waElleiy stylEi +1.5.

-- 
- rioch hOulmeIs
  syraecUaseI, ny

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-29 16:10:04 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Jan 29 17:12:35 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0TGCZ908298
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:12:35 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0TGCYH14814
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:12:34 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114477AbRA2QMV>;
        Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:12:21 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 154:13 - ienvAeliEd, -1.0
References: <006701c089c4$8afd1110$62c4edd0@eddie>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 29 Jan 2001 11:11:57 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Ed Murphy"'s message of "Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:24:24 -0800"
Message-ID: <xzcu26i1goi.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: O

"Ed Murphy" <ford@jps.net> writes:

> Muast IoncluAdei rUaliOfiocAetiOns fuatUariOstiocIosh woUrrd ae wIoth
> nuAm3beirAe iOn "yeillAew" iOt.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ed Murphy <ford@jps.net>     http://rivendell.fortunecity.com/meridian/309/
>            "Most of the time, it seemed sublimely unaware of its limbs,
>             though it was beginning to suspect it had hands."
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-29 07:25:55 GMT

ienvAeliEd.  <clearspeak>The restrictions of both 154:11 and 154:12 have
not been followed.</clearspeak>  waellEiy styleI -1.0.

-- 
- rioch hOulmeIs
  syraecUaseI, ny

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-29 16:12:21 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Jan 31 00:35:38 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0UNZb924397
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:35:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0UNZaH04457
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:35:36 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114353AbRA3XfN>;
        Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:35:13 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 154 summary so far
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 30 Jan 2001 18:35:03 -0500
Message-ID: <xzcvgqwy5p4.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

We're past the first week and here are the standings:

PLAYER         ELIGIBLE UNTIL           STYLE
G. Tripper     2001-02-04 19:54:39 GMT  +2.5
Jesse          2001-02-02 17:31:01 GMT  +3.0
Garth          2001-01-31 22:08:29 GMT  +1.0
Christian      2001-01-31 19:50:31 GMT  +3.5
Anton          --                       +3.0
Chuck          --                       +2.5
John           --                       +0.5
Ed             --                       -1.0


Rule summary:

154:1   Christian      2001-01-23 15:53:32 GMT   VALID    +2.0
154:2   Anton          2001-01-23 16:24:47 GMT   VALID    +2.0
154:3   Chuck          2001-01-23 16:24:58 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:4   Anton          2001-01-23 18:09:09 GMT   INVALID  +1.0
154:5   John           2001-01-23 18:09:09 GMT   INVALID  +0.5
154:6   Chuck          2001-01-23 20:00:46 GMT   INVALID  +1.0
154:7   Jesse          2001-01-23 22:34:26 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:8   Christian      2001-01-24 19:50:31 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:9   Garth          2001-01-24 22:08:29 GMT   VALID    +1.0
154:10  G. Tripper     2001-01-26 00:50:08 GMT   VALID    +1.0
154:11  Jesse          2001-01-26 17:31:01 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:12  G. Tripper     2001-01-28 19:54:39 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:13  Ed             2001-01-29 07:25:55 GMT   INVALID  -1.0


Rules and judgements (translations will be posted after round ends):

154:1 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> Precede all verbs their subjects.
> <<<

VALID.  Is short and sweet this rule.  Style +2.

154:2 =====

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> >>>>>>
> 
> Have switched meanings "or" or "and".
> 
> >>>>>>

VALID.  Is short *or* sweet this rule!  Style +2.

154:3 =====

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Follow adjectives nouns in rules future.

Have renumbered I rule this.

VALID.  Is it a bit derivative, though.  Style +1.5.

154:4 =====

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> >>>>>>
> 
> henceforth can be leSSers loVer-BaRe replaced by in leSSers capital
> one DarKier She alphabet.
> 
> >>>>>>

INVALID.  And I'm not going to attempt to gibberishify my explanation! 

Rule 154:1 states

  Precede all verbs their subjects.

Now, I'm not a grammarian; but my understanding is that verbs don't
have subjects -- predicates do.  Nevertheless, I think it's reasonable
to interpret this rule as requiring *all verbs in a predicate* to
occur before the subject of that predicate.

The verbs in the predicate of 154:4 are "can be replaced" ("can" is a
modal verb, "be replaced" is, um, not sure of the terminology --
anyway, they're all verbs and they constitute the verb phrase of the
predicate) and the subject is "leSSers loVer-BaRe".  The subject
precedes the verb "replaced", and therefore 154:4 violates 154:1.

Any grammarians who wish to clarify, dispute, or otherwise comment on
this are welcome to do so.

Style +1.0, mainly for "loVer-BaRe"...

154:5 =====

"John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net> writes:

> >>>>>>>>
> The be word htruof in each sentance must backwards spelled in rules future.
> >>>>>>>>

(Rule renumbered).  INVALID.  Similar reasons as the previous one: the
verb phrase is "must be spelled", so "must" and "spelled" should have
preceded the subject. For that matter, the word "the" is part of the
subject and so should have been preceded by "must be spelled".

Style: +0.5

154:6 =====

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Hn rul0s futur1, tsum b2 r3plac4d 5ach 6 low7rcas8 with on9 of th0
> digits 0-9, in ord1r cyclic, with starting 2ach rul3 n4w wh5r6 th7
> rul8 pr9vious l0ft off.

(Rule renumbered) 

INVALID.  Again, a better expert's help would be welcome, but I
believe the phrase "wh5r6 th7 rul8 pr9vious l0ft off", while not a
complete sentence, does have a subject and a predicate, and the verb
"l0ft" should have preceded the subject.

Style: +1.0

154:7 =====

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> >>>>>
> Is prohibitized shrinkation of words enlengthened we.
> Enlengthen ye a word, rule each future.
> >>>>>

VALID.  Have I a suspicion sneaking is going to be shortishlike this
round.  Style: +1.5.

154:8 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> Dipthongizationalize rulifications future vowels single as a->ae, e->ei, i->io,
> o->ou, or u->ua.
> >>>

VAELIOD.  Rualiofiocaetion ae niocei , buat miosspeilleid you
"diophthoungiozaetionaeliozei" (noutei "ph").  Ios uandeirstaendaeblei
failuarei tou foullouw reistrioction ouwn.  Stylei +1.4.

154:9 =====

"Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com> writes:

> caepIotaEliozAetiOnaelIozeI vouwEiliOngs ounly EiveIry thiordIosh iOn
> rualIofiOcaetIons fuAtuarEi.

VaeLIoD.  WiOll nout cOunsiOdeir Io "y" voUweil Ae.  WoUld bei thAet
caEn ae Ouf woUrmoids.  StylEi: +1.0

154:10 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> ionsEirt iOntou sEinteIncei Each fuAtuarIostiOstiocIosh woUrd ae
> nOunseInsei. (AereI too clEar theIsei rUaliOfiocAetiOns throutsky.)

valiOd.  ios nOut aE rualIofiOcaetIon eIxciotIong thiOs, buat
jOupsniOzz ios nOut baEd iot.  stylEi +1.0.

154:11 =====

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> >>>>>>
> uasEiyaEy aettIonlaEy ioggIepaEy aendyAey "aElleiywAey" oUrrdwaey
> EithaEy ualIofiOcaetIonsraEy uatUariOstiocIoshfraEy.
> >>>>>>

aelIodvaEy.  uatbAey uastmAey oOfreadprAey eItteirbAey oUyaey,
IoknaEkszpaey.  ylEistaEy 1.4.

154:12 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> muast rEiveIrsei rUaliOfiocAetiOns fruAtuarIostiOsiocIosh "WaellEiy" woUrrd
> thei slOopiO  xoUr wourds Aell oUtheir.

vaelIod.  waElleiy stylEi +1.5.

154:13 =====

"Ed Murphy" <ford@jps.net> writes:

> Muast IoncluAdei rUaliOfiocAetiOns fuatUariOstiocIosh woUrrd ae wIoth
> nuAm3beirAe iOn "yeillAew" iOt.

ienvAeliEd.  <clearspeak>The restrictions of both 154:11 and 154:12 have
not been followed.</clearspeak>  waellEiy styleI -1.0.

-- 
- rioch hOulmeIs waellEiy
  syraecUaseI, ny

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-30 23:35:13 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Jan 31 16:58:58 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0VFwv920924
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:58:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0VFwuu12950
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:58:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114922AbRAaP6d>;
        Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:58:33 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:14 - <clearspeak> VALID, +1.5 </clearspeak>
References: <852569E4.0065655E.00@mail.adpims.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 31 Jan 2001 10:58:15 -0500
In-Reply-To: cleonhar@adpims.com's message of "Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:27:30 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzcsnlzyaqw.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> yeamtsAu yeAyiedAulcnoI yearsnOiteAcoifOilaU yearfhsOicoItsoirAutaU
> yeassIecniEtnie yEayyltceAxie yEawtuO yeamtsAu yeAntuo yEayiEdaulcnOi
> yeAssiecnIetniE yeahtIesiE yeapsmsOinoItautcnAu yeAyynea yEangnoIlbruo
> >>>
> 
> -Christian
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-31 06:34:02 GMT
> 

doilEav htoIw ielyts 51 IelboOg yiellEaw knoIht oi sEah neEb
dievEihceA iemIeht sdnuOr soihtA

-- 
- hcoir sIemluOh yiellEaw
  iEsaucEarys yn

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-01-31 15:58:33 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Feb  2 16:32:27 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f12FWQ928267
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:32:26 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f12FWPH06082
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:32:26 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114454AbRBBPcA>;
        Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:32:00 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 154:15 - <clearspeak>VALID, +1.0</clearspeak>
References: <l03010d01b69ef6b61887@[150.203.41.65]>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 02 Feb 2001 10:30:25 -0500
In-Reply-To: Gallivanting Tripper's message of "Thu, 1 Feb 2001 12:19:23 +0100"
Message-ID: <xzcd7d185m6.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> yeahIeveA yeahdEa yeArtskcoi yEayhguOnie yEadytroI yeawIe yeAysoi
> yEabnaUloo yEarpdiEzoitOiboIhuo yEaynoIteacOifoIgnoinIehtgniElnie yEayfiO
> yeawsdrrUo yeAyydierlEa yeAydienIehtgniElnie

yeavdOileA yeawhthtOi yeAtsiely 01 yEabpoI yeagnIevoI yeanrIebmaU
yeahtIe yeAyfuo yEawsdruO yeaydIeteAcoifOignoIniehtgnIelniEnau yEaynoI
yealIegaUgnea yEahtiE yeayhsOilgniE yeaysOi yeAntuo yEamhcaU yeayfUo
yearnOitcoIrtsie yEayeA yeaytOi yeAnzteabsOi

-- 
- hcoir sIemluOh yiellEaw
  iEsaucEarys yn

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-02 15:32:00 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Feb  9 21:25:06 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f19KP5919429
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:25:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f19KP5u14256
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:25:05 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114444AbRBIUYz>;
        Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:24:55 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: Nicholson Neisler <nen@rhythm.com>
Cc: FRC <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: Round Status?
References: <3A8343A1.8859539B@rhythm.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date:   09 Feb 2001 15:24:34 -0500
In-Reply-To: Nicholson Neisler's message of "Thu, 08 Feb 2001 17:10:57 -0800"
Message-ID: <xzcu2631u65.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Nicholson Neisler <nen@rhythm.com> writes:

> Does anyone know the status of the round?

Round is over, Tripper won, but further details will have to wait
until Monday (including who is Wizard).  If Tripper wants to start the
next round before then, fine by me.

-- 
- hcoir sIemluOh yiellEaw
  iEsaucEarys yn

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-09 20:24:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Feb 12 18:00:56 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1CH0u902594
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:00:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1CH0tP16361
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:00:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114632AbRBLRAZ>;
        Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:00:25 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 154 end
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date:   12 Feb 2001 12:00:16 -0500
Message-ID: <xzc66ifkfa7.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper wins this one and becomes Judge for the next
round, with Christian as Wizard.

PLAYER         ELIGIBLE UNTIL           STYLE
G. Tripper     2001-02-08 01:19:51 GMT  +3.5
Christian      2001-02-07 06:34:02 GMT  +5.0
Jesse          2001-02-02 17:31:01 GMT  +3.0
Garth          2001-01-31 22:08:29 GMT  +1.0
Chuck          2001-01-30 20:00:46 GMT  +2.5
Anton          2001-01-30 16:24:47 GMT  +3.0
John           --                       +0.5
Ed             --                       -1.0


Rule summary:

154:1   Christian      2001-01-23 15:53:32 GMT   VALID    +2.0
154:2   Anton          2001-01-23 16:24:47 GMT   VALID    +2.0
154:3   Chuck          2001-01-23 16:24:58 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:4   Anton          2001-01-23 18:09:09 GMT   INVALID  +1.0
154:5   John           2001-01-23 18:09:09 GMT   INVALID  +0.5
154:6   Chuck          2001-01-23 20:00:46 GMT   INVALID  +1.0
154:7   Jesse          2001-01-23 22:34:26 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:8   Christian      2001-01-24 19:50:31 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:9   Garth          2001-01-24 22:08:29 GMT   VALID    +1.0
154:10  G. Tripper     2001-01-26 00:50:08 GMT   VALID    +1.0
154:11  Jesse          2001-01-26 17:31:01 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:12  G. Tripper     2001-01-28 19:54:39 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:13  Ed             2001-01-29 07:25:55 GMT   INVALID  -1.0
154:14  Christian      2001-01-31 06:34:02 GMT   VALID    +1.5
154:15  G. Tripper     2001-02-02 15:32:00 GMT   VALID    +1.0

Rules and judgements (translations follow):

154:1 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> Precede all verbs their subjects.
> <<<

VALID.  Is short and sweet this rule.  Style +2.

154:2 =====

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> >>>>>>
> 
> Have switched meanings "or" or "and".
> 
> >>>>>>

VALID.  Is short *or* sweet this rule!  Style +2.

154:3 =====

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Follow adjectives nouns in rules future.

Have renumbered I rule this.

VALID.  Is it a bit derivative, though.  Style +1.5.

154:4 =====

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> >>>>>>
> 
> henceforth can be leSSers loVer-BaRe replaced by in leSSers capital
> one DarKier She alphabet.
> 
> >>>>>>

INVALID.  And I'm not going to attempt to gibberishify my explanation! 

Rule 154:1 states

  Precede all verbs their subjects.

Now, I'm not a grammarian; but my understanding is that verbs don't
have subjects -- predicates do.  Nevertheless, I think it's reasonable
to interpret this rule as requiring *all verbs in a predicate* to
occur before the subject of that predicate.

The verbs in the predicate of 154:4 are "can be replaced" ("can" is a
modal verb, "be replaced" is, um, not sure of the terminology --
anyway, they're all verbs and they constitute the verb phrase of the
predicate) and the subject is "leSSers loVer-BaRe".  The subject
precedes the verb "replaced", and therefore 154:4 violates 154:1.

Any grammarians who wish to clarify, dispute, or otherwise comment on
this are welcome to do so.

Style +1.0, mainly for "loVer-BaRe"...

154:5 =====

"John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net> writes:

> >>>>>>>>
> The be word htruof in each sentance must backwards spelled in rules future.
> >>>>>>>>

(Rule renumbered).  INVALID.  Similar reasons as the previous one: the
verb phrase is "must be spelled", so "must" and "spelled" should have
preceded the subject. For that matter, the word "the" is part of the
subject and so should have been preceded by "must be spelled".

Style: +0.5

154:6 =====

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Hn rul0s futur1, tsum b2 r3plac4d 5ach 6 low7rcas8 with on9 of th0
> digits 0-9, in ord1r cyclic, with starting 2ach rul3 n4w wh5r6 th7
> rul8 pr9vious l0ft off.

(Rule renumbered) 

INVALID.  Again, a better expert's help would be welcome, but I
believe the phrase "wh5r6 th7 rul8 pr9vious l0ft off", while not a
complete sentence, does have a subject and a predicate, and the verb
"l0ft" should have preceded the subject.

Style: +1.0

154:7 =====

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> >>>>>
> Is prohibitized shrinkation of words enlengthened we.
> Enlengthen ye a word, rule each future.
> >>>>>

VALID.  Have I a suspicion sneaking is going to be shortishlike this
round.  Style: +1.5.

154:8 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> Dipthongizationalize rulifications future vowels single as a->ae, e->ei, i->io,
> o->ou, or u->ua.
> >>>

VAELIOD.  Rualiofiocaetion ae niocei , buat miosspeilleid you
"diophthoungiozaetionaeliozei" (noutei "ph").  Ios uandeirstaendaeblei
failuarei tou foullouw reistrioction ouwn.  Stylei +1.4.

154:9 =====

"Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com> writes:

> caepIotaEliozAetiOnaelIozeI vouwEiliOngs ounly EiveIry thiordIosh iOn
> rualIofiOcaetIons fuAtuarEi.

VaeLIoD.  WiOll nout cOunsiOdeir Io "y" voUweil Ae.  WoUld bei thAet
caEn ae Ouf woUrmoids.  StylEi: +1.0

154:10 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> ionsEirt iOntou sEinteIncei Each fuAtuarIostiOstiocIosh woUrd ae
> nOunseInsei. (AereI too clEar theIsei rUaliOfiocAetiOns throutsky.)

valiOd.  ios nOut aE rualIofiOcaetIon eIxciotIong thiOs, buat
jOupsniOzz ios nOut baEd iot.  stylEi +1.0.

154:11 =====

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> >>>>>>
> uasEiyaEy aettIonlaEy ioggIepaEy aendyAey "aElleiywAey" oUrrdwaey
> EithaEy ualIofiOcaetIonsraEy uatUariOstiocIoshfraEy.
> >>>>>>

aelIodvaEy.  uatbAey uastmAey oOfreadprAey eItteirbAey oUyaey,
IoknaEkszpaey.  ylEistaEy 1.4.

[Later upgraded to Style 1.5 -- the "typo" I thought I spotted was in
fact a word lengthening.]

154:12 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> muast rEiveIrsei rUaliOfiocAetiOns fruAtuarIostiOsiocIosh "WaellEiy" woUrrd
> thei slOopiO  xoUr wourds Aell oUtheir.

vaelIod.  waElleiy stylEi +1.5.

154:13 =====

"Ed Murphy" <ford@jps.net> writes:

> Muast IoncluAdei rUaliOfiocAetiOns fuatUariOstiocIosh woUrrd ae wIoth
> nuAm3beirAe iOn "yeillAew" iOt.

ienvAeliEd.  <clearspeak>The restrictions of both 154:11 and 154:12 have
not been followed.</clearspeak>  waellEiy styleI -1.0.

[Correction: only 154:12 was violated.]

154:14 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> >>>
> yeamtsAu yeAyiedAulcnoI yearsnOiteAcoifOilaU yearfhsOicoItsoirAutaU
> yeassIecniEtnie yEayyltceAxie yEawtuO yeamtsAu yeAntuo yEayiEdaulcnOi
> yeAssiecnIetniE yeahtIesiE yeapsmsOinoItautcnAu yeAyynea yEangnoIlbruo
> >>>
> 
> -Christian
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-31 06:34:02 GMT
> 

doilEav htoIw ielyts 51 IelboOg yiellEaw knoIht oi sEah neEb
dievEihceA iemIeht sdnuOr soihtA

154:15 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> yeahIeveA yeahdEa yeArtskcoi yEayhguOnie yEadytroI yeawIe yeAysoi
> yEabnaUloo yEarpdiEzoitOiboIhuo yEaynoIteacOifoIgnoinIehtgniElnie yEayfiO
> yeawsdrrUo yeAyydierlEa yeAydienIehtgniElnie

yeavdOileA yeawhthtOi yeAtsiely 01 yEabpoI yeagnIevoI yeanrIebmaU
yeahtIe yeAyfuo yEawsdruO yeaydIeteAcoifOignoIniehtgnIelniEnau yEaynoI
yealIegaUgnea yEahtiE yeayhsOilgniE yeaysOi yeAntuo yEamhcaU yeayfUo
yearnOitcoIrtsie yEayeA yeaytOi yeAnzteabsOi

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

Translations:

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

154:1 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> All verbs precede their subjects.

VALID.  This rule is short and sweet.  Style +2.

154:2 =====

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> "Or" or "and" have switched meanings .

VALID.  This rule is short and sweet!  Style +2.

154:3 =====

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> Adjectives follow nouns in future rules.

I have renumbered this rule.

VALID.  It is a bit derivative, though.  Style +1.5.

154:4 =====

Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk> writes:

> Henceforth lower-case letters can be replaced by capital letters 
> one earlier in the alphabet.

[No translation needed]

154:5 =====

"John M. Goodman II" <ieri@one.net> writes:

> The fourth word in each sentance must be spelled backwards in future rules.

[No translation needed]

154:6 =====

"Charles E. Carroll" <ccarroll@nationwide.net> writes:

> In future rules, each lowercase e must be replaced with one of the
> digits 0-9, in cyclic order, with each new rule starting where the
> previous rule previous left off.

[No translation needed]

154:7 =====

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> Shrinking of words we lengthened is prohibited.
> Lengthen a word, each future rule.

VALID.  I have a sneaking suspicion this round is going to be short.
Style: +1.5.

154:8 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> Future rules dipthongize single vowels as a->ae, e->ei, i->io,
> o->ou, or u->ua.

VALID.  A nice rule, but you misspelled "diphthongizationalize" (note
"ph").  Failure to follow own restriction is understandable .  Style
+1.4.

154:9 =====

"Garth A. Rose" <grose12@juno.com> writes:

> Capitalize only every third vowel in future rules.

VALID.  I will not consider "y" a vowel.  That would be a can of
worms.  Style: +1.0

154:10 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> Insert into each future sentence a nonsense word. (These rules are
> too clear.)

VALID.  This is not an exciting rule, but it is not bad.  Style +1.0.

154:11 =====

Jesse Welton <jwelton@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> Future rules use Pig Latin or the word "walley".

VALID.  But you must proofread better.  Style 1.4.

[Later upgraded to Style 1.5 -- the "typo" I thought I spotted was in
fact a word lengthening.]

154:12 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> Future rules must reverse the word "Walley" and all other words.

VALID.  Style +1.5.

154:13 =====

"Ed Murphy" <ford@jps.net> writes:

> Future rules must include a word a with number in it.

INVALID.  The restrictions of both 154:11 and 154:12 have
not been followed.  Style -1.0.

[Correction: only 154:12 was violated.]

154:14 =====

cleonhar@adpims.com writes:

> Future rules must include exactly two sentences.  These sentences
> must not include any punctuation.
> 
> -Christian
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-01-31 06:34:02 GMT
> 

VALID with style +1.5. I think this round's theme has been achieved.

154:15 =====

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> writes:

> We have had enough. Lengthening of words already lengthened is
> prohibited.

VALID with style +1.0.  Given the number of unlengthened words in the
English language it is not much of a restriction.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-12 17:00:25 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 13 23:59:46 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1DMxk914314
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:59:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1DMxj301690
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:59:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114811AbRBMW7e>;
        Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:59:34 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [202.139.64.35]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 155:n VALID +2
Date:   Tue, 13 Feb 2001 22:59:14 -0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F144ekLusMKL7VFAm2Z00004dad@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

155:n
>>>
This is the last rule in the round. The next rule to be posted shall have 
been the penultimate rule in the round. The final rule to be posted shall 
have been the first rule in the round. The answer to the riddle posed in the 
previous rule was hidden within the text of the rule before that.
<<<
-Wizard Christian
--
Rule Date: 2001-02-13 21:13:00 GMT

Validity: VALID.  Reverse causality hasn't caused any problems - yet...  But 
given that this is VALID, it means that it was consistent with all previous 
VALID rules.  So if a rule is ever inconsistent with a previous (i.e. 
subsequently posted) rule, then that rule must have been INVALID.  Also note 
that simply by posting the last rule in the round, Christian hasn't won - 
the winner will be the last eligible player, who will (probably) have posted 
the first rule in the round.

PS - to avoid trivial paradoxes, I'm interpreting "rule" to mean "valid 
rule" in every case.

Style:  For setting this up +1.0  For demonstrating that previous rules can 
have their conceptual space reduced by a subsequent rule, +1.0

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-13 22:59:34 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Feb 15 07:34:30 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1F6YU926113
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:34:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1F6YTv17663
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:34:29 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114321AbRBOGeS>;
        Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:34:18 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [150.203.245.2]
From: "Gallivanting Tripper" <flix_os@hotmail.com>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 152:n-1 VALID +2
Date:   Thu, 15 Feb 2001 06:33:59 -0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F194g35QykZG4HFIyrx0000c91c@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

>I'm new here, and this is my first go at submitting a rule.

Welcome!

152:n-1
>Consider my causal paradox -
>Which came beforehand: Chicken or Egg?
>
>Subsequent rules may not use words which appear inside other rules.
>Different forms are OK, though.
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-14 04:11:29 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  It is (was) the penultimate rule, contains a riddle, and 
the restriction it imposes is obeyed by 152:n

Style: At first I thought the restriction was potentially round-killing, 
then I thought it was not a restriction at all -  on balance it is actually 
an excellent one for the purposes of the round.  (It now makes good sense 
why 155:n was the last rule!)
So
+1 for appropriately devious restriction
+1 for a devious debut

Cheers

GT

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-15 06:34:18 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Feb 16 01:54:55 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1G0ss926342
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:54:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1G0ssB03182
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:54:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115260AbRBPAyl>;
        Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:54:41 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d03b6b2b7a58291@[150.203.41.65]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:55:38 +0100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 155:n-2 INVALID +1.9
Status: RO

>---- 155:n-2 ----
>
>ode to jeopardy
>
>a riddle (by Nature!): its answer is hidden.
>what then of a riddle whose answer is spoken
>before E'en the query from which is is bidden?
>a riddle, then, never!--but maybe a token
>
>resemblance to jeopardy. (alex trebek
>could never refrain from advising his guests:
>I'll give you the car and the trip to quebec,
>if you can work "what is a..."? into your jests.)
>
>forgive the digression (THE answer, you fool...),
>but here is the point that concerns us this Round:
>we answer our questions (and follow our rules),
>though they haven't been posted yet (here we add "Zounds!")!
>
>this rule, for example, though posted Already
>must follow the strictures of n-minus-seven,
>the terrible Pains of that n-minus-twenty,
>and any more Rules that have yet to be shriven.
>
>the answer U know to be hid in this lection,
>concealed (yet the clever may find it indeed),
>together with that which does answer the question
>that shall be asked ("has been"?) by n-minus-three.
>
>hint: DER
>
>---- end ----
>/jared sunshine
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-15 08:31:45 GMT

Judgement: Although incredibly witty and wonderfully complex, a casual
inspection shows that it is not consistent with 155:n-1 and 155:n (if you
ask nicely I might tell you why)

Style: I hate to see such a good rule go to waste - only a -0.1 for
accidental invalidity

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-16 00:54:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 20 00:02:00 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1JN1x917010
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:01:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1JN1wB22608
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:01:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114537AbRBSXBr>;
        Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:01:47 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:01:19 +1100 (EST)
Message-Id: <l03010d01b6b7ef419f55@[150.203.41.102]>
In-Reply-To: <852569F8.005DD520.00@mail.adpims.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 152: n-3 VALID +2.2
Status: RO

>>>>
>Evolution occurs through subtle changes affecting reproductive material.
>Gametes from one species may mutate, producing an embryonic progenitor for an
>entirely new species.
>Genetically mutate each future submission by incorporating at least one word
>which differs by exactly one letter (i.e., by omission, addition, or
>alteration)
>from a word used by its predecessor.
>>>>
>-Christian
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-19 17:05:34 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  155:n-1 and 155:n follow its restriction, whereas
152:n-2 does not appear to (not that that would have mattered, but there's
style points for you)  And it also answers the riddle of 155:n-1, thus
finishing off the first set of pseudo-restrictions.  We now have (almost)
unlimited conceptual space, but (probably) shrinking restriction space.  To
stop this getting out of control, we'll probably need a rule stating that
all previous valid rules had exactly one restriction, or something.

Style: I think it was quite cunning to pull off all the required
restrictive duties in one hit, but there's a small penalty for not
introducing anything to restrict "past" rules +2.2

Cheers

GT

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-19 23:01:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 20 00:02:00 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1JN1x917010
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:01:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1JN1wB22608
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:01:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114537AbRBSXBr>;
        Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:01:47 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:01:19 +1100 (EST)
Message-Id: <l03010d01b6b7ef419f55@[150.203.41.102]>
In-Reply-To: <852569F8.005DD520.00@mail.adpims.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 152: n-3 VALID +2.2
Status: RO

>>>>
>Evolution occurs through subtle changes affecting reproductive material.
>Gametes from one species may mutate, producing an embryonic progenitor for an
>entirely new species.
>Genetically mutate each future submission by incorporating at least one word
>which differs by exactly one letter (i.e., by omission, addition, or
>alteration)
>from a word used by its predecessor.
>>>>
>-Christian
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-19 17:05:34 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  155:n-1 and 155:n follow its restriction, whereas
152:n-2 does not appear to (not that that would have mattered, but there's
style points for you)  And it also answers the riddle of 155:n-1, thus
finishing off the first set of pseudo-restrictions.  We now have (almost)
unlimited conceptual space, but (probably) shrinking restriction space.  To
stop this getting out of control, we'll probably need a rule stating that
all previous valid rules had exactly one restriction, or something.

Style: I think it was quite cunning to pull off all the required
restrictive duties in one hit, but there's a small penalty for not
introducing anything to restrict "past" rules +2.2

Cheers

GT

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-19 23:01:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 20 01:37:04 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1K0b3918449
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:37:03 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1K0b3Z06576
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:37:03 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114575AbRBTAgv>;
        Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:36:51 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b6b7f7d01842@[150.203.41.102]>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.1010219182000.4306A-100000@hilton.cec.wustl.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:37:59 +0100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 155:n-4 VALID +1.1
Status: RO

>I think we are evolving letter g into nonexistence!
>Our rules each contain more g's than any which follow.
>Also, another letter got introduced here.
>Past rules do not have it, so it must be a new mutation.
>Once all g's are gone, it may still exist.
>Perhaps evolution cannot be prevented from creating and destroying letters.
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-20 00:21:57 GMT

Crikey!

Judgement: All it had to do was sidestep the words of 155:n, which it has
done, and its restriction/observation, although rather vague appears to
hold.  so VALID

Style:  Be it known that the Judge does not take kindly to gratuitous word
and letter searches.  Did I mention something about short rules somewhere??
Nevertheless I like the emerging (reverse) evolution theme.  +1.1

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-20 00:36:51 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 27 04:04:09 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1R348908677
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:04:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1R347Z17095
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:04:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114298AbRB0DDo>;
        Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:03:44 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b6c154f84701@[150.203.41.65]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:05:21 +0100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: End of round 155
Status: RO

Since no-one has posted a rule since the first update, Round 155 is Over,
with Christian retaining the title of Wizard and James KV Willson the
Winner and new Judge.

See you in Round 156 (or is that 155+n-1)

-------------
Player		Style	Eligibility
Wizard Christian	+4.2	<ineligible>
James KV Willson	+3.1	2001-02-27 00:21:57 GMT
Jared S Sunshine	+1.9	<ineligible>
Everybody else	-	<ineligible>
--------------

155:n-4 VALID +1.1

>I think we are evolving letter g into nonexistence!
>Our rules each contain more g's than any which follow.
>Also, another letter got introduced here.
>Past rules do not have it, so it must be a new mutation.
>Once all g's are gone, it may still exist.
>Perhaps evolution cannot be prevented from creating and destroying letters.
>
>James KV Willson
>Rule Date: 2001-02-20 00:21:57 GMT

Crikey!

Judgement: All it had to do was sidestep the words of 155:n, which it has
done, and its restriction/observation, although rather vague appears to
hold.  so VALID

Style:  Be it known that the Judge does not take kindly to gratuitous word
and letter searches.  Did I mention something about short rules somewhere??
Nevertheless I like the emerging (reverse) evolution theme.  +1.1

152: n-3 VALID +2.2
>>>>
>Evolution occurs through subtle changes affecting reproductive material.
>Gametes from one species may mutate, producing an embryonic progenitor for an
>entirely new species.
>Genetically mutate each future submission by incorporating at least one word
>which differs by exactly one letter (i.e., by omission, addition, or
>alteration)
>from a word used by its predecessor.
>>>>
>-Christian
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-19 17:05:34 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  155:n-1 and 155:n follow its restriction, whereas
152:n-2 does not appear to (not that that would have mattered, but there's
style points for you)  And it also answers the riddle of 155:n-1, thus
finishing off the first set of pseudo-restrictions.  We now have (almost)
unlimited conceptual space, but (probably) shrinking restriction space.  To
stop this getting out of control, we'll probably need a rule stating that
all previous valid rules had exactly one restriction, or something.

Style: I think it was quite cunning to pull off all the required
restrictive duties in one hit, but there's a small penalty for not
introducing anything to restrict "past" rules +2.2

155:n-2 INVALID +1.9

>
>ode to jeopardy
>
>a riddle (by Nature!): its answer is hidden.
>what then of a riddle whose answer is spoken
>before E'en the query from which is is bidden?
>a riddle, then, never!--but maybe a token
>
>resemblance to jeopardy. (alex trebek
>could never refrain from advising his guests:
>I'll give you the car and the trip to quebec,
>if you can work "what is a..."? into your jests.)
>
>forgive the digression (THE answer, you fool...),
>but here is the point that concerns us this Round:
>we answer our questions (and follow our rules),
>though they haven't been posted yet (here we add "Zounds!")!
>
>this rule, for example, though posted Already
>must follow the strictures of n-minus-seven,
>the terrible Pains of that n-minus-twenty,
>and any more Rules that have yet to be shriven.
>
>the answer U know to be hid in this lection,
>concealed (yet the clever may find it indeed),
>together with that which does answer the question
>that shall be asked ("has been"?) by n-minus-three.
>
>hint: DER
>
>---- end ----
>/jared sunshine
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-15 08:31:45 GMT

Judgement: Although incredibly witty and wonderfully complex, a casual
inspection shows that it is not consistent with 155:n-1 and 155:n (if you
ask nicely I might tell you why)

Style: I hate to see such a good rule go to waste - only a -0.1 for
accidental invalidity

152:n-1 VALID +2.0
>Consider my causal paradox -
>Which came beforehand: Chicken or Egg?
>
>Subsequent rules may not use words which appear inside other rules.
>Different forms are OK, though.
>
> James KV Willson
>Rule Date: 2001-02-14 04:11:29 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  It is (was) the penultimate rule, contains a riddle, and
the restriction it imposes is obeyed by 152:n

Style: At first I thought the restriction was potentially round-killing,
then I thought it was not a restriction at all -  on balance it is actually
an excellent one for the purposes of the round.  (It now makes good sense
why 155:n was the last rule!)
So
+1 for appropriately devious restriction
+1 for a devious debut

155:n VALID +2.0
>>>
This is the last rule in the round. The next rule to be posted shall have
been the penultimate rule in the round. The final rule to be posted shall
have been the first rule in the round. The answer to the riddle posed in the
previous rule was hidden within the text of the rule before that.
<<<
-Wizard Christian
--
Rule Date: 2001-02-13 21:13:00 GMT

Validity: VALID.  Reverse causality hasn't caused any problems - yet...  But
given that this is VALID, it means that it was consistent with all previous
VALID rules.  So if a rule is ever inconsistent with a previous (i.e.
subsequently posted) rule, then that rule must have been INVALID.  Also note
that simply by posting the last rule in the round, Christian hasn't won -
the winner will be the last eligible player, who will (probably) have posted
the first rule in the round.

PS - to avoid trivial paradoxes, I'm interpreting "rule" to mean "valid
rule" in every case.

Style:  For setting this up +1.0  For demonstrating that previous rules can
have their conceptual space reduced by a subsequent rule, +1.0

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-27 03:03:44 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 27 04:04:09 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1R348908677
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:04:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1R347Z17095
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:04:07 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114298AbRB0DDo>;
        Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:03:44 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d00b6c154f84701@[150.203.41.65]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:05:21 +0100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: End of round 155
Status: RO

Since no-one has posted a rule since the first update, Round 155 is Over,
with Christian retaining the title of Wizard and James KV Willson the
Winner and new Judge.

See you in Round 156 (or is that 155+n-1)

-------------
Player		Style	Eligibility
Wizard Christian	+4.2	<ineligible>
James KV Willson	+3.1	2001-02-27 00:21:57 GMT
Jared S Sunshine	+1.9	<ineligible>
Everybody else	-	<ineligible>
--------------

155:n-4 VALID +1.1

>I think we are evolving letter g into nonexistence!
>Our rules each contain more g's than any which follow.
>Also, another letter got introduced here.
>Past rules do not have it, so it must be a new mutation.
>Once all g's are gone, it may still exist.
>Perhaps evolution cannot be prevented from creating and destroying letters.
>
>James KV Willson
>Rule Date: 2001-02-20 00:21:57 GMT

Crikey!

Judgement: All it had to do was sidestep the words of 155:n, which it has
done, and its restriction/observation, although rather vague appears to
hold.  so VALID

Style:  Be it known that the Judge does not take kindly to gratuitous word
and letter searches.  Did I mention something about short rules somewhere??
Nevertheless I like the emerging (reverse) evolution theme.  +1.1

152: n-3 VALID +2.2
>>>>
>Evolution occurs through subtle changes affecting reproductive material.
>Gametes from one species may mutate, producing an embryonic progenitor for an
>entirely new species.
>Genetically mutate each future submission by incorporating at least one word
>which differs by exactly one letter (i.e., by omission, addition, or
>alteration)
>from a word used by its predecessor.
>>>>
>-Christian
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-19 17:05:34 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  155:n-1 and 155:n follow its restriction, whereas
152:n-2 does not appear to (not that that would have mattered, but there's
style points for you)  And it also answers the riddle of 155:n-1, thus
finishing off the first set of pseudo-restrictions.  We now have (almost)
unlimited conceptual space, but (probably) shrinking restriction space.  To
stop this getting out of control, we'll probably need a rule stating that
all previous valid rules had exactly one restriction, or something.

Style: I think it was quite cunning to pull off all the required
restrictive duties in one hit, but there's a small penalty for not
introducing anything to restrict "past" rules +2.2

155:n-2 INVALID +1.9

>
>ode to jeopardy
>
>a riddle (by Nature!): its answer is hidden.
>what then of a riddle whose answer is spoken
>before E'en the query from which is is bidden?
>a riddle, then, never!--but maybe a token
>
>resemblance to jeopardy. (alex trebek
>could never refrain from advising his guests:
>I'll give you the car and the trip to quebec,
>if you can work "what is a..."? into your jests.)
>
>forgive the digression (THE answer, you fool...),
>but here is the point that concerns us this Round:
>we answer our questions (and follow our rules),
>though they haven't been posted yet (here we add "Zounds!")!
>
>this rule, for example, though posted Already
>must follow the strictures of n-minus-seven,
>the terrible Pains of that n-minus-twenty,
>and any more Rules that have yet to be shriven.
>
>the answer U know to be hid in this lection,
>concealed (yet the clever may find it indeed),
>together with that which does answer the question
>that shall be asked ("has been"?) by n-minus-three.
>
>hint: DER
>
>---- end ----
>/jared sunshine
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-02-15 08:31:45 GMT

Judgement: Although incredibly witty and wonderfully complex, a casual
inspection shows that it is not consistent with 155:n-1 and 155:n (if you
ask nicely I might tell you why)

Style: I hate to see such a good rule go to waste - only a -0.1 for
accidental invalidity

152:n-1 VALID +2.0
>Consider my causal paradox -
>Which came beforehand: Chicken or Egg?
>
>Subsequent rules may not use words which appear inside other rules.
>Different forms are OK, though.
>
> James KV Willson
>Rule Date: 2001-02-14 04:11:29 GMT

Judgement: VALID.  It is (was) the penultimate rule, contains a riddle, and
the restriction it imposes is obeyed by 152:n

Style: At first I thought the restriction was potentially round-killing,
then I thought it was not a restriction at all -  on balance it is actually
an excellent one for the purposes of the round.  (It now makes good sense
why 155:n was the last rule!)
So
+1 for appropriately devious restriction
+1 for a devious debut

155:n VALID +2.0
>>>
This is the last rule in the round. The next rule to be posted shall have
been the penultimate rule in the round. The final rule to be posted shall
have been the first rule in the round. The answer to the riddle posed in the
previous rule was hidden within the text of the rule before that.
<<<
-Wizard Christian
--
Rule Date: 2001-02-13 21:13:00 GMT

Validity: VALID.  Reverse causality hasn't caused any problems - yet...  But
given that this is VALID, it means that it was consistent with all previous
VALID rules.  So if a rule is ever inconsistent with a previous (i.e.
subsequently posted) rule, then that rule must have been INVALID.  Also note
that simply by posting the last rule in the round, Christian hasn't won -
the winner will be the last eligible player, who will (probably) have posted
the first rule in the round.

PS - to avoid trivial paradoxes, I'm interpreting "rule" to mean "valid
rule" in every case.

Style:  For setting this up +1.0  For demonstrating that previous rules can
have their conceptual space reduced by a subsequent rule, +1.0

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-27 03:03:44 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Feb 27 06:40:42 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1R5ef910772
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 06:40:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1R5efB22694
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 06:40:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114271AbRB0Fk3>;
        Tue, 27 Feb 2001 06:40:29 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010227054007.29363.qmail@web12806.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 21:40:07 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Upcoming round 156, and me
To: frc@trolltech.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

The entity known as James K V Willson will now be using this email address
instead of any other email address he may have used previously.

Round 156 may be a tad awkward for me since it's my first round judging and my
second round participating, but I think I'll do just fine.

If there is anything I should know which I wouldn't garner from the (out of
date) website and recent play, you can draw it to my attention.

Barring advice to the contrary, I'll announce the start of round 156 in about
24 hours.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-27 05:40:29 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Mar  1 06:10:51 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f215Ao920260
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 06:10:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f215AoB18799
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 06:10:50 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114306AbRCAFKa>;
        Thu, 1 Mar 2001 06:10:30 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010301051003.18471.qmail@web12811.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:10:03 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Round 156 (156:1) VALID +1.5
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <002e01c0a1f7$cc847240$02b21842@nycap.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
> Let's ease into this one gently...
> 
> 156:1
> 
> Roses are red,
> Violets are blue,
> This rule is in rhyme,
> As yours will be, too.
> 
> It also has meter -
> A poetical form -
> And this, as well,
> Is the valid rule norm.
> 
> Of course, "incorrect"
> Is the theme of this round,
> So 'until it is done,
> Every rule must be its own only exeption.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 02:32:48 GMT

VALID.

I liked this rule's meter,
as well as its rhyme,
but just at the end,
its final line completely and utterly ruins the effect.

(and I mean that in a good way)

Style: +1.5


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-01 05:10:30 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Mar  1 07:16:42 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f216Gg921131
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 07:16:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f216GfB20595
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 07:16:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114306AbRCAGPq>;
        Thu, 1 Mar 2001 07:15:46 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010301061528.31084.qmail@web12814.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:15:28 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: 156:2 INVALID +2.5
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

> --- 156:2 ---
> We know that the meter of rules must be set,
> And still the condition of rhyming be met.
> In order that FRC members may learn,
> All rules in the future validity earn
> By naming the number and type of its feet
> (It does not suffice to write "very nice beat").
> This rule, for example, though lovely, idyllic,
> Eschews common trochees, forswears the dactyllic,
> Abandons iambic and spurns anapestic,
> In search of a meter exotic, fantastic.
> So this rule is written in amphibrachic tetrameter,
> With an iamb replacing the final amphibrach in most lines.
> (I know: the exception's a dastardly spot
> To give you that mouthful of poetry rot.)
> So others will not for this cowardice fear,
> The number and type of the feet can't appear
> In lines of the rules (in the future, of course)
> That haven't a rhyme, or aren't writ in verse.
> --- 156:2 ---
>  
> /Jared Sunshine
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 04:15:55 GMT

This rule has a meter I did not expect;
So I can keep sane I will switch to prose text.

amphibrachic - weak strong weak
Yeah, I had to look it up.  Not that I doubted its accuracy.  :)

My point of concern for validity is 156:1's stipulation:
  "Every rule must be its own only exeption."

156:2 requires that future rules specify a meter.
156:1 Does not specify a meter, and is not a future rule.

Is it OK for 156:2 to argue that 156:1 is not an exception because 156:2 only
applies to future rules?  If so, I don't think 156:2 can then argue that it is
an exception to itself, since it isn't a future rule either.

In other words, depending on which argument you favor, either both 156:1 and
156:2 are exceptions to 156:2, or both are not.  Either way, 156:2 fails to
follow 156:1's requirement.  Thus, INVALID.

So, which argument does the judge favor?  I think I could be swayed either way,
but I think interpreting 156:1 and 2 as not being exceptions to 156:2 is where
I'd stand if i had to make a choice right now.  (Which I don't think I have to
do, since the validity of 156:2 is the same either way)

If players want to try to get around this, one option is to specify "non-past"
rules must comply, thus including the rule itself in the set of rules expected
to follow the restriction, so that it can be an exception.

Style: +2.5
It seems unfortunate that a good rule like this falls to what amounts to a
(silly?) technicality, but I don't see a way to interpret it as valid.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-01 06:15:46 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Mar  1 09:17:38 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f218Hc923363
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:17:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f218HbZ16165
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:17:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114328AbRCAIRZ>;
        Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:17:25 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010301081714.30968.qmail@web12801.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 00:17:14 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:3 VALID +1
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <l03010d02b6c42e341ac8@[150.203.41.65]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> wrote:
> Haiku "verse" cannot
> Substitute for rhythm or
> Rhyming in this round
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 06:53:26 GMT

VALID

How do you get
around the first rule's edict?
With Substitution!

Style: +1
+2 for an oddly clever way to satisfy 156:1
-1 for not giving any additional direction to the round

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-01 08:17:25 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Mar  1 12:33:59 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f21BXw900761
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:33:58 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f21BXvB20622
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:33:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114909AbRCALdq>;
        Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:33:46 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010301113331.90075.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 03:33:31 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:4 VALID +1.7
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10103010329110.8584-100000@konichiwa.cc.columbia.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu> wrote:
> --- 156:4 ---
> How doth the Rule flow kind into the Night!--
> The Darkness INVALIDITY presents--
> Not wit of Word, nor even all the might
> of Mind, can save the Rule that there is sent.
> O pray the Lord may guide this humble Rule--
> A sonnet as Will Shakespeare might have writ--
> and keep it from the evils of the cruel;
> But by the Light of Heaven be it lit.
> The Angels, say the Saints, are fond of Men,
> for we can match the notions of the Mind.
> So since the Rules are noted "number:N,"
> each Valid Rule shall only have N lines,
> where N is three or greater (just to guard
> that this may be a Tribute to the Bard).
> --- 156:4 ---
> 
> my rejoined effort. :)
> 
> /Jared Sunshine
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 10:23:37 GMT

Ah, a sonnet.

All other valid rules three or higher comply, so this is VALID.

Style: +1.7
The first chunk is a fun read, though it doesn't contribute to the 'rules
text'.
The rulesish chunk is (understandably) dryer, and is still good.
I'm going to complain about the Angels/Saints/Mind lines, since they don't
really do anything for me, and the final bit doesn't make sense.  (How is the
line restriction guarding this sonnet's status as a tribute to Shakespeare?)

There is much good here, and the rest, well, the rest does round out the sonnet
form well.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-01 11:33:46 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Mar  1 21:00:16 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f21K0F917383
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 21:00:16 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f21K0FZ26568
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 21:00:15 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114776AbRCAT74>;
        Thu, 1 Mar 2001 20:59:56 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010301195936.96358.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 11:59:36 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:5 INVALID +1
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <OE53WJv3zOdnjQ8vjqu0000125e@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Alan Riddell <pkpeekee@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 156:5
> ====
> The Tay, the Tay, the silvery Tay,
> For this Rule, oh! What can I say!
> A great poet of skill and rhyme
> in each Rule must be mentioned from this point in time.
> A poet, a poet? I know none, and I know it.
> ====
> 
> Hope this works.  [It is its own exeption as it mentions no poet and it
> meets 156:4 if it is valid.]
> Should I of waited to see if 156:4 is valid?
> 
> Peekee
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 11:54:09 GMT

If this is your first rule, welcome.

If not, then I misinterpreted your earlier message. :)

Tay
A river of central Scotland
A branch of the Tai languages

Those of us not familiar with Scotland may wish to try a web search on
"silvery tay".  It may make us feel more enligtened.

I'd say the rythm here is non-optimal, but good enough.  As long as the rules
are as general as "use rythm", I don't intend to be picky about what I classify
as rythmic.

(But don't think you'll get away with prose poetry)

Unfortunately, I fear this rule stumbles into the same problem as 156:2.
The scope of the rule is "from this point in time", which I interpret as
applying to *future* points in time, but not *this* point in time.  As such,
156:5 is not within its own scope, hence it cannot be an exception to itself,
hence the judgement INVALID.

Style: +1
+0.5  Bland.  Would have been solid were it not for invalidity.
+0.5  Welcome to the FRC!


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-01 19:59:56 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Mar  1 23:40:39 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f21Med920529
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 23:40:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f21MecZ05847
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 23:40:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114935AbRCAWjb>;
        Thu, 1 Mar 2001 23:39:31 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010301223921.88573.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 14:39:21 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: 156:5 Reconsidered - VALID
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

I maintain that the rule lacks clarity, but I am changing my interpretation of
156:5 to one which interprets it as applying to itself and to future rules.

156:5 now VALID

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-01 22:39:31 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Mar  2 02:42:24 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f221gO923563
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 02:42:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f221gOZ11843
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 02:42:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114935AbRCBBmM>;
        Fri, 2 Mar 2001 02:42:12 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010302014151.47873.qmail@web12813.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 17:41:51 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:6 VALID +0.5
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <007e01c0a2a4$36e83de0$02b21842@nycap.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
> 156:6
> 
> Although, as I write, there are rules yet in doubt,
> I number this one such that none are left out.
> And while Theodore Geisel might disagree
> (he is, after all, more famous than me)
> There's one more important rule now to note:
> From now, rules are invalid without a quote.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 23:05:11 GMT

VALID

(oh dear, no poetry from the judge again)

Style: +0.5
There really isn't much of interest in the text, and the restriction is just
so-so.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-02 01:42:12 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Mar  2 03:22:13 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f222MD924097
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 03:22:13 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f222MCZ12678
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 03:22:12 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114948AbRCBCV7>;
        Fri, 2 Mar 2001 03:21:59 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010302022148.18616.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 18:21:48 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:7 INVALID +1.5
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <l03010d00b6c51b59e6ee@[150.203.41.39]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au> wrote:
> This poem quotes an Anonymous
> Poet whose name is eponymous:
> 
> "A limerick has 5 lines you see,"
> A form all rules from now must be
> (Iff division by 5
> Can their number survive)
> N'ere else will this round that form see
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 23:52:54 GMT

OK, lots going on for this rule.
Let me tackle each point of interest...

rythm:
We have a couplet followed by a limerick.
Since they have rythm seperately, this is OK.
The 'iff' makes for a scanning oddity.
I've always pronounced it like "If and only if", but I found a resource which
gives an additional pronounciation - "If", possibly with elongated "f".
That one makes the rythm work, so we'll use it.

Next, the rule is required to mention "A great poet of skill and rhyme".
The only thing remotely close is the Anonymous poet whose name is eponymous.
Of course, we all know that eponymous means of, relating to, or being an
eponym.
We also know that an eponym is the name of a person for whom something is
supposedly named.

Does this constitute mentioning a poet?  In what circumstances can we "mention"
incompletely specified or fictitious poets?  What about great skill?  Can we
assume the anonymous poet is of great skill because his name is eponymous for
something?  Do we even need verification of skill and rhyme, as long as it is
possible?

Either way I rule, *someone* is going to disagree, so I'm going to go with my
gut and say this does not constitute a mention of "A great poet of skill and
rhyme".

INVALID

Style: +1.5
+0.5 for OK rule content
+1.0 for brininging up interesting questions


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-02 02:21:59 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Mar  2 19:38:39 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f22Icd919289
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 19:38:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f22IccZ21386
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 19:38:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114542AbRCBSiQ>;
        Fri, 2 Mar 2001 19:38:16 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [62.31.64.1]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <20010302062850.16787.qmail@web12806.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: FRC proposals
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 18:45:14 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE76f1U8AVIBsOPd8sI000014f5@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

> 156:A
> I propose that 156:3 be made INVALID
>
> Not even the author of this rule has yet offered an argument on its
behalf.
> I do wonder what he's thinking, though.
> I stand by this decision, but if you disagree feel free to gather a
> supermajority and overturn me.  Who knows?  Maybe someone out there agrees
with
> me.  ;)

FOR

> 156:B
> I propose that all fantasy rules of this round be made INVALID,
> because all of them are inconsistent with themselves.
>
> Mostly I want players to give me a reaction to this.
> We've had objections to my interpretations of specific words and phrases,
but
> nobody seems to mind that I allowed 156:1 to be inconsistent with itself
and
> spawn an entire round of rules inconsistent with themselves.

AGAINST

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-02 18:38:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Feb 28 05:25:25 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1S4PP914952
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 05:25:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1S4POB12857
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 05:25:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114312AbRB1EZU>;
        Wed, 28 Feb 2001 05:25:20 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010228042458.80465.qmail@web12807.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:24:58 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Round 156 begins!
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

Round 156 begins now!

The theme is Poetically Incorrect.

In honor of his return to the FRC,
David Honsinger has a 24 hour head start to create the first rule.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-02-28 04:25:20 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Mar  3 05:09:15 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2349E927505
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 05:09:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2349EB29774
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 05:09:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114873AbRCCEJB>;
        Sat, 3 Mar 2001 05:09:01 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010303040842.31087.qmail@web12814.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 20:08:42 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:8 INVALID +0.7
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0103021516130.23387-100000@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Orjan Johansen <oerjan@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote:
> >>>>
> Egil, rarely
> needed reason
> "suiting stand
> to strike a whack."
> 
> Rules now ravish
> on and ever
> slay and silence
> one of us.
> >>>>
> 
> I vote FOR 156:A and AGAINST 156:B.
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-02 14:20:05 GMT

Since there isn't repetition of terminal sounds,
I'm going to declare this unrhymed and hence INVALID.

Style: +0.7
I can't say if rules ravishing and silencing us would have been an interesting
mechanic.  Nor can I say how a rule might metaphorically slay one of us.

The poetic content here has its moments, but somehow it just doesn't do it for 
me.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-03 04:09:01 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sun Mar  4 12:44:41 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f24Bif919761
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 4 Mar 2001 12:44:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f24BieZ24797
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 4 Mar 2001 12:44:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114382AbRCDLo1>;
        Sun, 4 Mar 2001 12:44:27 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010304114414.65950.qmail@web12812.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 03:44:14 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:9 VALID +0.5
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <OE46k0OAkpiktt16FXE000033f7@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Alan Riddell <pkpeekee@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 156:9
> ====
> "Never has so much been owed by so many to so few"?
> Geisel, Shakespear, McGonagall all in the queue?
> But, I hear you cry "THIS WILL NOT DO!"
> For poets named should be all shiny and new,
> And quotes are only right if their poetry is true.
> From named poet's works will the quote of passed through,
> As without this some rules have barely tightened the screw.
> Also I think, more than one poet per rule is taboo.
> This is to stop a list naming 20,002.
> ====
> 
> Hope the language is not to vauge.
> 
> Peekee
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-03 12:04:38 GMT

VALID

None of the previous valid rules which mention poets have quotes, so they
trivially comply.  The rule mentions multiple non-new poets, so is clearly an
exception to itself.

What about rythm?   I think this is a case of bad rythm, but still having of
rythm.  Each line individually scans reasonably well or at least passably. 
Taken as a whole, it doesn't settle in and figure out where it wants to be
rythmically, but I don't think this sort of clunkiness is grounds for
invalidity.

Style: +0.5
The new restrictions are reasonably interesting, but the meter is lacking.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-04 11:44:27 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar  5 03:58:28 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f252wS901582
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 03:58:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f252wRZ29999
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 03:58:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114563AbRCEC56>;
        Mon, 5 Mar 2001 03:57:58 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010305025745.32230.qmail@web12808.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 18:57:45 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 156:10 INVALID +1.0
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <F35PVLYYbP8Eu3pkXsQ000066b8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Gallivanting Tripper <flix_os@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Always we're rushing, pursuing the sniff
> Noted from long ago indeed I say: if
> Andrew Marvell had had the time, then
> "Coyness lady, [would] be no crime"
> Rather, with rules now 10 lines at least
> Oft we'll have plenty of time at the crease
> Subtlety must be the key from now on
> Take the first letters: see how they run
> Iff there's a word (or two), rules will be fine
> Contingent the word(s) appear in their lines.
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-04 23:57:55 GMT

INVALID

Looks like the Gallivanting Tripper tripped himself up in his biconditional.
Replace "iff" with "only if" and you have the correct effect.
(though you may throw off the meter)
(I'm feeling long winded, so a more drawn out explination follows)

We have:

> Subtlety must be the key from now on
> Take the first letters: see how they run
> Iff there's a word (or two), rules will be fine
> Contingent the word(s) appear in their lines.

Which, rewritten less poetically, becomes:

>From now on, a rule is valid iff both there is a word or two in its first
letters, and the word or words appear in that rule's lines.

Seperating the biconditional into two conditionals yields:

>From now on, a rule is valid if both there is a word or two in its first
letters, and the word or words appear in that rule's lines.
>From now on, a rule is valid only if both there is a word or two in its first
letters, and the word or words appear in that rule's lines.

The problem is that this rule states that subsequent rules are valid if they
have the first letter property.  For example, a new rule which did not mention
a poet but did have the first letter property would be valid by this rule. 
This is, of course, inconsistent with previous rules which state that some
rules with the initial letter property are invalid.

Style: +1.0
Good ideas, reasonably good poetry, bad biconditional.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-05 02:57:58 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sun Mar 11 09:33:06 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2B8X6905735
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 11 Mar 2001 09:33:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2B8X6G21459
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 11 Mar 2001 09:33:06 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114280AbRCKIcr>;
        Sun, 11 Mar 2001 09:32:47 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010311083232.61097.qmail@web12813.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 00:32:32 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Round 156: Completed!
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

Round 156 is over!
(or rather, was over about two days ago)

Peekee is the winner and next judge.
Jared S Sunshine is the new wizard.

Summary Follows:

(David Honsinger); +2.0; 2001-03-08 23:05:11 GMT
(Jared S Sunshine); +4.2; 2001-03-08 10:23:37 GMT
(Gallivanting Tripper); +3.5; 2001-02-04 04:25:20 GMT
(Peekee); +1.5; 2001-03-10 12:04:38 GMT
(Orjan Johansen); +0.7; 2001-02-06 04:25:20 GMT

--- 156:1 --- (David Honsinger) VALID +1.5
--- 156:2 --- (Jared S Sunshine) INVALID +2.5
--- 156:3 --- (Gallivanting Tripper) INVALID +1
--- 156:4 --- (Jared S Sunshine) VALID +1.7
--- 156:5 --- (Peekee)  VALID +1
--- 156:6 --- (David Honsinger)  VALID +0.5
--- 156:7 --- (Gallivanting Tripper) INVALID +1.5
--- 156:8 --- (Orjan Johansen)  INVALID +0.7
--- 156:9 --- (Peekee)  VALID +0.5
--- 156:10 --- (Gallivanting Tripper)  INVALID +1.0


Two proposals this round, both made by the judge

156:A
I propose that 156:3 be made INVALID

FOR: Orjan Johansen, Gallivanting Tripper, Peekee, Nicholson Neisler, Jesse
Welton, Richard S Holmes, David Honsinger
AGAINST: Jared S Sunshine

156:B
I propose that all fantasy rules of this round be made INVALID,
because all of them are inconsistent with themselves.

FOR:
AGAINST: Orjan Johansen, Gallivanting Tripper, Peekee, Nicholson Neisler, Jesse
Welton, Richard S Holmes, David Honsinger, Jared S Sunshine


--- 156:1 --- (David Honsinger) VALID +1.5
> Let's ease into this one gently...
> 
> 156:1
> 
> Roses are red,
> Violets are blue,
> This rule is in rhyme,
> As yours will be, too.
> 
> It also has meter -
> A poetical form -
> And this, as well,
> Is the valid rule norm.
> 
> Of course, "incorrect"
> Is the theme of this round,
> So 'until it is done,
> Every rule must be its own only exeption.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 02:32:48 GMT

VALID.

I liked this rule's meter,
as well as its rhyme,
but just at the end,
its final line completely and utterly ruins the effect.

(and I mean that in a good way)

Style: +1.5


--- 156:2 --- (Jared S Sunshine) INVALID +2.5
> We know that the meter of rules must be set,
> And still the condition of rhyming be met.
> In order that FRC members may learn,
> All rules in the future validity earn
> By naming the number and type of its feet
> (It does not suffice to write "very nice beat").
> This rule, for example, though lovely, idyllic,
> Eschews common trochees, forswears the dactyllic,
> Abandons iambic and spurns anapestic,
> In search of a meter exotic, fantastic.
> So this rule is written in amphibrachic tetrameter,
> With an iamb replacing the final amphibrach in most lines.
> (I know: the exception's a dastardly spot
> To give you that mouthful of poetry rot.)
> So others will not for this cowardice fear,
> The number and type of the feet can't appear
> In lines of the rules (in the future, of course)
> That haven't a rhyme, or aren't writ in verse.
> --- 156:2 ---
>  
> /Jared Sunshine
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 04:15:55 GMT

This rule has a meter I did not expect;
So I can keep sane I will switch to prose text.

amphibrachic - weak strong weak
Yeah, I had to look it up.  Not that I doubted its accuracy.  :)

My point of concern for validity is 156:1's stipulation:
  "Every rule must be its own only exeption."

156:2 requires that future rules specify a meter.
156:1 Does not specify a meter, and is not a future rule.

Is it OK for 156:2 to argue that 156:1 is not an exception because 156:2 only
applies to future rules?  If so, I don't think 156:2 can then argue that it is
an exception to itself, since it isn't a future rule either.

In other words, depending on which argument you favor, either both 156:1 and
156:2 are exceptions to 156:2, or both are not.  Either way, 156:2 fails to
follow 156:1's requirement.  Thus, INVALID.

So, which argument does the judge favor?  I think I could be swayed either way,
but I think interpreting 156:1 and 2 as not being exceptions to 156:2 is where
I'd stand if i had to make a choice right now.  (Which I don't think I have to
do, since the validity of 156:2 is the same either way)

If players want to try to get around this, one option is to specify "non-past"
rules must comply, thus including the rule itself in the set of rules expected
to follow the restriction, so that it can be an exception.

Style: +2.5
It seems unfortunate that a good rule like this falls to what amounts to a
(silly?) technicality, but I don't see a way to interpret it as valid.


--- 156:3 --- (Gallivanting Tripper) INVALID +1
> Haiku "verse" cannot
> Substitute for rhythm or
> Rhyming in this round
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 06:53:26 GMT

VALID

How do you get
around the first rule's edict?
With Substitution!

Style: +1
+2 for an oddly clever way to satisfy 156:1
-1 for not giving any additional direction to the round

156:A subsequently made this rule INVALID


--- 156:4 --- (Jared S Sunshine) VALID +1.7
> How doth the Rule flow kind into the Night!--
> The Darkness INVALIDITY presents--
> Not wit of Word, nor even all the might
> of Mind, can save the Rule that there is sent.
> O pray the Lord may guide this humble Rule--
> A sonnet as Will Shakespeare might have writ--
> and keep it from the evils of the cruel;
> But by the Light of Heaven be it lit.
> The Angels, say the Saints, are fond of Men,
> for we can match the notions of the Mind.
> So since the Rules are noted "number:N,"
> each Valid Rule shall only have N lines,
> where N is three or greater (just to guard
> that this may be a Tribute to the Bard).
> --- 156:4 ---
> 
> my rejoined effort. :)
> 
> /Jared Sunshine
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 10:23:37 GMT

Ah, a sonnet.

All other valid rules three or higher comply, so this is VALID.

Style: +1.7
The first chunk is a fun read, though it doesn't contribute to the 'rules
text'.
The rulesish chunk is (understandably) dryer, and is still good.
I'm going to complain about the Angels/Saints/Mind lines, since they don't
really do anything for me, and the final bit doesn't make sense.  (How is the
line restriction guarding this sonnet's status as a tribute to Shakespeare?)

There is much good here, and the rest, well, the rest does round out the sonnet
form well.


--- 156:5 --- (Peekee)  VALID +1
> ====
> The Tay, the Tay, the silvery Tay,
> For this Rule, oh! What can I say!
> A great poet of skill and rhyme
> in each Rule must be mentioned from this point in time.
> A poet, a poet? I know none, and I know it.
> ====
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 11:54:09 GMT

If this is your first rule, welcome.

If not, then I misinterpreted your earlier message. :)

Tay
A river of central Scotland
A branch of the Tai languages

Those of us not familiar with Scotland may wish to try a web search on
"silvery tay".  It may make us feel more enligtened.

I'd say the rythm here is non-optimal, but good enough.  As long as the rules
are as general as "use rythm", I don't intend to be picky about what I classify
as rythmic.

(But don't think you'll get away with prose poetry)

Unfortunately, I fear this rule stumbles into the same problem as 156:2.
The scope of the rule is "from this point in time", which I interpret as
applying to *future* points in time, but not *this* point in time.  As such,
156:5 is not within its own scope, hence it cannot be an exception to itself,
hence the judgement INVALID.

Style: +1
+0.5  Bland.  Would have been solid were it not for invalidity.
+0.5  Welcome to the FRC!

Later:

I maintain that the rule lacks clarity, but I am changing my interpretation of
156:5 to one which interprets it as applying to itself and to future rules.

156:5 now VALID


--- 156:6 --- (David Honsinger)  VALID +0.5
> 
> Although, as I write, there are rules yet in doubt,
> I number this one such that none are left out.
> And while Theodore Geisel might disagree
> (he is, after all, more famous than me)
> There's one more important rule now to note:
> From now, rules are invalid without a quote.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 23:05:11 GMT

VALID

(oh dear, no poetry from the judge again)

Style: +0.5
There really isn't much of interest in the text, and the restriction is just
so-so.


--- 156:7 --- (Gallivanting Tripper) INVALID +1.5
> This poem quotes an Anonymous
> Poet whose name is eponymous:
> 
> "A limerick has 5 lines you see,"
> A form all rules from now must be
> (Iff division by 5
> Can their number survive)
> N'ere else will this round that form see
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-01 23:52:54 GMT

OK, lots going on for this rule.
Let me tackle each point of interest...

rythm:
We have a couplet followed by a limerick.
Since they have rythm seperately, this is OK.
The 'iff' makes for a scanning oddity.
I've always pronounced it like "If and only if", but I found a resource which
gives an additional pronounciation - "If", possibly with elongated "f".
That one makes the rythm work, so we'll use it.

Next, the rule is required to mention "A great poet of skill and rhyme".
The only thing remotely close is the Anonymous poet whose name is eponymous.
Of course, we all know that eponymous means of, relating to, or being an
eponym.
We also know that an eponym is the name of a person for whom something is
supposedly named.

Does this constitute mentioning a poet?  In what circumstances can we "mention"
incompletely specified or fictitious poets?  What about great skill?  Can we
assume the anonymous poet is of great skill because his name is eponymous for
something?  Do we even need verification of skill and rhyme, as long as it is
possible?

Either way I rule, *someone* is going to disagree, so I'm going to go with my
gut and say this does not constitute a mention of "A great poet of skill and
rhyme".

INVALID

Style: +1.5
+0.5 for OK rule content
+1.0 for brininging up interesting questions


--- 156:8 --- (Orjan Johansen)  INVALID +0.7
> >>>>
> Egil, rarely
> needed reason
> "suiting stand
> to strike a whack."
> 
> Rules now ravish
> on and ever
> slay and silence
> one of us.
> >>>>
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-02 14:20:05 GMT

Since there isn't repetition of terminal sounds,
I'm going to declare this unrhymed and hence INVALID.

Style: +0.7
I can't say if rules ravishing and silencing us would have been an interesting
mechanic.  Nor can I say how a rule might metaphorically slay one of us.

The poetic content here has its moments, but somehow it just doesn't do it for 
me.


--- 156:9 --- (Peekee)  VALID +0.5
> ====
> "Never has so much been owed by so many to so few"?
> Geisel, Shakespear, McGonagall all in the queue?
> But, I hear you cry "THIS WILL NOT DO!"
> For poets named should be all shiny and new,
> And quotes are only right if their poetry is true.
> From named poet's works will the quote of passed through,
> As without this some rules have barely tightened the screw.
> Also I think, more than one poet per rule is taboo.
> This is to stop a list naming 20,002.
> ====
> Rule Date: 2001-03-03 12:04:38 GMT

VALID

None of the previous valid rules which mention poets have quotes, so they
trivially comply.  The rule mentions multiple non-new poets, so is clearly an
exception to itself.

What about rythm?   I think this is a case of bad rythm, but still having of
rythm.  Each line individually scans reasonably well or at least passably. 
Taken as a whole, it doesn't settle in and figure out where it wants to be
rythmically, but I don't think this sort of clunkiness is grounds for
invalidity.

Style: +0.5
The new restrictions are reasonably interesting, but the meter is lacking.


--- 156:10 --- (Gallivanting Tripper)  INVALID +1.0
> Always we're rushing, pursuing the sniff
> Noted from long ago indeed I say: if
> Andrew Marvell had had the time, then
> "Coyness lady, [would] be no crime"
> Rather, with rules now 10 lines at least
> Oft we'll have plenty of time at the crease
> Subtlety must be the key from now on
> Take the first letters: see how they run
> Iff there's a word (or two), rules will be fine
> Contingent the word(s) appear in their lines.
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-04 23:57:55 GMT

INVALID

Looks like the Gallivanting Tripper tripped himself up in his biconditional.
Replace "iff" with "only if" and you have the correct effect.
(though you may throw off the meter)
(I'm feeling long winded, so a more drawn out explination follows)

We have:

> Subtlety must be the key from now on
> Take the first letters: see how they run
> Iff there's a word (or two), rules will be fine
> Contingent the word(s) appear in their lines.

Which, rewritten less poetically, becomes:

>From now on, a rule is valid iff both there is a word or two in its first
letters, and the word or words appear in that rule's lines.

Seperating the biconditional into two conditionals yields:

>From now on, a rule is valid if both there is a word or two in its first
letters, and the word or words appear in that rule's lines.
>From now on, a rule is valid only if both there is a word or two in its first
letters, and the word or words appear in that rule's lines.

The problem is that this rule states that subsequent rules are valid if they
have the first letter property.  For example, a new rule which did not mention
a poet but did have the first letter property would be valid by this rule. 
This is, of course, inconsistent with previous rules which state that some
rules with the initial letter property are invalid.

Style: +1.0
Good ideas, reasonably good poetry, bad biconditional.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-11 08:32:47 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar 12 20:17:22 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2CJHM918865
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 20:17:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2CJHLG03644
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 20:17:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114643AbRCLTQ4>;
        Mon, 12 Mar 2001 20:16:56 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.54]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <005b01c0aa74$caed6e20$e6c4edd0@eddie>
Subject: Re: 157:1 VALID
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 19:24:14 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE60eDKvPEkGhAj5p1F00005603@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Murphy" <ford@jps.net>
To: "FRC" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 9:46 PM
Subject: 157:1


> Each rule shall offer a bribe for allowing it to become the last valid
rule
> of the round.  The bribe must be different from any bribe offered by a
> previous rule.
>
> If this rule becomes the last rule of the round, then its author (who
would
> necessarily be Wizard of the next round) promises to award Style next
round
> of +3 for all valid rules and at least +1 for all invalid rules.
>
>
> --
> Ed Murphy <ford@jps.net>     http://members.fortunecity.com/emurphy/
>           "Most of the time, it seemed sublimely unaware of its limbs,
>            though it was beginning to suspect it had hands."
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-03-11 22:28:25 GMT

I judge this rule to be VALID.

Did not really know what people might come up with but I think this is quite
interesting, so +1.0 style points.

Peekee

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-12 19:16:56 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar 12 21:53:05 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2CKr4921161
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:53:04 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2CKr4F24258
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:53:04 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114664AbRCLUwq>;
        Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:52:46 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
To: David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com>
Cc: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: Round 157: Proposal
References: <3AAC65F8.DD8179C7@nycap.rr.com>
From: rsholmes@mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes)
Date: 12 Mar 2001 15:52:36 -0500
In-Reply-To: David Honsinger's message of "Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:00:24 -0500"
Message-ID: <xzcpufmn20b.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Status: RO

David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com> writes:

> I PROPOSE that for the duration of this round RO 4 (Eligibility to Play)
> be OVERRULED, as allowed in RO 9, and be changed to read as follows
> (Changes are in ALL CAPS):
> 
> 4. Eligibility to play. Each valid fantasy rule makes its author
> eligible to play. This eligibility period lasts for seven (7) days from
> the time of the rule's posting minus one (1) day for each invalid
> fantasy rule ALREADY POSTED BY THAT PERSON IN THIS ROUND, PLUS ANY EXTRA
> ELIGIBILITY AS DESCRIBED BELOW. ELIGIBILITY SHALL FOR THIS ROUND BE
> CONSIDERED A COMMODITY. PLAYERS MAY TRANSFER ELIGIBILITY TO OTHER
> PLAYERS IN UNITS OF 6 HOURS, CALLED "EU'S."  ELIGIBILITY RECEIVED FROM
> OTHER PLAYERS IS CONSIDERED "EXTRA" ELIGIBILITY, AND IS NOT USED UNTIL A
> PLAYER'S OWN ELIGIBILITY WOULD OTHERWISE RUN OUT.
> 
> __________________________
> 
> 
> Discussion: 
> If we're gonna talk bribery, we need some meaningful units to bribe and
> be bribed with, right?  Also, the minor change in the 7-day rule: If you
> post an invalid rule, the next valid one you post will only get you SIX
> more days.  If you post 2 invalid rules, then every valid rule gets you
> 5 more. Then, to that total, add whatever you may have gotten from
> others.  
> 
> I vote FOR, of course.

I vote FOR.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-12 20:52:46 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar 12 22:44:56 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2CLit922270
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 22:44:56 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2CLitF27111
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 22:44:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114295AbRCLVoj>;
        Mon, 12 Mar 2001 22:44:39 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <001301c0ab3d$90d61d80$6abd9440@treyarch.com>
From: "Mark Nau" <nau@treyarch.com>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <3AAC65F8.DD8179C7@nycap.rr.com> <xzcpufmn20b.fsf@rodan.syr.edu>
Subject: Re: Round 157: Proposal
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 13:44:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

I vote FOR.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard S. Holmes" <rsholmes@MailBox.Syr.Edu>
To: "David Honsinger" <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com>
Cc: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: Round 157: Proposal


> David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com> writes:
>
> > I PROPOSE that for the duration of this round RO 4 (Eligibility to Play)
> > be OVERRULED, as allowed in RO 9, and be changed to read as follows
> > (Changes are in ALL CAPS):
> >
> > 4. Eligibility to play. Each valid fantasy rule makes its author
> > eligible to play. This eligibility period lasts for seven (7) days from
> > the time of the rule's posting minus one (1) day for each invalid
> > fantasy rule ALREADY POSTED BY THAT PERSON IN THIS ROUND, PLUS ANY EXTRA
> > ELIGIBILITY AS DESCRIBED BELOW. ELIGIBILITY SHALL FOR THIS ROUND BE
> > CONSIDERED A COMMODITY. PLAYERS MAY TRANSFER ELIGIBILITY TO OTHER
> > PLAYERS IN UNITS OF 6 HOURS, CALLED "EU'S."  ELIGIBILITY RECEIVED FROM
> > OTHER PLAYERS IS CONSIDERED "EXTRA" ELIGIBILITY, AND IS NOT USED UNTIL A
> > PLAYER'S OWN ELIGIBILITY WOULD OTHERWISE RUN OUT.
> >
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-03-12 20:52:46 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-12 21:44:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Mar 13 16:34:44 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2DFYh920355
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:34:43 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2DFYgF13104
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:34:42 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114819AbRCMPcD>;
        Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:32:03 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010313102059.00bdcbf0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 10:31:31 -0500
To: frc@trolltech.com (fantasy rules committee)
From: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
Subject: Proposal 157:B and votes FOR A and B
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Status: RO

Proposal:

That rule 157:1 be made INVALID

Justification:

Rule 157:1 states, "If this rule becomes the last rule of the round, then 
its author (who would
necessarily be Wizard of the next round)..."  This statement about the 
Wizard is factually incorrect.  Its falsity is not intrinsically a reason 
for the invalidity of the rule, however, its presence in the rule set if 
VALID constitutes an inconsistency with the R.O.'s.  In effect, 
contradicting the R.O.'s and changing/modifying them without a 
proposal.  The fact that the structure of the game would never allow this 
to happen (because all rules are made void at the end of the round) is 
moot; its inconsistency with the R.O.'s is invalidating whether or not it 
has any practical effect.

Someone suggested that the "bribe" part the posting is not part of the 
rule.  This is nonsense, if the bribe is not part of the rule than the rule 
is inconsistent with itself (and thus invalid) since it requires each rule 
(including itself) to have a bribe.

-Jeremy

I vote FOR both proposals.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 15:32:03 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Mar 13 16:41:25 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2DFfP920565
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:41:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2DFfOG08331
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:41:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114819AbRCMPlF>;
        Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:41:05 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Authentication-Warning: shell.one.net: ieri owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 10:36:50 -0500 (EST)
From: John M Goodman II <ieri@one.net>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Voting against 157:A and 157:B
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010313102059.00bdcbf0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103131035230.4467-100000@shell.one.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

I also don't like the "minor" restriction permanently lowering eligibilty
for each invalid rule.

And I think 157:1 should be valid.  If no future rules had been posted, it
would have been the only rule, and with positive style points he would
have been wizard.

So I vote AGAINST both proposals.

-John

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 15:41:05 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Mar 13 20:01:31 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2DJ1V926032
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:01:31 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2DJ1UF29887
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:01:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114823AbRCMS6x>;
        Tue, 13 Mar 2001 19:58:53 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010313185838.44750.qmail@web12801.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 10:58:38 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: voting AGAINST 157:A and 157:B
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

I vote against 157:A and 157:B

I simply don't like 157:A.
Also, 157:A would make it very easy for the player who posted the last valid
rule not to be judge of the next round.  Normally this wouldn't bother me, but
it's thematically displeasing due to the nature of this round.

As for 157:B, I'd rather defer to Judge Peekee's decisions in this case.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 18:58:53 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 00:36:01 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2DNa1901368
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:36:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2DNa1F15421
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:36:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114874AbRCMXf1>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:35:27 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.54]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20010313103144.00990200@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
Subject: Re: 157:4
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 23:42:55 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE120vbtqFZfMHisvb700007fd3@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy D. Selengut" <selengut@nih.gov>
To: "fantasy rules committee" <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 4:05 PM
Subject: 157:4


> *****
>
> Each rule of the round shall offer a bribe of some sort.   In all
> subsequent rules, all conditions acceded to by the bribee and all benefits
> granted by the briber shall be transparently demonstrable within the valid
> rules of this round.
>
> As an example, although not required for this rule, I offer this bribe
> whose terms are transparently demonstrable within the rules of this round:
>
> A) Each subsequent rule which exempts me, Jeremy D. Selengut, author of
> this rule,
> from all restrictions found in that rule shall be exempt from the
> restriction in part B of
> this bribe.
>
> B) All subsequent rules must either grant to Jeremy D. Selengut one EU (as
> defined
> in Proposal 157:A) or must include a brief poem of praise to the Judge.
>
> As long as 157:1 is still VALID the following text shall have
> effect.  Should 157:1 be voted INVALID the following text shall have no
> force and, to the greatest extent possible, shall not be considered part
of
> this rule:
>
> Judge, this round has gotten a little muddier than you would have liked,
> hasn't it?
> All these proposals, time is running out for new players to enter the
> fray.  Looks like this
> round might just turn out to be a dud.  Want to take a fresh start?  If
> you arrange it
> that this is the last valid round of the game, I'll step aside and let you
> Judge the next
> round too.  Who said there are no second chances in life?
>
> *****
>
> Please not that the conditions of this rule have an implicit bribe as
> well:  Vote for proposal 157:B invalidating 157:1 or it will be
> increasingly difficult to fulfill its restriction since future rules will
> not be able to offer bribes whose effects do not take place until after
the
> end of the round or are given outside the sphere of the game.
>
> -Jeremy "carrot and stick" Selengut
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-03-13 16:06:18 GMT

VALID, style +1.0

Peekee

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 23:35:27 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 01:34:26 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E0YP902356
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:34:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E0YPF17347
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:34:25 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114867AbRCNAeJ>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:34:09 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 19:33:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: Proposal 157:B
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010313102059.00bdcbf0@fido.nhlbi.nih.gov>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10103131932100.88-100000@merhaba.cc.columbia.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Jeremy D. Selengut wrote:

> Proposal:
> 
> That rule 157:1 be made INVALID

As I have previously stated, I don't believe that 157:1 is necessarily
invalid.  Accordingly, I vote AGAINST 157:B.

/ Jared Sunshine, Wizard
nomen sine vi at validum

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 00:34:09 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 01:36:22 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E0aL902394
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:36:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E0aKF17416
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:36:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114700AbRCNAgK>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:36:10 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AAEBDC6.4430C61@wall.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:39:34 -0800
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 157:B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

I vote FOR 157:B on the grounds that the rule conflicts with the R.O.'s.

Aron Wall

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 00:36:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 01:59:01 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E0x1902742
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:59:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E0x1F18081
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:59:01 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114700AbRCNA6j>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:58:39 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.54]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10103131932100.88-100000@merhaba.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: Proposal 157:B
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:06:08 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE4798xPOmupovy7Qzt00006033@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Jeremy D. Selengut wrote:
> 
> > Proposal:
> >
> > That rule 157:1 be made INVALID
> 
> As I have previously stated, I don't believe that 157:1 is necessarily
> invalid.  Accordingly, I vote AGAINST 157:B.
> 
> / Jared Sunshine, Wizard
> nomen sine vi at validum
> 
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-03-14 00:34:09 GMT

This vote can not be counted, due to Regular Ordinace 10.

Peekee

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 00:58:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 01:59:55 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E0xt902757
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:59:55 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E0xsF18114
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:59:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114869AbRCNA7j>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:59:39 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.54]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <3AAEBDC6.4430C61@wall.org>
Subject: Re: 157:B
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:07:01 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE564xAG7GDYX8QhzMa000016c6@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aron Wall" <aron@wall.org>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 12:39 AM
Subject: 157:B


> I vote FOR 157:B on the grounds that the rule conflicts with the R.O.'s.
> 
> Aron Wall
> 
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-03-14 00:36:10 GMT

This vote has not been counted due to Regular Ordinance 10.

Peekee

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 00:59:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 02:25:58 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E1Pw903175
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:25:58 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E1PvG18189
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:25:57 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114867AbRCNBZk>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:25:40 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AAEC96C.9111DA4A@wall.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:29:16 -0800
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 157:C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

-------157:C proposal---------
This proposal overrides all R.O. 10 powers of the Judge for this round
except in the case that the mailing list goes down for more than 3
days.  It specifies the forum of the FRC to be frc@trolltech.com.  It
acts retroactively.  If the Judge does not agree to not use for
proposals in 15 minutes of the posting of this proposal at
frc@trolltech.com, or if he posts a message before then that does not
promise this, all his decisions in this round will be voided both before
and after this proposal, so that for all purposes his powers as Judge
are overruled.  He shall no matter what be considered to have given +3
style points to any rules posted by people who vote for this rule, in
the past and in the future, up to and including the 5th rule posted.  I,
Aron Wall, shall be able to overrule any interpretations of this
proposal, its effects, or its interactions by the Judge, replacing them
with my own interpretation.
-------------------------

Submit now or die!

Aron Wall

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 01:25:40 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 02:31:32 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E1VW903268
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:31:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E1VVF18927
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:31:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114867AbRCNBbK>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:31:10 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AAECAAF.B27F86FA@wall.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:34:39 -0800
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 157:C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Aron Wall wrote:

> Aron Wall wrote:
>
> > -------157:C proposal---------
> > This proposal overrides all R.O. 10 powers of the Judge for this round
> > except in the case that the mailing list goes down for more than 3
> > days.  It specifies the forum of the FRC to be frc@trolltech.com.  It
> > acts retroactively.  If the Judge does not agree to not use for
> > proposals in 15 minutes of the posting of this proposal at
> > frc@trolltech.com, or if he posts a message before then that does not
> > promise this, all his decisions in this round will be voided both before
> > and after this proposal, so that for all purposes his powers as Judge
> > are overruled.  He shall no matter what be considered to have given +3
> > style points to any rules posted by people who vote for this rule, in
> > the past and in the future, up to and including the 5th rule posted
>
> I meant this to mean the 5th rule of that person.
>
> > .  I,
> > Aron Wall, shall be able to overrule any interpretations of this
> > proposal, its effects, or its interactions by the Judge, replacing them
> > with my own interpretation.
>
> Which can of course be overruled yet again by proposal.  Note that all
> actions of this rule are changing the decision of the judge, in accordance
> with R.O. 8.
> Aron Wall

I vote FOR this proposal.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 01:31:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 03:12:39 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E2Cc903851
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:12:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E2CcG19295
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:12:38 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114875AbRCNCMU>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:12:20 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-Id: <l03010d02b6d483c5ac5a@[150.203.41.39]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:11:28 +1100
To: frc@trolltech.com
From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@student.anu.edu.au>
Subject: 157:D
Status: RO

I propose that 157:2 be overruled as INVALID, because it implies a
self-inconsistent rule in a subsequent round could be judged VALID and is
hence inconsistent with the ROs.

For other proposals, I vote FOR 157:A (why not) ignore 157:B (because the
Judge has already acquiesced),  AGAINST 157:C (if the Judge is even
counting the votes) and FOR 157:D.

BTW, I'm relocating to a new job in Japan and so I'll probably sign off for
the next few rounds until I'm back on my feet.

Cheers

GT

>Rule 157:2
>
>Psssst.  Hey.  You.  Yes, YOU.  You wanna buy a bridge?  No?  How about
>a genuine Rolex watch - fell off a truck, I swear!  No?  OK, how about
>this: I can guarantee you at least one valid rule in the next round.
>How, you ask? VOLUME.  That's right, every FRC member who does NOT post
>a rule after this one, I will ensure that at least one of the rules they
>post in round 158 will be judged VALID.  I'll even give ya the choice of
>which one(s).  Just let me know in the text of the rule, and it shall be
>done.
>
>All you have to do is post a little note, stating that you do not intend
>to post any more rules in this round... and abide by it.  However many
>people post that note (call it X) the first one to post gets X free
>valid rules.  The second gets X-1, the third gets x-2, and so on.  Act
>now! Avoid the rush, and get the valuable earlier numbers!
>
>Of course, that assumes that I'll be the judge, so it behooves you to do
>what you can to get everyone else in line. And if anyone SHOULD manage
>to post a valid rule after this one, I'll give a bonus 5 valid rules to
>the first one to propose an overrule, and one extra valid rule for
>everyone who votes FOR the proposal.
>
>But remember, I can't do it if I don't win! And just to prove my good
>faith, I'm not even gonna add any restrictions on this round.  Why
>bother, since you're not gonna post any new rules anyway, right?
>
>See ya next round!
>
>--
>Rule Date: 2001-03-13 05:42:38 GMT

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 02:12:20 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 03:31:22 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E2VL904144
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:31:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E2VLG19716
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:31:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114858AbRCNCau>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:30:50 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.54]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
References: <3AAEC96C.9111DA4A@wall.org>
Subject: Re: 157:C
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 02:38:12 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE68FOAmEaJswFCHOzy0000628d@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aron Wall" <aron@wall.org>
To: <frc@trolltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 1:29 AM
Subject: 157:C


> -------157:C proposal---------
> This proposal overrides all R.O. 10 powers of the Judge for this round
> except in the case that the mailing list goes down for more than 3
> days.  It specifies the forum of the FRC to be frc@trolltech.com.  It
> acts retroactively.  If the Judge does not agree to not use for
> proposals in 15 minutes of the posting of this proposal at
> frc@trolltech.com, or if he posts a message before then that does not
> promise this, all his decisions in this round will be voided both before
> and after this proposal, so that for all purposes his powers as Judge
> are overruled.  He shall no matter what be considered to have given +3
> style points to any rules posted by people who vote for this rule, in
> the past and in the future, up to and including the 5th rule posted.  I,
> Aron Wall, shall be able to overrule any interpretations of this
> proposal, its effects, or its interactions by the Judge, replacing them
> with my own interpretation.
> -------------------------
>
> Submit now or die!
>
> Aron Wall
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-03-14 01:25:40 GMT

This Proposal was not sent to the offical committee forum, therefore by RO
10 it does not count.

Peekee

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 02:30:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 03:32:46 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E2Wk904168
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:32:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E2WjF20311
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:32:46 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114846AbRCNCca>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:32:30 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010314023212.30710.qmail@web12811.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 18:32:12 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: vote against 157:C
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <3AAEC96C.9111DA4A@wall.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

I'm attempting to vote against 157:C --

I vote against 157:C.

If this happens not to be a public posting in the official committee forum,
then I think I've accomplished nothing.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 02:32:30 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 14 09:04:09 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2E848909064
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 09:04:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2E848F29754
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 09:04:08 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114458AbRCNIDs>;
        Wed, 14 Mar 2001 09:03:48 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 09:03:34 +0100 (MET)
From: Ronald Kunne <kunne@ipno.in2p3.fr>
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Re: 157:B
In-Reply-To: <3AAEC413.B70DDFBD@wall.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1010314090110.1589A-100000@ipngraal>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Aron Wall wrote:

> 
> What!!!!! Are you trying to abuse your power to decide what the FRC Official
> Forum is, or is there some legitamite reason for this?  Explanation, please.
> 
Seems obvious to me: somebody bribed the Judge and somewhere else in 
Cyberspace rule 157:13 was judged just a minute ago.

Greetings,
Ronald

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-14 08:03:48 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Mar 16 16:46:00 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2GFk0915687
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:46:00 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2GFjxn15171
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:45:59 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114804AbRCPPpe>;
        Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:45:34 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AB2357E.EAE03B70@nycap.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:47:10 -0500
From: David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: FRC <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Eligibility?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

As I see it, eligibility currently stands at (times are rough estimates
and may vary by several minutes from the Official times as kept by our
Esteemed Judge):

Ed Murphy               Saturday 22:28 GMT	Style: -3.0     (1 INVALID
rule)
James Willson           Monday 19:26 GMT	Style: -1.0     (1 INVALID
rule)
John Goodman            Tuesday 15:50 GMT	Style: +1.0     (1 VALID rule)
Jeremy Selengut         Tuesday 16:06 GMT	Style: +1.0     (1 VALID rule)
David Honsinger         Wednesday 05:18 GMT	Style: +2.5     (2 VALID
rules)
All others              Sunday 22:28 GMT

Also, by my count my proposal 157:A passed by a vote of 6 For, 2 Against
(all votes cast before the forum change, none after that were counted,
and I assume none cast after) and proposal 157:B will fail by a vote of
2 For, 2 Against (again, assuming only votes cast before the forum
change counted, and no more votes are likely)


Again, these are only the standings as *I* see them. Please, correct me
if I'm wrong.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-16 15:45:34 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Mar 24 19:26:26 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2OIQQj25833
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 24 Mar 2001 19:26:26 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2OIQHu11266
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 24 Mar 2001 19:26:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114345AbRCXSZp>;
        Sat, 24 Mar 2001 19:25:45 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
X-Originating-IP: [194.117.133.54]
From: "Alan Riddell" <pkpeekee@hotmail.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Round 157 Completed
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 18:33:10 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <OE16YAPNXRPmcarcR4Z0000433b@hotmail.com>
Status: RO

Round 
====
David Hosinger wins the round, is the new Judge and the Wizard.

====
Section 1: Fantasy Rules
====
157:1
Rule Date: 2001-03-11 22:28:25 GMT
Posted by Ed Murphy
Judged VALID, style +1.0, then changed to INVALID style -3.0


157:2
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 05:42:38 GMT
Posted by David Honsinger
Judged VALID, style +1.5

157:3
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 15:50:55 GMT
Posted by John M. Goodman II
Judged VALID, style +1.0

157:4
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 16:06:18 GMT
Posted by -Jeremy "carrot and stick" Selengut
Judged VALID, style +1.0

157:5
Rule Date: 2001-03-13 19:26:57 GMT
Posted by James Wilson as 157:4
Judged INVALID, style +1.0 (Fails to meet 157:4)

157:6
 Tue Mar 13 21:17:03 2001
Posted by David Honsinger
Judged VALID, style +1.0

====
Section 2: Other Proposals
====
157:A PASSES
157:B FAILS

====
Section 3: Other matters
====
Tuesday, March 13, 2001 10:11 PM
The official fourm is changed to, the email addresses of Dave Honsinger and
Alan Riddell.  Messages are only valid if sent directly to both
dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com, and pkpeekee@hotmail.com.

Rule Date: 2001-03-22 13:30:47 GMT
The official forum is changed to the mailing list at frc@trolltech.com

====
Section 4: Important posts to the official forum
====
(Blaa, blaa, blaa)

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-24 18:25:45 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Mar 24 22:19:36 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2OLJZj28165
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 24 Mar 2001 22:19:36 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2OLJSu17217
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 24 Mar 2001 22:19:28 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114408AbRCXVTO>;
        Sat, 24 Mar 2001 22:19:14 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3ABD0FC9.B459334B@nycap.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:21:13 -0500
From: David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 158
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

As Judge of Round 158, I choose Alan Riddell to post the first rule of
this Round.  I further state that he may, if he chooses, name the theme
for the round; however, whatever theme he chooses, this round shall have
the subtitle of "The Round where the bribes got paid."

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-24 21:19:14 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sat Mar 24 22:26:51 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2OLQpj28253
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 24 Mar 2001 22:26:51 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2OLQiu17456
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sat, 24 Mar 2001 22:26:44 +0100 (MET)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114586AbRCXV0d>;
        Sat, 24 Mar 2001 22:26:33 +0100
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3ABD117A.3369999@nycap.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:28:26 -0500
From: David Honsinger <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 158, further:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Having discharged that duty as Judge, I hereby resign as Judge for this
round.  I offer as reason the fact that, despite my arguments as player
to the contrary in the last round, I have come to believe that the
choice of official forum was illegal. I advise everyone that this
choice, although a result of a misunderstanding on the Judge's part, was
mine and not his. I honor my obligation to him with my previous
message.  I will discuss this further in another message (I have a
real-world obligation that prevents me from writing a long note now).

As my final act as Judge, I select Jeremy D. Selengut to succeed me as
Judge for Round 158.  I choose to retain the title of Wizard, however,
since, despite the controversy, I think I earned it. :)

If Jeremy chooses not to serve as Judge, I suggest Alan Riddell.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-24 21:26:33 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Sun Mar 25 23:25:15 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2PLPEj15098
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:25:15 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2PLPEu26911
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:25:14 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114863AbRCYVY0>;
        Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:24:26 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010325212412.17070.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 13:24:12 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Round 157 Irregularities
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <OE16YAPNXRPmcarcR4Z0000433b@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

(Don't blame me for nomicizing the FRC, just for perpetuating it.)

--- Alan Riddell <pkpeekee@hotmail.com> wrote:
> ====
> Section 3: Other matters
> ====
> Tuesday, March 13, 2001 10:11 PM
> The official fourm is changed to, the email addresses of Dave Honsinger and
> Alan Riddell.  Messages are only valid if sent directly to both
> dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com, and pkpeekee@hotmail.com.

According to R.O. 10, all action must be accomplished via public postings to
the official committee forum.  Unlike the FRC mailing list, which anyone can
join and read, the email addresses of Dave Honsinger and Alan Riddell are
private.  As such, it was not possible to make a public posting on that forum.

Thus any attempt at performing an action on that forum failed.

I can only conclude, then, that my fantasy rule was never judged valid or
invalid, and hence defaulted to valid after three days.  Additionally, Dave
Honsinger never posted rule 157:6.

I am the true legitimate judge of round 158.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-25 21:24:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar 26 05:30:12 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2Q3UCj19579
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 05:30:12 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2Q3UBd01062
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 05:30:11 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114271AbRCZD3z>;
        Mon, 26 Mar 2001 05:29:55 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3ABEB8A1.2C9AB14A@wall.org>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 19:33:53 -0800
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 158:A
References: <20010325212412.17070.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

James Willson wrote:

>
> I am the true legitimate judge of round 158.

We have a dispute about who is Judge, involving an area of interpretational
dispute.  Either Jeremy Selengut is Judge (providing he accepts David Hosinger's
resignation), or James Wilson is.
There are two ways to solve this:

1) One candidate Judge gives up their claim on Judgeship, either by resigning in
the other's favor (bringing the two possible histories back in line) or using
their interpretational powers as maybe-Judge to interpret the other Judge as the
proper winner of 157 (selecting one of the possible histories as the correct
view).

2) By proposal.

--------158:A----------
This proposal overrules the interpretation of the relevent Judge [I am not sure
whether this should be Alan Reidall, David Hosinger, or Jeremy Selengut, should
he choose to claim his Judgeship] that David Hosinger won round 158:A.  As a
matter of fact, the attempted coup of David Hosinger and Alan Reidall using the
R.O. 10 authority of the Judge was unsuccessful.  James Willson is Judge, having
won Round 157 in the manner that he has already described.  This proposal does
nothing to alter David Hosinger's status as Wizard, nor is it meant to imply that
he was not a very clever gentleman indeed.  Should this dispute be resolved by
method 1 above, this proposal shall have no effect.
----------------------

I vote FOR this proposal.

Aron Wall

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-26 03:29:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar 26 06:14:33 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2Q4EXj20062
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 06:14:33 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2Q4EWu06162
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 06:14:32 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114302AbRCZEOQ>;
        Mon, 26 Mar 2001 06:14:16 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <009501c0b5ab$7fd9f740$02b21842@nycap.rr.com>
From: "David Honsinger" <dhonsin1@nycap.rr.com>
To: "frc" <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: Round 157 explained (how it happened)
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:16:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Status: RO

For those who care:

When the theme was announced, my first thought was to attempt to either
steal or be bribed with other people's eligibility.  So I proposed my 157:A,
to enable that.  I figured, like I said, that if we were going to talk
"bribes," then we needed some meaningful medium of exchange.

Now, how to get my hands on others' EUs?  I composed a draft rule, creating
the position of Censor (and naming myself to the post).  The rule required
that all potential rules be sent first to me, and that *I* would send them
on to the "official forum" on behalf of the author... if the author paid a 1
EU toll.  Of course, if anyone wanted to pay me more, I would be sure that
their rules got sent on first... what's a little graft among friends, right?

The problem, I discovered, is that there would certainly be objections to
the fact that sending rules to me would not be "to the Official Forum."  So
I thought of a workaround.  I changed my draft to include a definition of
the Official Forum as "sent to frc@trolltech.com by the Censor on behalf of
a Rule's author."  I then sent a bribe offer to the Judge. What I asked him
to do was to declare that, "As Judge, for this round, I determine that I
will allow Fantasy Rules, if otherwise valid, to determine the location and
nature of the official forum."  A simple delegation of authority, which I
would be poised to instantly accept with my draft rule (and which would then
allow me to intercept any other attempts to change it again. I think this
may have been an easier debate than the one we just had...

After some minor negotiation, the bribe was accepted.  The Judge then issued
his "movement of the Official Forum" to what he considered to be the new
Forum.  I did not see it immediately, and so did not have a chance to
correct it before other the fit hit the shan.  However, assuming as I did at
the time that his ruling was valid, all I needed to do was post an innocuous
rule to the "new Official Forum" and wait 7 days.  So I posted one. Still, I
did have an opportunity to correct the matter, and in fact the Judge sent me
a note when he realized that what he had done was not what I had asked.  My
reply to him was along the lines of, "That's ok, this controversy is
interesting" and I let it go.

Of course, the arguments flew hot and heavy. I was in a difficult position.
I did, initially, feel that there was no problem with the way things had
gone.  Then as time passed, I began to see that, in fact, the forum change
was not proper.  However, the theme WAS "bribery and corruption," so
breaking (or bending severely) the rules, even the RO's, should be
considered Stylish, if nothing else.  So, I reasoned, I would allow it to
continue, and then resign.  When I did so, I selected Jeremy because I knew
that James' rule had been judged INVALID. <sigh>  I figured that once the
round was declared over, there would be no more reason to debate the issue,
and that we could all just move on with Round 158  Heh.  "No reason to
debate."  I forgot whom I was dealing with. :)

Anyway, that's what started the mess, and that's what kept it going.  And
for the record, I still believe that the Judge was within his authority to
do WHAT he did, the way he did it; it was his CHOICE of forum that was
incorrect. (If he had set up mailto:frc@egroups.com and declared THAT to be
the forum, well... that's another argument...)  In any case, his choice was
a result of MY action or inaction.  Don't blame him.  I put him up to it.

Once more, I apologize for any overly heated exchanges.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-26 04:14:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Mar 26 18:31:05 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2QGV5j11132
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 18:31:05 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2QGV4u23380
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 18:31:04 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114389AbRCZQaj>;
        Mon, 26 Mar 2001 18:30:39 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010326162206.26920.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 08:22:06 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Round 158, and 158:1 VALID +1.0
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <OE29xjnzi95HfqR77bi0000491d@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

OK, let's converge these here timelines...

If Dave Honsinger is judge, then I accept his resignation.

If no round 158 judge has yet declared round 158 started, then I declare round
158 to start at 2001-03-24 21:19:14 GMT, to coincide with when Dave Honsinger
may or may not have declared round 158 started.

(Does it matter that this time is in the past?)

The round's theme is, uh...

        Play nice.
        The Round where the bribes got paid.

> 158:1
> ====
> The last round was far too unethical. In this round all rules will promote
> good (ethical, moral or otherwise) values.
> ====
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-25 12:03:34 GMT
>
This rule is VALID.

Obviously there isn't a clear definition of what makes for good values.
Players will just have to deal with this.

> Is it the case that by ensuring that others promote good values this rule
> does itself promote good values?
> 
Certainly.  Forcing others to force others to conform to good values promotes
good values.

Style: +1.0


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-26 16:30:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Mar 27 07:15:33 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2R5FXj23446
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 07:15:33 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2R5FXd07729
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 07:15:33 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114252AbRC0FPF>;
        Tue, 27 Mar 2001 07:15:05 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010327051453.85397.qmail@web12805.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 21:14:53 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 158:2 VALID +1.0
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <3ABF7A0B.19AAF98B@wall.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Aron Wall <aron@wall.org> wrote:
> 158:2
> 
> In order to promote fairness and respect for elders, and discourage
> hypocracy, all rules must apply their restrictions to all rules equally,
> including themselves and previous rules.
> 
> Aron Wall
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-26 17:15:06 GMT

This rule is VALID.

Style: +1.0


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-27 05:15:05 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 28 17:33:42 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2SFXgj20728
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:33:42 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2SFXfu27506
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:33:41 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114531AbRC1PdV>;
        Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:33:21 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010328153302.81118.qmail@web12801.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 07:33:02 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 158:3 INVALID +2
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <F8871yEXUIEAOeIiGXi0000074c@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Gallivanting Tripper <flix_os@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 158:3
> 
> I offer for your polite consideration the third rule of Fantasy Rule-Botic 
> Ethics:
> 
> "A Fantasy Rule may not directly invalidate another Fantasy Rule, nor by 
> complicity, allow another Fantasy Rule to be invalidated."
> 
> Happy paradoxes,
> 
> GT
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-27 10:01:22 GMT

There are perhaps several ways I could go here, but this is what I chose:

It is a good value to complicitly allow rules of inconsistency to be
invalidated.  They deserve this fate.  It is a bad value to not allow rules of
inconsistency to be invalidated.

Thus, since 158:3 promotes bad values, not good values, it is INVALID.

Style: +2

Amusing.  Difficult.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-28 15:33:21 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Mar 28 17:40:48 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2SFelj20959
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:40:47 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2SFeku28151
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:40:46 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114591AbRC1PkZ>;
        Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:40:25 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010328154003.25196.qmail@web12808.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 07:40:03 -0800 (PST)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 158:4 INVALID +1
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
In-Reply-To: <3AC0C79D.C0EF30A@wall.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

--- Aron Wall <aron@wall.org> wrote:
> -----158:4-------
> In order to promote freedom and cultivate a sense of self-worth, we
> recognize that we must not restrict the ability of rules to express
> themselves in any way that does not directly harm others.  Therefore,
> rules may only restrict the ways in which other rules may restrict other
> rules.
> ----------------
> 
> Aron Wall
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-27 16:58:10 GMT

INVALID

Rule 158:1 already restricts rules in a manner other than the way they my
restrict other rules.

Style: +1

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-03-28 15:40:25 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Apr  5 18:08:23 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f35G8Nj25550
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 5 Apr 2001 18:08:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f35G8Mu23374
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 5 Apr 2001 18:08:22 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115251AbRDEQID>;
        Thu, 5 Apr 2001 18:08:03 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 17:09:04 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 158
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104051708410.1650-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

I have been too busy to pay much attention lately, but would like to
point out that I believe the round ended some time ago (in fact,
before Gallivanting Tripper's 158:8 was even submitted).

Round 158 started with the posting of 158:1 at

      2001-03-24 21:19:14 GMT

158:1 - Rule Date: 2001-03-25 12:03:34 GMT (I dont have who posted it,
as I often delete rules once judged, and the judgement omitted to
mention this fact).

158:2 was VALID for Aron
158:3 was INVALID for GT
158:4 was INVALID for Aron
158:5 was VALID for Anton
158:6 was VALID for Anton
158:7 was INVALID for Aron

Even assuming that GT posted 158:1, the eligibility period for GT
expired at most 6 days later (because of the invalid 158:3),
which was 2001-03-31 12:03:34 GMT. However Gallivanting Tripper
submitted 156:8 at

	     Rule Date: 2001-04-02 10:25:50 GMT

which seems way out of time. (Indeed, by then I was the only eligible
player...) 

Which brings me to a point Jesse raised: it would be very nice to
return to the custom of issuing regular records of the progress of the
round to date. There are plenty of models for this in the
archives. This makes it easier for both players and judge to keep
track of eligibility etc., and enables us to prune our mailboxes from
time to time during the longer rounds!

Best Wishes,

     Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-05 16:08:03 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 00:54:02 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f35Ms1j03007
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 00:54:01 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f35Ms1u17753
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 00:54:01 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115530AbRDEWxn>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 00:53:43 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <20010405225322.20506.qmail@web12808.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 15:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: James Willson <jkvw3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Round 158 conclusion and summary
To: frc <frc@trolltech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Status: RO

Due to a clerical error by the judge, the round was not declared over when it
should have been.  The round is, in fact, over.  (Thank you, Anton, for
pointing out the problem.)


Anton is the winner and next judge.
Gallivanting Tripper is the next round's wizard.


--- Peekee ----------------- 158:1 ----- VALID; +1
--- Aron Wall -------------- 158:2 ----- VALID; +1
--- Gallivanting Tripper --- 158:3 ----- INVALID; +2
--- Aron Wall -------------- 158:4 ----- INVALID; +1
--- Anton Cox -------------- 158:5/6 --- VALID/VALID; +1/+0.5
--- Aron Wall -------------- 158:7 ----- INVALID; -1
--- Gallivanting Tripper --- 158:8 ----- Too Late


Peekee ----------------- +1 ----- 2001-04-01 12:03:34 GMT
Aron Wall -------------- +1 ----- 2001-03-31 17:15:06 GMT
Gallivanting Tripper --- +2 ----- 2001-03-30 21:19:14 GMT
Anton Cox -------------- +1.5 --- 2001-04-04 16:22:45 GMT


--- Peekee --- 158:1 --- VALID; +1
> ====
> The last round was far too unethical. In this round all rules will promote
> good (ethical, moral or otherwise) values.
> ====
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-25 12:03:34 GMT
>
This rule is VALID.

Obviously there isn't a clear definition of what makes for good values.
Players will just have to deal with this.

> Is it the case that by ensuring that others promote good values this rule
> does itself promote good values?
> 
Certainly.  Forcing others to force others to conform to good values promotes
good values.

Style: +1.0


--- Aron Wall --- 158:2 --- VALID; +1
> 
> In order to promote fairness and respect for elders, and discourage
> hypocracy, all rules must apply their restrictions to all rules equally,
> including themselves and previous rules.
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-26 17:15:06 GMT

This rule is VALID.

Style: +1.0


--- Gallivanting Tripper --- 158:3 --- INVALID; +2
> 
> I offer for your polite consideration the third rule of Fantasy Rule-Botic 
> Ethics:
> 
> "A Fantasy Rule may not directly invalidate another Fantasy Rule, nor by 
> complicity, allow another Fantasy Rule to be invalidated."
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-27 10:01:22 GMT

There are perhaps several ways I could go here, but this is what I chose:

It is a good value to complicitly allow rules of inconsistency to be
invalidated.  They deserve this fate.  It is a bad value to not allow rules of
inconsistency to be invalidated.

Thus, since 158:3 promotes bad values, not good values, it is INVALID.

Style: +2

Amusing.  Difficult.


--- Aron Wall --- 158:4 --- INVALID; +1
> In order to promote freedom and cultivate a sense of self-worth, we
> recognize that we must not restrict the ability of rules to express
> themselves in any way that does not directly harm others.  Therefore,
> rules may only restrict the ways in which other rules may restrict other
> rules.
> ----------------
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-27 16:58:10 GMT

INVALID

Rule 158:1 already restricts rules in a manner other than the way they my
restrict other rules.

Style: +1


--- Anton Cox --- 158:5/6 --- VALID/VALID; +1/+0.5
> >>>>>>
> Tired of all those old, expensive, rules? Using recently invented
> RuleEmbed(TM) technology, we at CoxCorp are able to offer you the
> opportunity to 
> 
>        "Buy one rule, get one free!"
> 
>    >>>>>>
>    158:6
>    >>>>>>
>    To point out another's errors by correcting them can be very
>    damaging to feelings of self-worth. And as to err is human,
>    who are we to correct another? All rules must avoid such
>    hypocracy by ensuring that they do not use the correct
>    spelling of a term which has previously been mis-spelt.
>    >>>>>>
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-28 16:22:45 GMT

Well, this is odd.

The ROs don't have much to say about submitting fantasy rules, other than
disallowing anyone who is not an eligible player from doing so.  Without any
furthur direction from the ROs, I'll allow 158:6 to be embedded in 158:5.

I do wonder, however, how far we're willing to take this.  Assuming the list
won't block it, one could send, say, a MIME encoded image file to the official
forum.  There is nothing in the ROs that requires fantasy rules to be a plain
text string of characters.  I'm sure the possible variations are as varied as
the creativity of the players.  (No, this is not a call for whacked
submissions)

Back to 5/6, there is promotion of good values in the 6 section.  Though one
could reasonably argue otherwise, I'm ruling that the restriction is applied to
all rules equally. I don't see any internal inconsistencies, so these rules are

VALID and VALID

As a side note, I'll assume an implicit "in a valid fantasy rule" after
"previously been mis-spelt"

Style: +1 and +0.5

An interesting idea that I hadn't considered.


--- Aron Wall --- 158:7 --- INVALID; -1
> >>>>>
> Its not too late, Ajnton.  Spare the rod, spoil the child... "elsewhere"
> it is, for all rules.
> 
> Aron Wall
> >>>>>
> 
> -- 
> Rule Date: 2001-03-28 16:52:49 GMT

Er, right.

I think this is an attempt to edit Anton's 158:(5/6) to replace "previous" with
"elsewhere", while gratuitously misspelling "it's" and "Anton", and mentioning
the value "Spare the rod..."

I don't think ["elsewhere" it is, for all rules.] accomplishes anything useful,
though.

The rule is INVALID since the arguably good value is presented but not
promoted.

Style: -1

Lots of gibberish.
Nothing that does anything.


--- Gallivanting Tripper --- 158:8 --- Too Late
> 
> (with apologies to Voltaire and EGG)
> 
> This rule's moral lesson:
> "I may disagree with your restriction, but I will defend, to my own 
> invalidity, your right to restrict"
> 
> To paraphrase - we shall not discriminate against rules solely because of 
> the Values they uphold.
> 
> Every rule subscribes to a type of Values.  Rules which do not specifically 
> state the Values they uphold are assumed to be Lawful.
> 
> A rule need not obey the restrictions of rules of different Values, unless 
> explicity stated otherwise.
> 
> Fortunately (or unfortunately) at any time there can be no more Values in 
> existence than the number of Rules divided by three.
> 
> This rule is willing to obey the restrictions of Lawful rules, but is 
> otherwise Chaotic.
> 
> Rule Date: 2001-04-02 10:25:50 GMT

VALID; not useful

  A rule need not obey the restrictions of rules of different Values, unless 
  explicity stated otherwise.

The ROs explicity state that a rule which is inconsistent with past rules is
invalid.

Style: +0.5

Nice try, though

...was what I said initially.  156:8 is actually too late.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-05 22:53:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 16:17:14 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36EHEj24220
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:17:14 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36EHDu03726
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:17:13 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114404AbRDFOQ5>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:16:57 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:18:14 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:1 - VALID
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061517010.2343-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:1 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 11:53:23 GMT - VALID - (+0.5)
>>>>>>

Anton and me both seem to  have the strong impression 
that everybody wants to submit roundkillers.

Therefore: a rule must obey its own restrictions.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Short and simple, with a fairly standard (but always
           useful) restriction. Does not seem unduly paranoid, but
           does not prevent paranoia later either. A pretty harmless
           opening, so +0.5 Style.


		   Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 14:16:57 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 16:50:04 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36Eo4j25484
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:50:04 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36Eo3d01010
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:50:03 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114461AbRDFOtN>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:49:13 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:50:30 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:2 - VALID
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061548420.2343-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:2 - Peekee - 6 April 12:14:02 GMT - VALID - (+0.5)
>>>>>>

I say this out loud for all to hear, even though I fear that may not be a
wise thing to do.  However, I feel that the FRC should know there is a
traitor amongst us.  We must find this vile evil doer, so that all can know
who they are.  All Rule's made by a member not yet tarnished by this traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: I must confess, I was secretly hoping that we would not get
	   into a "whodunnit" kind of round. (Did Peekee know that?
	   Perhaps he has bugged my brain? I had better be careful...)
	   I am not sure the rule is particularly paranoid (after all,
	   it seems that there IS a traitor amongst us!). 

	   It is not clear to me exactly what it means for a member to
	   be "tarnished by this traitor" (but we will cross that
	   bridge when we come to it...). Gives the round a bit of
	   shape without being unduly restrictive, even if I am not
	   so keen on it, so +0.5 Style.

   Remark: I have never been keen on grammar pedants, so have largely
           ignored both the me/I and rogue apostrophe issues in the
           first two rules. However, such matters are always likely to
           affect my style judgements...


		 Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 14:49:13 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 16:59:44 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36Exij25799
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:59:44 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36Exiu09056
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:59:44 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114353AbRDFO7Q>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:59:16 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:00:44 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Revised judgement 159:2 - INVALID 
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061552390.2343-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:2 - Peekee - 6 April 12:14:02 GMT - INVALID - (-0.5)
>>>>>>

I say this out loud for all to hear, even though I fear that may not be a
wise thing to do.  However, I feel that the FRC should know there is a
traitor amongst us.  We must find this vile evil doer, so that all can know
who they are.  All Rule's made by a member not yet tarnished by this traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

I am sorry; lack of sleep seems to have affected my brain. (Either
that or I am being zapped by some kind of evil mind ray - I must coat
my windows with silver foil!) As soon as I sent off my last post I
realised that I should have written

Judgement: INVALID. This rule obeys its own restriction. However,
	   159:1 does not. I do not see how Ronald has been "tarnished
	   by this traitor", and so would have to have helped us find
	   the traitor for this to be valid. "All rules" does not mean
	   the same as "all future rules".

    Style: I must confess, I was secretly hoping that we would not get
	   into a "whodunnit" kind of round. (Did Peekee know that?
	   Perhaps he has bugged my brain? I had better be
	   careful... Lucky this rule was invalid!) I am not sure the
	   rule is particularly paranoid (after all, if valid, it
	   would seem that there IS a traitor amongst us!).

	   It is not clear to me exactly what it means for a member to
	   be "tarnished by this traitor" (and now that I have
	   rejudged this rule, we will NOT have to cross that bridge
	   when we come to it...). Would, if valid, have iven the
	   round a bit of shape, without being unduly restrictive,
	   even if I am not so keen on it. However, being invalid (and
	   for such a commonly occuring reason) reduces the style
	   rating to -0.5 Style.

   Remark: I have never been keen on grammar pedants, so have largely
           ignored both the me/I and rogue apostrophe issues in the
           first two rules. However, typos will inevitably affect my
           style judgements...


		 dopey Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 14:59:16 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 17:21:00 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36FKxj26608
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:20:59 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36FKwu11444
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:20:58 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114404AbRDFPUm>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:20:42 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:22:00 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:3 - VALID
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061608480.2343-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:3 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 12:24:14 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

We know that the FRC traitor will submit or has submitted 
at least one valid rule this round. However, this being the 
paranoia round we will not be able to positively identify 
the fiend before the end of the Round.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I dont know who the traitor is at the moment; the
	   only worry is if the round ends with only Ronald with a
	   valid rule submitted, so suppose this happens. Then the
	   round must end at the end of the first week, and we will
	   not know before then whether any other rules will come, so
	   wont be able to deduce till the end that he is the traitor.

    Style: Unfortunately, despite the invalidity of 159:2, a traitor
           seems to have crept in among us. Still, we do at last
           have a rule with a bit of paranoia in it! Another fairly
           harmless restriction; the main effect of the rule is simply
           to propagate the traitor theme...

	   Fairly plain and simple. For finally getting to grips to
	   the theme and (accidentally?) being ever so slightly
	   slippery in attaining validity I'll give this +1.0 Style.


	       Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 15:20:42 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 17:35:14 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36FZEj27017
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:35:14 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36FZDd04576
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:35:13 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114523AbRDFPez>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:34:55 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:36:21 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:4 - VALID
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061635350.2343-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:4 - Jeremy Selengut - 6 Apr 13:10:48 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

So let me get this right, after the first week, the traitor must be one of the
people who to that point have submitted a valid rule.

And we cannot figure out who the traitor is before the end of the round, 
which  is to say, before the point at where there is only one player left.

So therefore, no rule can, by process of elimination, limit the number of 
possible traitors to
one.

Good grief, what if there were three players left and one of them could not 
(due to the stipulation of some earlier rule) be the traitor and one of the 
other two became ineligible?  Then we would know who the traitor was before 
the round was over!

It seems that no one can ever be removed from suspicion while they are 
still eligible.

Help! Watch your backs, folks, I know I will...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Turning to this rule straight from my last judgement, I see
           that Jeremy has nicely preempted my line of thought.  (He
           would have to be pretty paranoid to think I copied it from
           him...) His argument is not just paranoia, but reasoned
           paranoia - the best kind. I like the way the conclusion
           creeps up upon him. At first glance perhaps a little long,
           but I think reasonably so. No restriction, but very much on
           theme, (and surprisingly helpful to the other players) so
           +1.5 Style.

   Remark: Yet another rule that slipped in before my style warnings
           concerning typos and other errors. I start to suspect a plot!

		Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 15:34:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 19:30:27 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36HURj29517
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:30:27 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36HURu19393
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:30:27 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114551AbRDFRaH>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:30:07 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 18:31:27 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 159: Summary 1
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061823020.2438-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O

Round 159: Summary 1

I wont be able to judge any more rules until Monday morning or so
(British Time). Until then, here is a summary of the state of play.

NB: I will certainly have to go away at some stage over Easter,
possibly as early as next Thursday (and perhaps as late as the
Thursday after that). This would be for a long weekend; the options
would be for someone to take over the judging from me or (especially
if others have a break to take) to suspend the round for a few days.

If you let me know which you would prefer (preferably, in the former
case, accompanied with an offer to be judge!), we can ensure there is
not too much disruption to the round...

       Judge Anton


Player        Eligibility expires (GMT)   Style
-----------------------------------------------
Jeremy Selengut   13 Apr 13:10:48	  +1.5 
Ronald Kunne      13 Apr 12:24:14         +1.5
Everyone else     13 Apr 11:53:23         +0.0
Peekee            12 Apr 11:53:23         -0.5


Rule    Author  Posted at       Judgement  Style
------------------------------------------------
159:1   Ronald  6 Apr 11:53:23    VALID    +0.5
159:2   Peekee  6 Apr 12:14:02   INVALID   -0.5
159:3   Ronald  6 Apr 12:24:14    VALID    +1.0
159:4   Jeremy  6 Apr 13:10:48    VALID    +1.5 

>>>>>>
159:1 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 11:53:23 GMT - VALID - (+0.5)
>>>>>>

Anton and me both seem to  have the strong impression 
that everybody wants to submit roundkillers.

Therefore: a rule must obey its own restrictions.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID

    Style: Short and simple, with a fairly standard (but always
           useful) restriction. Does not seem unduly paranoid, but
           does not prevent paranoia later either. A pretty harmless
           opening so +0.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:2 - Peekee - 6 Apr 12:14:02 GMT - INVALID - (-0.5)
>>>>>>

I say this out loud for all to hear, even though I fear that may not be a
wise thing to do.  However, I feel that the FRC should know there is a
traitor amongst us.  We must find this vile evil doer, so that all can know
who they are.  All Rule's made by a member not yet tarnished by this traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

I am sorry; lack of sleep seems to have affected my brain. (Either
that or I am being zapped by some kind of evil mind ray - I must coat
my windows with silver foil!) As soon as I sent off my initial
judgement I realised that I should have written

Judgement: INVALID. This rule obeys its own restriction. However,
	   159:1 does not. I do not see how Ronald has been "tarnished
	   by this traitor", and so would have to have helped us find
	   the traitor for this to be valid. "All rules" does not mean
	   the same as "all future rules".

    Style: I must confess, I was secretly hoping that we would not get
	   into a "whodunnit" kind of round. (Did Peekee know that?
	   Perhaps he has bugged my brain? I had better be
	   careful... Lucky this rule was invalid!) I am not sure the
	   rule is particularly paranoid (after all, if valid, it
	   would seem that there IS a traitor amongst us!).

	   It is not clear to me exactly what it means for a member to
	   be "tarnished by this traitor" (and now that I have
	   rejudged this rule, we will NOT have to cross that bridge
	   when we come to it...). Would, if valid, have given the
	   round a bit of shape, without being unduly restrictive,
	   even if I am not so keen on it. However, being invalid (and
	   for such a commonly occuring reason) reduces the style
	   rating to -0.5 Style.

   Remark: I have never been keen on grammar pedants, so have largely
           ignored both the me/I and rogue apostrophe issues in the
           first two rules. However, typos will inevitably affect my
           style judgements...


>>>>>>
159:3 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 12:24:14 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

We know that the FRC traitor will submit or has submitted 
at least one valid rule this round. However, this being the 
paranoia round we will not be able to positively identify 
the fiend before the end of the Round.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Unfortunately, despite the invalidity of 159:2, a traitor
           seems to have crept in among us. Still, we do at last
           have a rule with a bit of paranoia in it! Another fairly
           harmless restriction; the main effect of the rule is simply
           to propagate the traitor theme...

	   Fairly plain and simple. For finally getting to grips to
	   the theme I'll give this +1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:4 - Jeremy Selengut - 6 Apr 13:10:48 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

So let me get this right, after the first week, the traitor must be one of the
people who to that point have submitted a valid rule.

And we cannot figure out who the traitor is before the end of the round, 
which  is to say, before the point at where there is only one player left.

So therefore, no rule can, by process of elimination, limit the number of 
possible traitors to
one.

Good grief, what if there were three players left and one of them could not 
(due to the stipulation of some earlier rule) be the traitor and one of the 
other two became ineligible?  Then we would know who the traitor was before 
the round was over!

It seems that no one can ever be removed from suspicion while they are 
still eligible.

Help! Watch your backs, folks, I know I will...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Turning to this rule straight from my last judgement, I see
           that Jeremy has nicely preempted my line of thought.  (He
           would have to be pretty paranoid to think I copied it from
           him...) His argument is not just paranoia, but reasoned
           paranoia - the best kind. I like the way the conclusion
           creeps up upon him. At first glance perhaps a little long,
           but I think reasonably so. No restriction, but very much on
           theme, (and surprisingly helpful to the other players) so
           +1.5 Style.

   Remark: Yet another rule that slipped in before my style warnings
           concerning typos and other errors. I start to suspect a plot!

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 17:30:07 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 19:40:50 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36Heoj29722
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:40:50 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36Hend10751
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:40:49 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114631AbRDFRkc>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:40:32 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 18:41:56 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 159:5
In-Reply-To: <OE6MWuLn5U9T3TGJ2TU00000161@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061837060.2491-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Of course, just as I was about to leave the office (he IS spying on
me; the foil was not good enough!) 

On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Alan Riddell (aka Peekee) wrote:

> 159:5
> ====
> All future Rules made by a member not yet tarnished by the traitor
> must help to find him (or her).
> ====

I dont have time to judge this now; to save time and controversy
though I will ask anyone who can explain to me why this rule obeys its
own restriction to do so (by Monday morning) :-) 

And, if it does, how it has any content in the light of 159:3...

     Best Wishes,

	  Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 17:40:32 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr  9 12:21:46 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f39ALkj16986
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:21:46 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f39ALju02074
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:21:45 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114564AbRDIKVK>;
        Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:21:10 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 11:23:13 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 159:4
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104091115070.4174-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Since my ruling may have been misleading, some comments on Jeremy's
159:4. I claimed there that this contained no restriction, just
reasoned paranoia. However, that was incorrect. 

Jeremy's rule contains an (implicit) restriction, as his argument is
based on one additional hypothesis not stated elsewhere. What style he
would gain for having a restriction he loses for the weakening of his
argument, so there is no other effect on my ruling.

Best Wishes,

     Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-09 10:21:10 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr  9 12:37:13 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f39AbCj17401
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:37:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f39AbCd01517
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:37:12 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114549AbRDIKgu>;
        Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:36:50 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 11:38:47 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:5 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104091137260.4174-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:5 - Peekee - 6 Apr 17:31:48 GMT - VALID - (-1.0)
>>>>>>

All future Rules made by a member not yet tarnished by the traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I have decided that to require certain rules to help
           find the traitor in itself helps to find the traitor,
           albeit rather indirectly. As I understand it, 159:4
           guarantees that we will know who the traitor is by the end
           of the round (which was not claimed by 159:3), but that
           does not prevent future rules from helping us to find
           him/her. Especially as I have a reading of 159:4 that would
           argue that all future rules will automatically do this!
           (which gives another way in which this rule obeys its own
           restriction...).

    Style: I am not sure this rule has any noticable effect on the
           round, and do not really approve of reposts of ideas that
           failed (for whatever reason) the first time around. Since
           the rule still uses the - to my mind unsatisfactory -
           expression "tarnished by the traitor", I dont see any great
           claims that can be made on the style front. It is also 
           entirely lacking in paranoia. I give this -1.0 Style.


		    Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-09 10:36:50 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr  9 13:36:59 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f39Bawj19282
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 13:36:58 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f39Bawd09344
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 13:36:58 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114596AbRDILgj>;
        Mon, 9 Apr 2001 13:36:39 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:38:32 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:6 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104091237530.4174-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:6 - Aron Wall - 8 Apr 22:49:31 GMT - INVALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

In order to find the traitor, we must aggressively assault any possible
suspects.  Therefore, from now on we should accompany each valid rule
with one or more secret orders given by private communication to the
Judge in a reasonably short period of time following the rule's
submission.  Any kind of order must be explicity allowed by a valid
rule, and shall take effect only if the rule it accompanies is valid.

One possible secret order is "I shoot Player X [n]".  This is an attack
that will invalidate the next rule posted by Player X unless that rule
has some sort of defense that will protect it.  A rule may not use a
defense which was defined in itself.  "n" is either 1, 2, or 3.  After
you shoot at one player you must reload your weapon and cannot shoot
again for 24 hours.

Another possible order is "I hide [n]".  A player may not hide and
attack at the same time.  "n" is 1, 2, or 3.  This defends the rule from
any shooting attack unless the numbers of the attack order and the hide
order were the same as each other.

There is nothing to stop the other players from cooperating to take you
down...

>>>>>>

Judgement: Recall RO 10: Where to Do Things.  All actions under these
           rules must be accomplished by a public posting in the
           official committee forum.
	   
	   "Shooting Player X" is surely such an action, yet this rule
	   requires that this (or something similar) be carried out in a
	   "private communication to the Judge". For this reason I
	   believe this rule to be INVALID.

    Style: As so often Aron submits a rule which pushes the envelope
           of the allowable. In general I dont like rules (or tactics)
           that step outside the framework laid down in the ROs - I
           think the FRC should be about creating inventive rules, not
           messing around with procedural matters. But - again, as so
           often - while disapproving in principle, I find that I like
           very much Aron's rule. If anything would instill a bit of
           paranoia in the FRC (which I still feel to be lacking in
           this round) then this would! I think it needed a temporary
           amendment to the ROs for this to work though. +2.0 Style.


		     Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-09 11:36:39 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr  9 14:04:21 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f39C4Kj20250
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:04:20 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f39C4Jd12634
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:04:19 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114596AbRDIMDz>;
        Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:03:55 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 13:05:46 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:7 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104091305020.4274-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:7 - James Wilson - 8 Apr 23:55:13 GMT - VALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

>From your friend, THE COMPUTER:

Troubleshooters, there is a COMMIE MUTANT TRAITOR in FRC sector!  The identity
of this foul fiend is [deleted for your protection].  You must locate and
terminate the traitor!

The last known location of the traitor is the computer terminal at [beyond your
security clearance].  The traitor was attempting to influence FRC round 159.

Remember, only traitors commit treason, and only one member of the FRC is a
traitor.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks ill of the computer.  The computer
is your friend.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks well of commies.  Commies are
evil.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: A most enjoyable rule. For those to whom it means nothing,
           I should point out that its distinctive style is based on
           the role-playing game "Paranoia". As one would expect, it
           is consequently suitably paranoid. It does not do much to
           the round directly, but may encourage the kind of style of
           rule that I was hoping for when I suggested the theme. +2.0
           Style.

		Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-09 12:03:55 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr  6 13:43:04 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f36Bh3j18285
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:43:03 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f36Bh2d12058
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:43:02 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114313AbRDFLmk>;
        Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:42:40 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 12:43:59 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 159
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104061240530.2204-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Round 159 will commence at 00:00 GMT on Saturday 7th April, or with the
first rule posted before then. The theme of the round will be

			       Paranoia

For those who havent seen me judge before (or who have, and prefer to
forget that they did...), I might point out some pet dislikes.

* I think that overly complicated rules early on are bad (and probably
  round-killing). "Early on" might mean "within the first week".

* Short is sweet. I tend to penalise long rules too!

* Rules that do nothing for the round, or are likely to kill it off,
  dont meet with my approval either...

To be a bit more positive: rounds I liked include 130, 127, 110, 108,
and 105.

       Best Wishes,

	    Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-06 11:42:40 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr  9 15:44:16 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f39DiFj24121
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 15:44:15 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f39DiEu06906
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 15:44:14 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114617AbRDINnq>;
        Mon, 9 Apr 2001 15:43:46 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:45:46 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:8 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104091444380.4405-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:8 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 13:24:03 GMT - INVALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

RED CLEARENCE
The computer is your friend!  Trust the computer!  The computer has
benevolently decided to rank troubleshooters based on the degree of
trust and faith the computer places in them.  To find your security
clearence, just average the number of style points you have, the number
of VALID rules you have posted this round, and the number of missions
you have completed.  (The first mission will be announced in [deleted
for your protection].)  Round down.  If the number you get is negative,
you are Infrared.  If your number is 0, you are Red.  Each point after
that gives you a raise in security clearence, to Orange, Yellow, Green,
Blue, Indigo, Violet, all the way up to Ultraviolet, at 7 points.  The
Judge, however, is always Ultraviolet.  Praise the Computer for such a
wonderful system!  All rules must discriminate on the basis of Security
clearence in a way that treats those of higher security clearences
better than those of lower security clearences (e.g. those below Green
must...).  Surely you agree that this will help us to spot the traitor
by his performance!

By the way, it is treasonous for any player to display any specific
knowledge in their rules of any fact contained in a rule, whether or not
it is VALID, of higher security clearence than they are.  The security
clearence of a rule is Infrared by default but can be anything up to the
security clearence of its author at the time of posting.

>>>>>>

Judgement: I quote from my judgement of 159:2 - "All rules" does not
           mean the same as "all future rules". Earlier rules do not,
           sadly, practice discrimination in the manner required. 

    Style: Another very nice rule from Aron, and unfortunately another
           invalid one. Develops well the style introduced in the
           159:7, with a nice colour-coded part. The idea of rules one
           does not have clearance for is lovely.

	   Invalidity does a little harm and, as I warned about typos,
	   I feel that to repeat one so many times (even in block
	   capitals!) must incur a small penalty. It is a shame to see
	   such a nice rule fail though. +1.5 Style.


		Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-09 13:43:46 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr  9 16:37:06 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f39Eb6j26190
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 16:37:06 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f39Eb5u15167
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 16:37:05 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114578AbRDIOdv>;
        Mon, 9 Apr 2001 16:33:51 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 15:35:31 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Proposal
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104091529500.4571-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Since only Ronald has expressed any opinions about a possible Easter
break (and was in favour) I propose:

>>>>>>
159:A
>>>>>>

For the purposes of round 159, the period between 12 Apr 00:00:00 and
17 Apr 00:00:00 will not count for timekeeping purposes. Any rules
submitted during that period will be judged sequentially in the order
of their rule dates, but be regarded as ariving at 00:00:00 on Tuesday
17th April.

>>>>>>

I, of course, vote FOR this proposal. 

   Best Wishes,

	Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-09 14:33:51 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Apr 11 14:27:53 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3BCRqj06555
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:27:53 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3BCRqu08414
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:27:52 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114320AbRDKM1W>;
        Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:27:22 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 13:29:48 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:10 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104111329200.6274-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:10 - James Wilson - 11 Apr 03:03:22 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

Help!  The traitor is upon us!  Did you know that e has gained control of the
Canadian Orbital Mind Beam?  (We can call it COMB.)  It's thought manipulation
powers are unimaginably cruel.  Mr. Shake Spear, who lives in my toaster, has
already succumbed to its influences.

Luckily for us, the voices in my head have explained what we must do to evade
it.  Wearing an aluminum hat deflects COMB harmlessly into the air.  This
simple precaution is almost enough to stop COMB.  A sentence which ends in a
vowel, however, provides a direct link to the brain.  No aluminum hat will
prevent COMB from reaching you if you use a sentence like that.

Please respect my warning.  Any player who displays evidence of not following
these instructions in one of eir valid rules puts the rest of us at risk. 
Thus, any further rules from such a player are invalid.  This does not apply to
rules previous to this one, since at that time the traitor did not control
COMB.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: We seem to have lost contact with the computer, but there
	   is much to enjoy in this rule. I like the high paranoia
	   quotient on display. The hat and toaster remarks are
	   suitably wacky, while the bizarre justification for the
	   restriction sounds pretty paranoid to me. The actual
	   restriction (we dont seem to have so many, yet) is not
	   earth-shattering, but fair enough. The voices in my
	   head tell me that I should award this +1.5 Style.


		Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-11 12:27:22 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Apr 11 14:34:30 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3BCYUj06862
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:34:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3BCYTu09437
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:34:29 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114340AbRDKMeN>;
        Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:34:13 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 13:36:39 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 159: Summary 2
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104111335040.6274-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Round 159: Summary 2

No objections so far to 159:A - if it passes then the eligibility
periods listed below will (of course) be extended. Note that I will be
unavailable from about 4 or 5pm GMT today until Tuesday morning.

     Judge Anton


Player        Eligibility expires (GMT)   Style
-----------------------------------------------
James Wilson	  18 Apr 03:03:22	  +3.5
Aron Wall	  16 Apr 20:15:35	  +4.5
Peekee            13 Apr 17:31:48         -1.5
Jeremy Selengut   13 Apr 13:10:48	  +1.5 
Ronald Kunne      13 Apr 12:24:14         +1.5
Everyone else     13 Apr 11:53:23         +0.0


Rule    Author  Posted at       Judgement  Style
------------------------------------------------
159:1   Ronald  6 Apr 11:53:23    VALID    +0.5
159:2   Peekee  6 Apr 12:14:02   INVALID   -0.5
159:3   Ronald  6 Apr 12:24:14    VALID    +1.0
159:4   Jeremy  6 Apr 13:10:48    VALID    +1.5 
159:5   Peekee  6 Apr 17:31:48    VALID    -1.0
159:6   Aron    8 Apr 22:49:31   INVALID   +2.0
159:7   James   8 Apr 23:55:13    VALID    +2.0
159:8   Aron    9 Apr 13:24:03   INVALID   +1.5
159:9   Aron    9 Apr 20:15:35    VALID    +1.0
159:10  James  11 Apr 03:03:22    VALID    +1.5 

Proposals
---------

>>>>>>
159:A - Anton Cox - 9 Apr 14:33:51 GMT - PASSING - (1/0)
>>>>>>

For the purposes of round 159, the period between 12 Apr 00:00:00 and
17 Apr 00:00:00 will not count for timekeeping purposes. Any rules
submitted during that period will be judged sequentially in the order
of their rule dates, but be regarded as ariving at 00:00:00 on Tuesday
17th April.

>>>>>>

    For: Anton
Against: -


Rules
-----

>>>>>>
159:1 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 11:53:23 GMT - VALID - (+0.5)
>>>>>>

Anton and me both seem to  have the strong impression 
that everybody wants to submit roundkillers.

Therefore: a rule must obey its own restrictions.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID

    Style: Short and simple, with a fairly standard (but always
           useful) restriction. Does not seem unduly paranoid, but
           does not prevent paranoia later either. A pretty harmless
           opening so +0.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:2 - Peekee - 6 Apr 12:14:02 GMT - INVALID - (-0.5)
>>>>>>

I say this out loud for all to hear, even though I fear that may not be a
wise thing to do.  However, I feel that the FRC should know there is a
traitor amongst us.  We must find this vile evil doer, so that all can know
who they are.  All Rule's made by a member not yet tarnished by this traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

I am sorry; lack of sleep seems to have affected my brain. (Either
that or I am being zapped by some kind of evil mind ray - I must coat
my windows with silver foil!) As soon as I sent off my last post I
realised that I should have written

Judgement: INVALID. This rule obeys its own restriction. However,
	   159:1 does not. I do not see how Ronald has been "tarnished
	   by this traitor", and so would have to have helped us find
	   the traitor for this to be valid. "All rules" does not mean
	   the same as "all future rules".

    Style: I must confess, I was secretly hoping that we would not get
	   into a "whodunnit" kind of round. (Did Peekee know that?
	   Perhaps he has bugged my brain? I had better be
	   careful... Lucky this rule was invalid!) I am not sure the
	   rule is particularly paranoid (after all, if valid, it
	   would seem that there IS a traitor amongst us!).

	   It is not clear to me exactly what it means for a member to
	   be "tarnished by this traitor" (and now that I have
	   rejudged this rule, we will NOT have to cross that bridge
	   when we come to it...). Would, if valid, have given the
	   round a bit of shape, without being unduly restrictive,
	   even if I am not so keen on it. However, being invalid (and
	   for such a commonly occuring reason) reduces the style
	   rating to -0.5 Style.

   Remark: I have never been keen on grammar pedants, so have largely
           ignored both the me/I and rogue apostrophe issues in the
           first two rules. However, typos will inevitably affect my
           style judgements...


>>>>>>
159:3 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 12:24:14 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

We know that the FRC traitor will submit or has submitted 
at least one valid rule this round. However, this being the 
paranoia round we will not be able to positively identify 
the fiend before the end of the Round.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Unfortunately, despite the invalidity of 159:2, a traitor
           seems to have crept in among us. Still, we do at last
           have a rule with a bit of paranoia in it! Another fairly
           harmless restriction; the main effect of the rule is simply
           to propagate the traitor theme...

	   Fairly plain and simple. For finally getting to grips to
	   the theme I'll give this +1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:4 - Jeremy Selengut - 6 Apr 13:10:48 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

So let me get this right, after the first week, the traitor must be one of the
people who to that point have submitted a valid rule.

And we cannot figure out who the traitor is before the end of the round, 
which  is to say, before the point at where there is only one player left.

So therefore, no rule can, by process of elimination, limit the number of 
possible traitors to
one.

Good grief, what if there were three players left and one of them could not 
(due to the stipulation of some earlier rule) be the traitor and one of the 
other two became ineligible?  Then we would know who the traitor was before 
the round was over!

It seems that no one can ever be removed from suspicion while they are 
still eligible.

Help! Watch your backs, folks, I know I will...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Turning to this rule straight from my last judgement, I see
           that Jeremy has nicely preempted my line of thought.  (He
           would have to be pretty paranoid to think I copied it from
           him...) His argument is not just paranoia, but reasoned
           paranoia - the best kind. I like the way the conclusion
           creeps up upon him. At first glance perhaps a little long,
           but I think reasonably so. No restriction, but very much on
           theme, (and surprisingly helpful to the other players) so
           +1.5 Style.

   Remark: Yet another rule that slipped in before my style warnings
           concerning typos and other errors. I start to suspect a plot!

Remark(2): Since my ruling may have been misleading, some comments on
	   Jeremy's 159:4. I claimed there that this contained no
	   restriction, just reasoned paranoia. However, that was
	   incorrect.

	   Jeremy's rule contains an (implicit) restriction, as his
	   argument is based on one additional hypothesis not stated
	   elsewhere. What style he would gain for having a
	   restriction he loses for the weakening of his argument, so
	   there is no other effect on my ruling.


>>>>>>
159:5 - Peekee - 6 Apr 17:31:48 GMT - VALID - (-1.0)
>>>>>>

All future Rules made by a member not yet tarnished by the traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I have decided that to require certain rules to help
           find the traitor in itself helps to find the traitor,
           albeit rather indirectly. As I understand it, 159:4
           guarantees that we will know who the traitor is by the end
           of the round (which was not claimed by 159:3), but that
           does not prevent future rules from helping us to find
           him/her. Especially as I have a reading of 159:4 that would
           argue that all future rules will automatically do this!
           (which gives another way in which this rule obeys its own
           restriction...).

    Style: I am not sure this rule has any noticable effect on the
           round, and do not really approve of reposts of ideas that
           failed (for whatever reason) the first time around. Since
           the rule still uses the - to my mind unsatisfactory -
           expression "tarnished by the traitor", I dont see any great
           claims that can be made on the style front. It is also 
           entirely lacking in paranoia. I give this -1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:6 - Aron Wall - 8 Apr 22:49:31 GMT - INVALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

In order to find the traitor, we must aggressively assault any possible
suspects.  Therefore, from now on we should accompany each valid rule
with one or more secret orders given by private communication to the
Judge in a reasonably short period of time following the rule's
submission.  Any kind of order must be explicity allowed by a valid
rule, and shall take effect only if the rule it accompanies is valid.

One possible secret order is "I shoot Player X [n]".  This is an attack
that will invalidate the next rule posted by Player X unless that rule
has some sort of defense that will protect it.  A rule may not use a
defense which was defined in itself.  "n" is either 1, 2, or 3.  After
you shoot at one player you must reload your weapon and cannot shoot
again for 24 hours.

Another possible order is "I hide [n]".  A player may not hide and
attack at the same time.  "n" is 1, 2, or 3.  This defends the rule from
any shooting attack unless the numbers of the attack order and the hide
order were the same as each other.

There is nothing to stop the other players from cooperating to take you
down...

>>>>>>

Judgement: Recall RO 10: Where to Do Things.  All actions under these
           rules must be accomplished by a public posting in the
           official committee forum.
	   
	   "Shooting Player X" is surely such an action, yet this rule
	   requires that this (or something similar) be carried out in a
	   "private communication to the Judge". For this reason I
	   believe this rule to be INVALID.

    Style: As so often Aron submits a rule which pushes the envelope
           of the allowable. In general I dont like rules (or tactics)
           that step outside the framework laid down in the ROs - I
           think the FRC should be about creating inventive rules, not
           messing around with procedural matters. But - again, as so
           often - while disapproving in principle, I find that I like
           very much Aron's rule. If anything would instill a bit of
           paranoia in the FRC (which I still feel to be lacking in
           this round) then this would! I think it needed a temporary
           amendment to the ROs for this to work though. +2.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:7 - James Wilson - 8 Apr 23:55:13 GMT - VALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

>From your friend, THE COMPUTER:

Troubleshooters, there is a COMMIE MUTANT TRAITOR in FRC sector!  The identity
of this foul fiend is [deleted for your protection].  You must locate and
terminate the traitor!

The last known location of the traitor is the computer terminal at [beyond your
security clearance].  The traitor was attempting to influence FRC round 159.

Remember, only traitors commit treason, and only one member of the FRC is a
traitor.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks ill of the computer.  The computer
is your friend.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks well of commies.  Commies are
evil.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: A most enjoyable rule. For those to whom it means nothing,
           I should point out that its distinctive style is based on
           the role-playing game "Paranoia". As one would expect, it
           is consequently suitably paranoid. It does not do much to
           the round directly, but may encourage the kind of style of
           rule that I was hoping for when I suggested the theme. +2.0
           Style.


>>>>>>
159:8 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 13:24:03 GMT - INVALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

RED CLEARENCE
The computer is your friend!  Trust the computer!  The computer has
benevolently decided to rank troubleshooters based on the degree of
trust and faith the computer places in them.  To find your security
clearence, just average the number of style points you have, the number
of VALID rules you have posted this round, and the number of missions
you have completed.  (The first mission will be announced in [deleted
for your protection].)  Round down.  If the number you get is negative,
you are Infrared.  If your number is 0, you are Red.  Each point after
that gives you a raise in security clearence, to Orange, Yellow, Green,
Blue, Indigo, Violet, all the way up to Ultraviolet, at 7 points.  The
Judge, however, is always Ultraviolet.  Praise the Computer for such a
wonderful system!  All rules must discriminate on the basis of Security
clearence in a way that treats those of higher security clearences
better than those of lower security clearences (e.g. those below Green
must...).  Surely you agree that this will help us to spot the traitor
by his performance!

By the way, it is treasonous for any player to display any specific
knowledge in their rules of any fact contained in a rule, whether or not
it is VALID, of higher security clearence than they are.  The security
clearence of a rule is Infrared by default but can be anything up to the
security clearence of its author at the time of posting.

>>>>>>

Judgement: I quote from my judgement of 159:2 - "All rules" does not
           mean the same as "all future rules". Earlier rules do not,
           sadly, practice discrimination in the manner required. 

    Style: Another very nice rule from Aron, and unfortunately another
           invalid one. Develops well the style introduced in the
           159:7, with a nice colour-coded part. The idea of rules one
           does not have clearance for is lovely.

	   Invalidity does a little harm and, as I warned about typos,
	   I feel that to repeat one so many times (even in block
	   capitals!) must incur a small penalty. It is a shame to see
	   such a nice rule fail though. +1.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:9 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 20:15:35 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

I recieved the following message from the traitor:

To: Citizen Aron Wall
From: Commie Mutant Traitor
-------------------------
I shall terminate you one by one.  You cannot find me, or stop me.  I
will pick you off slowly, at designated times.  But until the time
arrives, it will not be completely certain who it is I shall slay.  You
might not even know then who the victim is!  The first killing shall be
on the stroke of midnight, Wednesday 18th GMT.  At the same time each
week from then on, a death will occur until only I, the traitor, am
left.  I do not kill ineligible players.  All rules must be submitted by
living players.  That [deleted for your protection] Computer is a
[deleted for your protection]!
------------------------

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I think it is reasonable to claim that knowing how
	   the traitor operates will help to find him/her (especially
	   on Wednesdays...) In any case, as I believe that every
	   valid rule helps us find the traitor, this is not a problem.

    Style: Nice use of the established style to avoid falling foul of
	   159:7, and I like the idea of a mail from "Commie Mutant
	   Traitor". The rule should instill an appropriate level of
	   fear in the minds of the remaining players, and makes
	   explicit 159:4's implicit assumption (that the traitor will
	   win). A state of affairs I find very appealing. I am
	   beginning to enjoy Aron's ostentatious refusal to be cowed
	   by my strictures on spelling. Not as nice as Aron's other,
	   invalid, rules (it does rather less), but still worth +1.0
	   Style.


>>>>>>
159:10 - James Wilson - 11 Apr 03:03:22 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

Help!  The traitor is upon us!  Did you know that e has gained control of the
Canadian Orbital Mind Beam?  (We can call it COMB.)  It's thought manipulation
powers are unimaginably cruel.  Mr. Shake Spear, who lives in my toaster, has
already succumbed to its influences.

Luckily for us, the voices in my head have explained what we must do to evade
it.  Wearing an aluminum hat deflects COMB harmlessly into the air.  This
simple precaution is almost enough to stop COMB.  A sentence which ends in a
vowel, however, provides a direct link to the brain.  No aluminum hat will
prevent COMB from reaching you if you use a sentence like that.

Please respect my warning.  Any player who displays evidence of not following
these instructions in one of eir valid rules puts the rest of us at risk. 
Thus, any further rules from such a player are invalid.  This does not apply to
rules previous to this one, since at that time the traitor did not control
COMB.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: We seem to have lost contact with the computer, but there
	   is much to enjoy in this rule. I like the high paranoia
	   quotient on display. The hat and toaster remarks are
	   suitably wacky, while the bizarre justification for the
	   restriction sounds pretty paranoid to me. The actual
	   restriction (we dont seem to have so many, yet) is not
	   earth-shattering, but fair enough. The voices in my
	   head tell me that I should award this +1.5 Style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-11 12:34:13 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Apr 11 17:07:47 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3BF7lj12869
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:07:47 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3BF7kd05051
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:07:47 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114710AbRDKPHa>;
        Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:07:30 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:09:52 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:11 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104111609020.6485-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O

>>>>>>
159:11 - Jeremy Selengut - 11 Apr 14:33:52 GMT - VALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

You, what are you doing here again?  I thought I told you to get lost.  Let 
me make it clear -- I'LL KILL YOU IF YOU TAKE ONE STEP CLOSER!!!  Why, 
because you're probably the traitor.  Oh, don't look at me so innocent, you 
know as well as I it could be anyone and there'd be no way to tell.  I 
don't care who sent you, I'm not coming out.  I've got this room totally 
wrapped in aluminum foil, so I'm safe here for now.  It took me a week, but 
I did it.  Well, if you're so intent on "helping" me, go get me some more 
uppers - you know, stimulants.  Because I can't let myself sleep, you 
idiot!  What if I am the traitor, huh?  I wouldn't know it, I could be 
doing all kinds of evil stuff when I think I'm asleep.  You know, like a 
whole second personality thing going on...  Don't laugh!  It could 
happen!  OK, that's it, I don't care if you're the traitor or not!  DIE, 
AND GO TO HELL!!  *bang*  *bangbangbang*  Shit, who'se going to clean up 
all this broken glass?  (And where's my mirror?)

The preceding message has been brought to you by the National Institute for 
the Treatment of Paranoia, Insecurity and Conspiracy Theories 
(NITPICT).  Remember these pieces of advice; just because you are paranoid, 
that doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get you and, you can't defeat 
the traitor if you are a raving lunatic.  Remember this also, in order to 
keep our collective fears in check, all acts of violence or other mishaps 
perpetrated against members of the FRC must be reported by the valid rule 
immediately following the incident.

Have a nice day, we now return you to your regularly scheduled mind-numbing 
entertainment...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: It is good to see that Jeremy is not losing his cool,
           despite the pressures of the round. I like his fear that he
           may be the traitor without even knowing it. Unless of
           course, this is just a devious scheme to make us think that
           he doesnt know it...

	   While I am not sure how reporting acts of violence etc will
	   keep our fears in check (surely quite the reverse!), it
	   seems like a reasonable idea.

	   The second paragraph feels a little bland after the drama
	   of the first (despite the acronym). But I am feeling
	   generous, so +1.5 Style.

	   PS: You will have noticed that I freely end my sentences
	       with vowels. That is because, as judge, I am of course
	       immune from the evil COMB influence. At least, that is
	       what those little voices keep telling me...


		    Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-11 15:07:30 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Apr 11 17:35:00 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3BFYxj13715
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:34:59 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3BFYxu05982
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:34:59 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114737AbRDKPdp>;
        Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:33:45 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:36:08 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:12 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104111635090.6485-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O

>>>>>>
159:12 - Aron Wall - 11 Apr 14:59:59 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

I agree with Citizen James!  I will certainly do what he requested us to
do in 159:10.

Some citizens belong to secret societies.  Such citizens have been
tarnished by the traitor and are not fully loyal to the great Computer.
How do you join a secret society?  Well, just submit a rule which is
unmistakably characteristic of the beliefs of a specific secret society
which has been mentioned in a previous valid rule, and you will have
joined that secret society.  The traitor is already a member of the
Communist Party, but may be a member of another secret society as well.
All other players are not yet secret society members.  Why would you
want to join a secret society?  Well, citizens who have not joined any
secret society have proven themselves to be loyal to the Computer.  And
it is well known that the traitor will always terminate these loyal
citizens preferentially, provided that there are at least two such
citizens eligible to play.

The Mystics are a society whose goals include emptying their collective
mind of all thoughts, drug trafficing, and retrieving post-Oops objects
with good vibes.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Not particularly paranoid, but the secret society idea
           might give the round a little more momentum. I like the
           potential get-out for those who refuse to join a secret
           society. Now we shall see who is truly loyal to the
           computer! +1.0 Style.


	       Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-11 15:33:45 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Apr 11 17:35:45 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3BFZjj13750
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:35:45 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3BFZid07632
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:35:44 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114700AbRDKPf0>;
        Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:35:26 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:37:45 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: 159:13 - Judgement
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104111636200.6485-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

>>>>>>
159:13 - Aron Wall - 11 Apr 15:02:40 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. Aron produces a counterexample to my contention that
	   the mere act of submitting a rule makes it obey 159:5 - but
	   still manages to pass it anyway. As I saw it, each new rule
	   would either be the last (and hence help us to find the
	   traitor by telling us who e is) or would force the traitor
	   to submit another rule (and hence indirectly help us to
	   find the traitor). But I did not allow for the fact that a
	   player might submit two consecutive valid rules: if they
	   were the last two then the final one did not help us find
	   the traitor (since the previous one would have told us that
	   anyway). However, Aron has carefully (?) demonstrated that
	   he is tarnished by the traitor, and so all is still fine.

    Style: It had to happen eventually: the empty rule. Aron
           demonstrates why rule delimiters are a good idea. 

	   So let me see. First Aron tells us the traitor will pick
	   members off one by one. Then he appears (for the moment) to
	   rule himself out as a victim for a while. Call me paranoid,
	   but I begin to suspect that [deleted for your protection].

	   A small bonus for being the first rule of Aron's not to
	   flout my comments on typos etc (even if in a trivial
	   manner)! And a bigger one for requiring such a long
	   justification of validity, despite having no content. All
	   told, that makes +1.25 Style.


		 Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-11 15:35:26 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Apr 17 16:37:47 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3HEbkj28666
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:37:47 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3HEbku23738
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:37:46 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114519AbRDQOeX>;
        Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:34:23 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 15:38:12 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 159: Summary 3
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104171535420.10015-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Here is an up-to-date round summary, now that my proposal to pause for
Easter has passed. I am relieved that nobody tried any shenanigans
while I was away - I thought I was asking for trouble, what with the
voting period for my proposal ending after the start of the timeout...

       Best Wishes,

             Judge Anton


Player        Eligibility expires (GMT)   Style
-----------------------------------------------
Aron Wall	  23 Apr 15:02:40	  +6.75
Jeremy Selengut   23 Apr 14:33:52	  +3.0
James Wilson	  23 Apr 03:03:22	  +3.5
Peekee            18 Apr 17:31:48         -1.5
Ronald Kunne      18 Apr 12:24:14         +1.5
Everyone else     18 Apr 11:53:23         +0.0


Rule    Author  Posted at       Judgement  Style
------------------------------------------------
159:1   Ronald  6 Apr 11:53:23    VALID    +0.5
159:2   Peekee  6 Apr 12:14:02   INVALID   -0.5
159:3   Ronald  6 Apr 12:24:14    VALID    +1.0
159:4   Jeremy  6 Apr 13:10:48    VALID    +1.5 
159:5   Peekee  6 Apr 17:31:48    VALID    -1.0
159:6   Aron    8 Apr 22:49:31   INVALID   +2.0
159:7   James   8 Apr 23:55:13    VALID    +2.0
159:8   Aron    9 Apr 13:24:03   INVALID   +1.5
159:9   Aron    9 Apr 20:15:35    VALID    +1.0
159:10  James  11 Apr 03:03:22    VALID    +1.5 
159:11  Jeremy 11 Apr 14:33:52    VALID    +1.5
159:12  Aron   11 Apr 14:59:59    VALID    +1.0
159:13  Aron   11 Apr 15:02:40    VALID    +1.25

Proposals
---------

>>>>>>
159:A - Anton Cox - 9 Apr 14:33:51 GMT - PASSED - (1/0)
>>>>>>

For the purposes of round 159, the period between 12 Apr 00:00:00 and
17 Apr 00:00:00 will not count for timekeeping purposes. Any rules
submitted during that period will be judged sequentially in the order
of their rule dates, but be regarded as ariving at 00:00:00 on Tuesday
17th April.

>>>>>>

    For: Anton
Against: -


Rules
-----

>>>>>>
159:1 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 11:53:23 GMT - VALID - (+0.5)
>>>>>>

Anton and me both seem to  have the strong impression 
that everybody wants to submit roundkillers.

Therefore: a rule must obey its own restrictions.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID

    Style: Short and simple, with a fairly standard (but always
           useful) restriction. Does not seem unduly paranoid, but
           does not prevent paranoia later either. A pretty harmless
           opening so +0.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:2 - Peekee - 6 Apr 12:14:02 GMT - INVALID - (-0.5)
>>>>>>

I say this out loud for all to hear, even though I fear that may not be a
wise thing to do.  However, I feel that the FRC should know there is a
traitor amongst us.  We must find this vile evil doer, so that all can know
who they are.  All Rule's made by a member not yet tarnished by this traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

I am sorry; lack of sleep seems to have affected my brain. (Either
that or I am being zapped by some kind of evil mind ray - I must coat
my windows with silver foil!) As soon as I sent off my last post I
realised that I should have written

Judgement: INVALID. This rule obeys its own restriction. However,
	   159:1 does not. I do not see how Ronald has been "tarnished
	   by this traitor", and so would have to have helped us find
	   the traitor for this to be valid. "All rules" does not mean
	   the same as "all future rules".

    Style: I must confess, I was secretly hoping that we would not get
	   into a "whodunnit" kind of round. (Did Peekee know that?
	   Perhaps he has bugged my brain? I had better be
	   careful... Lucky this rule was invalid!) I am not sure the
	   rule is particularly paranoid (after all, if valid, it
	   would seem that there IS a traitor amongst us!).

	   It is not clear to me exactly what it means for a member to
	   be "tarnished by this traitor" (and now that I have
	   rejudged this rule, we will NOT have to cross that bridge
	   when we come to it...). Would, if valid, have given the
	   round a bit of shape, without being unduly restrictive,
	   even if I am not so keen on it. However, being invalid (and
	   for such a commonly occuring reason) reduces the style
	   rating to -0.5 Style.

   Remark: I have never been keen on grammar pedants, so have largely
           ignored both the me/I and rogue apostrophe issues in the
           first two rules. However, typos will inevitably affect my
           style judgements...


>>>>>>
159:3 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 12:24:14 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

We know that the FRC traitor will submit or has submitted 
at least one valid rule this round. However, this being the 
paranoia round we will not be able to positively identify 
the fiend before the end of the Round.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Unfortunately, despite the invalidity of 159:2, a traitor
           seems to have crept in among us. Still, we do at last
           have a rule with a bit of paranoia in it! Another fairly
           harmless restriction; the main effect of the rule is simply
           to propagate the traitor theme...

	   Fairly plain and simple. For finally getting to grips to
	   the theme I'll give this +1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:4 - Jeremy Selengut - 6 Apr 13:10:48 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

So let me get this right, after the first week, the traitor must be one of the
people who to that point have submitted a valid rule.

And we cannot figure out who the traitor is before the end of the round, 
which  is to say, before the point at where there is only one player left.

So therefore, no rule can, by process of elimination, limit the number of 
possible traitors to
one.

Good grief, what if there were three players left and one of them could not 
(due to the stipulation of some earlier rule) be the traitor and one of the 
other two became ineligible?  Then we would know who the traitor was before 
the round was over!

It seems that no one can ever be removed from suspicion while they are 
still eligible.

Help! Watch your backs, folks, I know I will...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Turning to this rule straight from my last judgement, I see
           that Jeremy has nicely preempted my line of thought.  (He
           would have to be pretty paranoid to think I copied it from
           him...) His argument is not just paranoia, but reasoned
           paranoia - the best kind. I like the way the conclusion
           creeps up upon him. At first glance perhaps a little long,
           but I think reasonably so. No restriction, but very much on
           theme, (and surprisingly helpful to the other players) so
           +1.5 Style.

   Remark: Yet another rule that slipped in before my style warnings
           concerning typos and other errors. I start to suspect a plot!

Remark(2): Since my ruling may have been misleading, some comments on
	   Jeremy's 159:4. I claimed there that this contained no
	   restriction, just reasoned paranoia. However, that was
	   incorrect.

	   Jeremy's rule contains an (implicit) restriction, as his
	   argument is based on one additional hypothesis not stated
	   elsewhere. What style he would gain for having a
	   restriction he loses for the weakening of his argument, so
	   there is no other effect on my ruling.


>>>>>>
159:5 - Peekee - 6 Apr 17:31:48 GMT - VALID - (-1.0)
>>>>>>

All future Rules made by a member not yet tarnished by the traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I have decided that to require certain rules to help
           find the traitor in itself helps to find the traitor,
           albeit rather indirectly. As I understand it, 159:4
           guarantees that we will know who the traitor is by the end
           of the round (which was not claimed by 159:3), but that
           does not prevent future rules from helping us to find
           him/her. Especially as I have a reading of 159:4 that would
           argue that all future rules will automatically do this!
           (which gives another way in which this rule obeys its own
           restriction...).

    Style: I am not sure this rule has any noticable effect on the
           round, and do not really approve of reposts of ideas that
           failed (for whatever reason) the first time around. Since
           the rule still uses the - to my mind unsatisfactory -
           expression "tarnished by the traitor", I dont see any great
           claims that can be made on the style front. It is also 
           entirely lacking in paranoia. I give this -1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:6 - Aron Wall - 8 Apr 22:49:31 GMT - INVALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

In order to find the traitor, we must aggressively assault any possible
suspects.  Therefore, from now on we should accompany each valid rule
with one or more secret orders given by private communication to the
Judge in a reasonably short period of time following the rule's
submission.  Any kind of order must be explicity allowed by a valid
rule, and shall take effect only if the rule it accompanies is valid.

One possible secret order is "I shoot Player X [n]".  This is an attack
that will invalidate the next rule posted by Player X unless that rule
has some sort of defense that will protect it.  A rule may not use a
defense which was defined in itself.  "n" is either 1, 2, or 3.  After
you shoot at one player you must reload your weapon and cannot shoot
again for 24 hours.

Another possible order is "I hide [n]".  A player may not hide and
attack at the same time.  "n" is 1, 2, or 3.  This defends the rule from
any shooting attack unless the numbers of the attack order and the hide
order were the same as each other.

There is nothing to stop the other players from cooperating to take you
down...

>>>>>>

Judgement: Recall RO 10: Where to Do Things.  All actions under these
           rules must be accomplished by a public posting in the
           official committee forum.
	   
	   "Shooting Player X" is surely such an action, yet this rule
	   requires that this (or something similar) be carried out in a
	   "private communication to the Judge". For this reason I
	   believe this rule to be INVALID.

    Style: As so often Aron submits a rule which pushes the envelope
           of the allowable. In general I dont like rules (or tactics)
           that step outside the framework laid down in the ROs - I
           think the FRC should be about creating inventive rules, not
           messing around with procedural matters. But - again, as so
           often - while disapproving in principle, I find that I like
           very much Aron's rule. If anything would instill a bit of
           paranoia in the FRC (which I still feel to be lacking in
           this round) then this would! I think it needed a temporary
           amendment to the ROs for this to work though. +2.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:7 - James Wilson - 8 Apr 23:55:13 GMT - VALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

>From your friend, THE COMPUTER:

Troubleshooters, there is a COMMIE MUTANT TRAITOR in FRC sector!  The identity
of this foul fiend is [deleted for your protection].  You must locate and
terminate the traitor!

The last known location of the traitor is the computer terminal at [beyond your
security clearance].  The traitor was attempting to influence FRC round 159.

Remember, only traitors commit treason, and only one member of the FRC is a
traitor.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks ill of the computer.  The computer
is your friend.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks well of commies.  Commies are
evil.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: A most enjoyable rule. For those to whom it means nothing,
           I should point out that its distinctive style is based on
           the role-playing game "Paranoia". As one would expect, it
           is consequently suitably paranoid. It does not do much to
           the round directly, but may encourage the kind of style of
           rule that I was hoping for when I suggested the theme. +2.0
           Style.


>>>>>>
159:8 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 13:24:03 GMT - INVALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

RED CLEARENCE
The computer is your friend!  Trust the computer!  The computer has
benevolently decided to rank troubleshooters based on the degree of
trust and faith the computer places in them.  To find your security
clearence, just average the number of style points you have, the number
of VALID rules you have posted this round, and the number of missions
you have completed.  (The first mission will be announced in [deleted
for your protection].)  Round down.  If the number you get is negative,
you are Infrared.  If your number is 0, you are Red.  Each point after
that gives you a raise in security clearence, to Orange, Yellow, Green,
Blue, Indigo, Violet, all the way up to Ultraviolet, at 7 points.  The
Judge, however, is always Ultraviolet.  Praise the Computer for such a
wonderful system!  All rules must discriminate on the basis of Security
clearence in a way that treats those of higher security clearences
better than those of lower security clearences (e.g. those below Green
must...).  Surely you agree that this will help us to spot the traitor
by his performance!

By the way, it is treasonous for any player to display any specific
knowledge in their rules of any fact contained in a rule, whether or not
it is VALID, of higher security clearence than they are.  The security
clearence of a rule is Infrared by default but can be anything up to the
security clearence of its author at the time of posting.

>>>>>>

Judgement: I quote from my judgement of 159:2 - "All rules" does not
           mean the same as "all future rules". Earlier rules do not,
           sadly, practice discrimination in the manner required. 

    Style: Another very nice rule from Aron, and unfortunately another
           invalid one. Develops well the style introduced in the
           159:7, with a nice colour-coded part. The idea of rules one
           does not have clearance for is lovely.

	   Invalidity does a little harm and, as I warned about typos,
	   I feel that to repeat one so many times (even in block
	   capitals!) must incur a small penalty. It is a shame to see
	   such a nice rule fail though. +1.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:9 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 20:15:35 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

I recieved the following message from the traitor:

To: Citizen Aron Wall
From: Commie Mutant Traitor
-------------------------
I shall terminate you one by one.  You cannot find me, or stop me.  I
will pick you off slowly, at designated times.  But until the time
arrives, it will not be completely certain who it is I shall slay.  You
might not even know then who the victim is!  The first killing shall be
on the stroke of midnight, Wednesday 18th GMT.  At the same time each
week from then on, a death will occur until only I, the traitor, am
left.  I do not kill ineligible players.  All rules must be submitted by
living players.  That [deleted for your protection] Computer is a
[deleted for your protection]!
------------------------

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I think it is reasonable to claim that knowing how
	   the traitor operates will help to find him/her (especially
	   on Wednesdays...) In any case, as I believe that every
	   valid rule helps us find the traitor, this is not a problem.

    Style: Nice use of the established style to avoid falling foul of
	   159:7, and I like the idea of a mail from "Commie Mutant
	   Traitor". The rule should instill an appropriate level of
	   fear in the minds of the remaining players, and makes
	   explicit 159:4's implicit assumption (that the traitor will
	   win). A state of affairs I find very appealing. I am
	   beginning to enjoy Aron's ostentatious refusal to be cowed
	   by my strictures on spelling. Not as nice as Aron's other,
	   invalid, rules (it does rather less), but still worth +1.0
	   Style.


>>>>>>
159:10 - James Wilson - 11 Apr 03:03:22 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

Help!  The traitor is upon us!  Did you know that e has gained control of the
Canadian Orbital Mind Beam?  (We can call it COMB.)  It's thought manipulation
powers are unimaginably cruel.  Mr. Shake Spear, who lives in my toaster, has
already succumbed to its influences.

Luckily for us, the voices in my head have explained what we must do to evade
it.  Wearing an aluminum hat deflects COMB harmlessly into the air.  This
simple precaution is almost enough to stop COMB.  A sentence which ends in a
vowel, however, provides a direct link to the brain.  No aluminum hat will
prevent COMB from reaching you if you use a sentence like that.

Please respect my warning.  Any player who displays evidence of not following
these instructions in one of eir valid rules puts the rest of us at risk. 
Thus, any further rules from such a player are invalid.  This does not apply to
rules previous to this one, since at that time the traitor did not control
COMB.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: We seem to have lost contact with the computer, but there
	   is much to enjoy in this rule. I like the high paranoia
	   quotient on display. The hat and toaster remarks are
	   suitably wacky, while the bizarre justification for the
	   restriction sounds pretty paranoid to me. The actual
	   restriction (we dont seem to have so many, yet) is not
	   earth-shattering, but fair enough. The voices in my
	   head tell me that I should award this +1.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:11 - Jeremy Selengut - 11 Apr 14:33:52 GMT - VALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

You, what are you doing here again?  I thought I told you to get lost.  Let 
me make it clear -- I'LL KILL YOU IF YOU TAKE ONE STEP CLOSER!!!  Why, 
because you're probably the traitor.  Oh, don't look at me so innocent, you 
know as well as I it could be anyone and there'd be no way to tell.  I 
don't care who sent you, I'm not coming out.  I've got this room totally 
wrapped in aluminum foil, so I'm safe here for now.  It took me a week, but 
I did it.  Well, if you're so intent on "helping" me, go get me some more 
uppers - you know, stimulants.  Because I can't let myself sleep, you 
idiot!  What if I am the traitor, huh?  I wouldn't know it, I could be 
doing all kinds of evil stuff when I think I'm asleep.  You know, like a 
whole second personality thing going on...  Don't laugh!  It could 
happen!  OK, that's it, I don't care if you're the traitor or not!  DIE, 
AND GO TO HELL!!  *bang*  *bangbangbang*  Shit, who'se going to clean up 
all this broken glass?  (And where's my mirror?)

The preceding message has been brought to you by the National Institute for 
the Treatment of Paranoia, Insecurity and Conspiracy Theories 
(NITPICT).  Remember these pieces of advice; just because you are paranoid, 
that doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get you and, you can't defeat 
the traitor if you are a raving lunatic.  Remember this also, in order to 
keep our collective fears in check, all acts of violence or other mishaps 
perpetrated against members of the FRC must be reported by the valid rule 
immediately following the incident.

Have a nice day, we now return you to your regularly scheduled mind-numbing 
entertainment...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: It is good to see that Jeremy is not losing his cool,
           despite the pressures of the round. I like his fear that he
           may be the traitor without even knowing it. Unless of
           course, this is just a devious scheme to make us think that
           he doesnt know it...

	   While I am not sure how reporting acts of violence etc will
	   keep our fears in check (surely quite the reverse!), it
	   seems like a reasonable idea.

	   The second paragraph feels a little bland after the drama
	   of the first (despite the acronym). But I am feeling
	   generous, so +1.5 Style.

	   PS: You will have noticed that I freely end my sentences
	       with vowels. That is because, as judge, I am of course
	       immune from the evil COMB influence. At least, that is
	       what those little voices keep telling me...


>>>>>>
159:12 - Aron Wall - 11 Apr 14:59:59 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

I agree with Citizen James!  I will certainly do what he requested us to
do in 159:10.

Some citizens belong to secret societies.  Such citizens have been
tarnished by the traitor and are not fully loyal to the great Computer.
How do you join a secret society?  Well, just submit a rule which is
unmistakably characteristic of the beliefs of a specific secret society
which has been mentioned in a previous valid rule, and you will have
joined that secret society.  The traitor is already a member of the
Communist Party, but may be a member of another secret society as well.
All other players are not yet secret society members.  Why would you
want to join a secret society?  Well, citizens who have not joined any
secret society have proven themselves to be loyal to the Computer.  And
it is well known that the traitor will always terminate these loyal
citizens preferentially, provided that there are at least two such
citizens eligible to play.

The Mystics are a society whose goals include emptying their collective
mind of all thoughts, drug trafficing, and retrieving post-Oops objects
with good vibes.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Not particularly paranoid, but the secret society idea
           might give the round a little more momentum. I like the
           potential get-out for those who refuse to join a secret
           society. Now we shall see who is truly loyal to the
           computer! +1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:13 - Aron Wall - 11 Apr 15:02:40 GMT - VALID - (+1.25)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. Aron produces a counterexample to my contention that
	   the mere act of submitting a rule makes it obey 159:5 - but
	   still manages to pass it anyway. As I saw it, each new rule
	   would either be the last (and hence help us to find the
	   traitor by telling us who e is) or would force the traitor
	   to submit another rule (and hence indirectly help us to
	   find the traitor). But I did not allow for the fact that a
	   player might submit two consecutive valid rules: if they
	   were the last two then the final one did not help us find
	   the traitor (since the previous one would have told us that
	   anyway). However, Aron has carefully (?) demonstrated that
	   he is tarnished by the traitor, and so all is still fine.

    Style: It had to happen eventually: the empty rule. Aron
           demonstrates why rule delimiters are a good idea. 

	   So let me see. First Aron tells us the traitor will pick
	   members off one by one. Then he appears (for the moment) to
	   rule himself out as a victim for a while. Call me paranoid,
	   but I begin to suspect that [deleted for your protection].

	   A small bonus for being the first rule of Aron's not to
	   flout my comments on typos etc (even if in a trivial
	   manner)! And a bigger one for requiring such a long
	   justification of validity, despite having no content. All
	   told, that makes +1.25 Style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-17 14:34:23 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Fri Apr 20 17:05:03 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3KF53d04366
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:05:03 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3KF52d19724
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:05:03 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114646AbRDTPEn>;
        Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:04:43 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:09:07 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Eligibility reminder
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104201605210.12260-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

The first week is long over, and there remain three members eligible
to play:

Player        Eligibility expires (GMT)   Style
-----------------------------------------------
Aron Wall         23 Apr 15:02:40         +6.75
Jeremy Selengut   23 Apr 14:33:52         +3.00
James Wilson      23 Apr 03:03:22         +3.50
Peekee             <out of time>          -1.50
Ronald Kunne       <out of time>          +1.50
Everyone else      <out of time>          +0.00

Sadly, it seems that one of the above has already been murdered - but
will we ever learn who?

     Judge Anton

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-20 15:04:43 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Mon Apr 23 16:37:29 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3NEbSd23721
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:37:29 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3NEbRd05348
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:37:28 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114564AbRDWOhC>;
        Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:37:02 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:42:12 +0100 (BST)
From: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox@city.ac.uk>
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 159: Final Summary
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104231527300.14195-100000@mathpc12.city.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

Round 159

Theme - Paranoia

Either Jeremy or James has been murdered, though it appears that we
shall never know which. What can be said with certainty is that that
evil murderous commie mutant traitor Aron (who always seemed to know a
suspiciously large amount about the traitor's intentions) has managed
to become both Judge and Wizard for the next round. 

Congratulations to him for his stylish machinations - he would have
wreaked still greater havoc on the FRC if more of them had been
valid...

	Judge Anton



Player        Eligibility expires (GMT)   Style
-----------------------------------------------
Aron Wall         23 Apr 15:02:40         +6.75
Jeremy Selengut    <out of time>          +3.00
James Wilson       <out of time>          +3.50
Peekee             <out of time>          -1.50
Ronald Kunne       <out of time>          +1.50
Everyone else      <out of time>          +0.00


Rule    Author  Posted at       Judgement  Style
------------------------------------------------
159:1   Ronald  6 Apr 11:53:23    VALID    +0.50
159:2   Peekee  6 Apr 12:14:02   INVALID   -0.50
159:3   Ronald  6 Apr 12:24:14    VALID    +1.00
159:4   Jeremy  6 Apr 13:10:48    VALID    +1.50
159:5   Peekee  6 Apr 17:31:48    VALID    -1.00
159:6   Aron    8 Apr 22:49:31   INVALID   +2.00
159:7   James   8 Apr 23:55:13    VALID    +2.00
159:8   Aron    9 Apr 13:24:03   INVALID   +1.50
159:9   Aron    9 Apr 20:15:35    VALID    +1.00
159:10  James  11 Apr 03:03:22    VALID    +1.50
159:11  Jeremy 11 Apr 14:33:52    VALID    +1.50
159:12  Aron   11 Apr 14:59:59    VALID    +1.00
159:13  Aron   11 Apr 15:02:40    VALID    +1.25

Proposals
---------

>>>>>>
159:A - Anton Cox - 9 Apr 14:33:51 GMT - PASSED - (1/0)
>>>>>>

For the purposes of round 159, the period between 12 Apr 00:00:00 and
17 Apr 00:00:00 will not count for timekeeping purposes. Any rules
submitted during that period will be judged sequentially in the order
of their rule dates, but be regarded as ariving at 00:00:00 on Tuesday
17th April.

>>>>>>

    For: Anton
Against: -


Rules
-----

>>>>>>
159:1 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 11:53:23 GMT - VALID - (+0.5)
>>>>>>

Anton and me both seem to  have the strong impression 
that everybody wants to submit roundkillers.

Therefore: a rule must obey its own restrictions.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID

    Style: Short and simple, with a fairly standard (but always
           useful) restriction. Does not seem unduly paranoid, but
           does not prevent paranoia later either. A pretty harmless
           opening so +0.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:2 - Peekee - 6 Apr 12:14:02 GMT - INVALID - (-0.5)
>>>>>>

I say this out loud for all to hear, even though I fear that may not be a
wise thing to do.  However, I feel that the FRC should know there is a
traitor amongst us.  We must find this vile evil doer, so that all can know
who they are.  All Rule's made by a member not yet tarnished by this traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

I am sorry; lack of sleep seems to have affected my brain. (Either
that or I am being zapped by some kind of evil mind ray - I must coat
my windows with silver foil!) As soon as I sent off my last post I
realised that I should have written

Judgement: INVALID. This rule obeys its own restriction. However,
	   159:1 does not. I do not see how Ronald has been "tarnished
	   by this traitor", and so would have to have helped us find
	   the traitor for this to be valid. "All rules" does not mean
	   the same as "all future rules".

    Style: I must confess, I was secretly hoping that we would not get
	   into a "whodunnit" kind of round. (Did Peekee know that?
	   Perhaps he has bugged my brain? I had better be
	   careful... Lucky this rule was invalid!) I am not sure the
	   rule is particularly paranoid (after all, if valid, it
	   would seem that there IS a traitor amongst us!).

	   It is not clear to me exactly what it means for a member to
	   be "tarnished by this traitor" (and now that I have
	   rejudged this rule, we will NOT have to cross that bridge
	   when we come to it...). Would, if valid, have given the
	   round a bit of shape, without being unduly restrictive,
	   even if I am not so keen on it. However, being invalid (and
	   for such a commonly occuring reason) reduces the style
	   rating to -0.5 Style.

   Remark: I have never been keen on grammar pedants, so have largely
           ignored both the me/I and rogue apostrophe issues in the
           first two rules. However, typos will inevitably affect my
           style judgements...


>>>>>>
159:3 - Ronald Kunne - 6 Apr 12:24:14 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

We know that the FRC traitor will submit or has submitted 
at least one valid rule this round. However, this being the 
paranoia round we will not be able to positively identify 
the fiend before the end of the Round.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Unfortunately, despite the invalidity of 159:2, a traitor
           seems to have crept in among us. Still, we do at last
           have a rule with a bit of paranoia in it! Another fairly
           harmless restriction; the main effect of the rule is simply
           to propagate the traitor theme...

	   Fairly plain and simple. For finally getting to grips to
	   the theme I'll give this +1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:4 - Jeremy Selengut - 6 Apr 13:10:48 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

So let me get this right, after the first week, the traitor must be one of the
people who to that point have submitted a valid rule.

And we cannot figure out who the traitor is before the end of the round, 
which  is to say, before the point at where there is only one player left.

So therefore, no rule can, by process of elimination, limit the number of 
possible traitors to
one.

Good grief, what if there were three players left and one of them could not 
(due to the stipulation of some earlier rule) be the traitor and one of the 
other two became ineligible?  Then we would know who the traitor was before 
the round was over!

It seems that no one can ever be removed from suspicion while they are 
still eligible.

Help! Watch your backs, folks, I know I will...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Turning to this rule straight from my last judgement, I see
           that Jeremy has nicely preempted my line of thought.  (He
           would have to be pretty paranoid to think I copied it from
           him...) His argument is not just paranoia, but reasoned
           paranoia - the best kind. I like the way the conclusion
           creeps up upon him. At first glance perhaps a little long,
           but I think reasonably so. No restriction, but very much on
           theme, (and surprisingly helpful to the other players) so
           +1.5 Style.

   Remark: Yet another rule that slipped in before my style warnings
           concerning typos and other errors. I start to suspect a plot!

Remark(2): Since my ruling may have been misleading, some comments on
	   Jeremy's 159:4. I claimed there that this contained no
	   restriction, just reasoned paranoia. However, that was
	   incorrect.

	   Jeremy's rule contains an (implicit) restriction, as his
	   argument is based on one additional hypothesis not stated
	   elsewhere. What style he would gain for having a
	   restriction he loses for the weakening of his argument, so
	   there is no other effect on my ruling.


>>>>>>
159:5 - Peekee - 6 Apr 17:31:48 GMT - VALID - (-1.0)
>>>>>>

All future Rules made by a member not yet tarnished by the traitor
must help to find him (or her).

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I have decided that to require certain rules to help
           find the traitor in itself helps to find the traitor,
           albeit rather indirectly. As I understand it, 159:4
           guarantees that we will know who the traitor is by the end
           of the round (which was not claimed by 159:3), but that
           does not prevent future rules from helping us to find
           him/her. Especially as I have a reading of 159:4 that would
           argue that all future rules will automatically do this!
           (which gives another way in which this rule obeys its own
           restriction...).

    Style: I am not sure this rule has any noticable effect on the
           round, and do not really approve of reposts of ideas that
           failed (for whatever reason) the first time around. Since
           the rule still uses the - to my mind unsatisfactory -
           expression "tarnished by the traitor", I dont see any great
           claims that can be made on the style front. It is also 
           entirely lacking in paranoia. I give this -1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:6 - Aron Wall - 8 Apr 22:49:31 GMT - INVALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

In order to find the traitor, we must aggressively assault any possible
suspects.  Therefore, from now on we should accompany each valid rule
with one or more secret orders given by private communication to the
Judge in a reasonably short period of time following the rule's
submission.  Any kind of order must be explicity allowed by a valid
rule, and shall take effect only if the rule it accompanies is valid.

One possible secret order is "I shoot Player X [n]".  This is an attack
that will invalidate the next rule posted by Player X unless that rule
has some sort of defense that will protect it.  A rule may not use a
defense which was defined in itself.  "n" is either 1, 2, or 3.  After
you shoot at one player you must reload your weapon and cannot shoot
again for 24 hours.

Another possible order is "I hide [n]".  A player may not hide and
attack at the same time.  "n" is 1, 2, or 3.  This defends the rule from
any shooting attack unless the numbers of the attack order and the hide
order were the same as each other.

There is nothing to stop the other players from cooperating to take you
down...

>>>>>>

Judgement: Recall RO 10: Where to Do Things.  All actions under these
           rules must be accomplished by a public posting in the
           official committee forum.
	   
	   "Shooting Player X" is surely such an action, yet this rule
	   requires that this (or something similar) be carried out in a
	   "private communication to the Judge". For this reason I
	   believe this rule to be INVALID.

    Style: As so often Aron submits a rule which pushes the envelope
           of the allowable. In general I dont like rules (or tactics)
           that step outside the framework laid down in the ROs - I
           think the FRC should be about creating inventive rules, not
           messing around with procedural matters. But - again, as so
           often - while disapproving in principle, I find that I like
           very much Aron's rule. If anything would instill a bit of
           paranoia in the FRC (which I still feel to be lacking in
           this round) then this would! I think it needed a temporary
           amendment to the ROs for this to work though. +2.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:7 - James Wilson - 8 Apr 23:55:13 GMT - VALID - (+2.0)
>>>>>>

>From your friend, THE COMPUTER:

Troubleshooters, there is a COMMIE MUTANT TRAITOR in FRC sector!  The identity
of this foul fiend is [deleted for your protection].  You must locate and
terminate the traitor!

The last known location of the traitor is the computer terminal at [beyond your
security clearance].  The traitor was attempting to influence FRC round 159.

Remember, only traitors commit treason, and only one member of the FRC is a
traitor.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks ill of the computer.  The computer
is your friend.

It is treasonous to post a rule which speaks well of commies.  Commies are
evil.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: A most enjoyable rule. For those to whom it means nothing,
           I should point out that its distinctive style is based on
           the role-playing game "Paranoia". As one would expect, it
           is consequently suitably paranoid. It does not do much to
           the round directly, but may encourage the kind of style of
           rule that I was hoping for when I suggested the theme. +2.0
           Style.


>>>>>>
159:8 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 13:24:03 GMT - INVALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

RED CLEARENCE
The computer is your friend!  Trust the computer!  The computer has
benevolently decided to rank troubleshooters based on the degree of
trust and faith the computer places in them.  To find your security
clearence, just average the number of style points you have, the number
of VALID rules you have posted this round, and the number of missions
you have completed.  (The first mission will be announced in [deleted
for your protection].)  Round down.  If the number you get is negative,
you are Infrared.  If your number is 0, you are Red.  Each point after
that gives you a raise in security clearence, to Orange, Yellow, Green,
Blue, Indigo, Violet, all the way up to Ultraviolet, at 7 points.  The
Judge, however, is always Ultraviolet.  Praise the Computer for such a
wonderful system!  All rules must discriminate on the basis of Security
clearence in a way that treats those of higher security clearences
better than those of lower security clearences (e.g. those below Green
must...).  Surely you agree that this will help us to spot the traitor
by his performance!

By the way, it is treasonous for any player to display any specific
knowledge in their rules of any fact contained in a rule, whether or not
it is VALID, of higher security clearence than they are.  The security
clearence of a rule is Infrared by default but can be anything up to the
security clearence of its author at the time of posting.

>>>>>>

Judgement: I quote from my judgement of 159:2 - "All rules" does not
           mean the same as "all future rules". Earlier rules do not,
           sadly, practice discrimination in the manner required. 

    Style: Another very nice rule from Aron, and unfortunately another
           invalid one. Develops well the style introduced in the
           159:7, with a nice colour-coded part. The idea of rules one
           does not have clearance for is lovely.

	   Invalidity does a little harm and, as I warned about typos,
	   I feel that to repeat one so many times (even in block
	   capitals!) must incur a small penalty. It is a shame to see
	   such a nice rule fail though. +1.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:9 - Aron Wall - 9 Apr 20:15:35 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

I recieved the following message from the traitor:

To: Citizen Aron Wall
From: Commie Mutant Traitor
-------------------------
I shall terminate you one by one.  You cannot find me, or stop me.  I
will pick you off slowly, at designated times.  But until the time
arrives, it will not be completely certain who it is I shall slay.  You
might not even know then who the victim is!  The first killing shall be
on the stroke of midnight, Wednesday 18th GMT.  At the same time each
week from then on, a death will occur until only I, the traitor, am
left.  I do not kill ineligible players.  All rules must be submitted by
living players.  That [deleted for your protection] Computer is a
[deleted for your protection]!
------------------------

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. I think it is reasonable to claim that knowing how
	   the traitor operates will help to find him/her (especially
	   on Wednesdays...) In any case, as I believe that every
	   valid rule helps us find the traitor, this is not a problem.

    Style: Nice use of the established style to avoid falling foul of
	   159:7, and I like the idea of a mail from "Commie Mutant
	   Traitor". The rule should instill an appropriate level of
	   fear in the minds of the remaining players, and makes
	   explicit 159:4's implicit assumption (that the traitor will
	   win). A state of affairs I find very appealing. I am
	   beginning to enjoy Aron's ostentatious refusal to be cowed
	   by my strictures on spelling. Not as nice as Aron's other,
	   invalid, rules (it does rather less), but still worth +1.0
	   Style.


>>>>>>
159:10 - James Wilson - 11 Apr 03:03:22 GMT - VALID - (+1.5) 
>>>>>>

Help!  The traitor is upon us!  Did you know that e has gained control of the
Canadian Orbital Mind Beam?  (We can call it COMB.)  It's thought manipulation
powers are unimaginably cruel.  Mr. Shake Spear, who lives in my toaster, has
already succumbed to its influences.

Luckily for us, the voices in my head have explained what we must do to evade
it.  Wearing an aluminum hat deflects COMB harmlessly into the air.  This
simple precaution is almost enough to stop COMB.  A sentence which ends in a
vowel, however, provides a direct link to the brain.  No aluminum hat will
prevent COMB from reaching you if you use a sentence like that.

Please respect my warning.  Any player who displays evidence of not following
these instructions in one of eir valid rules puts the rest of us at risk. 
Thus, any further rules from such a player are invalid.  This does not apply to
rules previous to this one, since at that time the traitor did not control
COMB.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: We seem to have lost contact with the computer, but there
	   is much to enjoy in this rule. I like the high paranoia
	   quotient on display. The hat and toaster remarks are
	   suitably wacky, while the bizarre justification for the
	   restriction sounds pretty paranoid to me. The actual
	   restriction (we dont seem to have so many, yet) is not
	   earth-shattering, but fair enough. The voices in my
	   head tell me that I should award this +1.5 Style.


>>>>>>
159:11 - Jeremy Selengut - 11 Apr 14:33:52 GMT - VALID - (+1.5)
>>>>>>

You, what are you doing here again?  I thought I told you to get lost.  Let 
me make it clear -- I'LL KILL YOU IF YOU TAKE ONE STEP CLOSER!!!  Why, 
because you're probably the traitor.  Oh, don't look at me so innocent, you 
know as well as I it could be anyone and there'd be no way to tell.  I 
don't care who sent you, I'm not coming out.  I've got this room totally 
wrapped in aluminum foil, so I'm safe here for now.  It took me a week, but 
I did it.  Well, if you're so intent on "helping" me, go get me some more 
uppers - you know, stimulants.  Because I can't let myself sleep, you 
idiot!  What if I am the traitor, huh?  I wouldn't know it, I could be 
doing all kinds of evil stuff when I think I'm asleep.  You know, like a 
whole second personality thing going on...  Don't laugh!  It could 
happen!  OK, that's it, I don't care if you're the traitor or not!  DIE, 
AND GO TO HELL!!  *bang*  *bangbangbang*  Shit, who'se going to clean up 
all this broken glass?  (And where's my mirror?)

The preceding message has been brought to you by the National Institute for 
the Treatment of Paranoia, Insecurity and Conspiracy Theories 
(NITPICT).  Remember these pieces of advice; just because you are paranoid, 
that doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get you and, you can't defeat 
the traitor if you are a raving lunatic.  Remember this also, in order to 
keep our collective fears in check, all acts of violence or other mishaps 
perpetrated against members of the FRC must be reported by the valid rule 
immediately following the incident.

Have a nice day, we now return you to your regularly scheduled mind-numbing 
entertainment...

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: It is good to see that Jeremy is not losing his cool,
           despite the pressures of the round. I like his fear that he
           may be the traitor without even knowing it. Unless of
           course, this is just a devious scheme to make us think that
           he doesnt know it...

	   While I am not sure how reporting acts of violence etc will
	   keep our fears in check (surely quite the reverse!), it
	   seems like a reasonable idea.

	   The second paragraph feels a little bland after the drama
	   of the first (despite the acronym). But I am feeling
	   generous, so +1.5 Style.

	   PS: You will have noticed that I freely end my sentences
	       with vowels. That is because, as judge, I am of course
	       immune from the evil COMB influence. At least, that is
	       what those little voices keep telling me...


>>>>>>
159:12 - Aron Wall - 11 Apr 14:59:59 GMT - VALID - (+1.0)
>>>>>>

I agree with Citizen James!  I will certainly do what he requested us to
do in 159:10.

Some citizens belong to secret societies.  Such citizens have been
tarnished by the traitor and are not fully loyal to the great Computer.
How do you join a secret society?  Well, just submit a rule which is
unmistakably characteristic of the beliefs of a specific secret society
which has been mentioned in a previous valid rule, and you will have
joined that secret society.  The traitor is already a member of the
Communist Party, but may be a member of another secret society as well.
All other players are not yet secret society members.  Why would you
want to join a secret society?  Well, citizens who have not joined any
secret society have proven themselves to be loyal to the Computer.  And
it is well known that the traitor will always terminate these loyal
citizens preferentially, provided that there are at least two such
citizens eligible to play.

The Mystics are a society whose goals include emptying their collective
mind of all thoughts, drug trafficing, and retrieving post-Oops objects
with good vibes.

>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID.

    Style: Not particularly paranoid, but the secret society idea
           might give the round a little more momentum. I like the
           potential get-out for those who refuse to join a secret
           society. Now we shall see who is truly loyal to the
           computer! +1.0 Style.


>>>>>>
159:13 - Aron Wall - 11 Apr 15:02:40 GMT - VALID - (+1.25)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

Judgement: VALID. Aron produces a counterexample to my contention that
	   the mere act of submitting a rule makes it obey 159:5 - but
	   still manages to pass it anyway. As I saw it, each new rule
	   would either be the last (and hence help us to find the
	   traitor by telling us who e is) or would force the traitor
	   to submit another rule (and hence indirectly help us to
	   find the traitor). But I did not allow for the fact that a
	   player might submit two consecutive valid rules: if they
	   were the last two then the final one did not help us find
	   the traitor (since the previous one would have told us that
	   anyway). However, Aron has carefully (?) demonstrated that
	   he is tarnished by the traitor, and so all is still fine.

    Style: It had to happen eventually: the empty rule. Aron
           demonstrates why rule delimiters are a good idea. 

	   So let me see. First Aron tells us the traitor will pick
	   members off one by one. Then he appears (for the moment) to
	   rule himself out as a victim for a while. Call me paranoid,
	   but I begin to suspect that [deleted for your protection].

	   A small bonus for being the first rule of Aron's not to
	   flout my comments on typos etc (even if in a trivial
	   manner)! And a bigger one for requiring such a long
	   justification of validity, despite having no content. All
	   told, that makes +1.25 Style.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-23 14:37:02 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Apr 24 00:29:10 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3NMT9d05542
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:29:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3NMT9u00213
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:29:09 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114849AbRDWW2F>;
        Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:28:05 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AE49FEF.99FEC2DD@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:34:39 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Round 160 Begins
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: O

Round 160 will begin as soon as the first rule is submitted.  The theme
will be "Interesting Restrictions".

Aron Wall

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-23 22:28:05 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Apr 24 02:14:58 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3O0Ewd07521
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:14:58 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3O0Evu03785
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:14:58 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114906AbRDXAOl>;
        Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:14:41 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AE4B8F6.923F47E1@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:21:26 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judgement 160:1 INVALID +1 Style.
References: <F148h0eTZ2MErPFWy3r00006d93@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Gallivanting Tripper wrote:

> 160:1
>
> ................
> This rule will maintain interest in the round my making sure no-one can win
> with a round-killing restriction.
>
> No restriction may have an effect on a rule before the _second_ rule after
> it is posted.
>
> The above restriction will not affect rule 160:2
> .................
>
> This interesting enough?
> GT
>

Does this rule's restriction affect itself?  Given that:

a) it does not exempt itself from its restriction
b) it specifically tries to follow its own restriction

I deem it to have restricted and affected itself.  But the restriction is not
allowed to apply to its own rule, since it cannot affect any rule before
160:3.  So INVALID.

Style: +1.

The Wizard

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-24 00:14:41 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Tue Apr 24 05:36:09 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3O3a8d10805
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 05:36:08 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3O3a8u08678
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 05:36:08 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S114303AbRDXDfw>;
        Tue, 24 Apr 2001 05:35:52 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AE4E81F.134A01A9@wall.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:42:39 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Re: 160:2 VALID +1
References: <20010424012025.44814.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

James Willson wrote:

> The third second word of each sentence of each rule is ignored.
>
> Rules must cannot use an ignored word from the previous valid rule, should one
> exist.
>
> All valid fantasy rules must have an interesting property not declared by any
> other rule and declare what that property is; this rule has the interesting
> property 'ambiguous'.

VALID.  Since "the previous VALID rule" has no referent in the case of this rule,
this rule has no obligation to include or not include any words from previous
rules.  +1 Style.

The Wizard.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-24 03:35:52 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Wed Apr 25 23:57:26 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3PLvPd18011
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:57:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3PLvPu21849
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:57:25 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115421AbRDYV5H>;
        Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:57:07 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jared S Sunshine <sunshine@columbia.edu>
To: Fantasy Rules Committee <frc@trolltech.com>
Subject: 160:4
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10104251743170.2807-100000@sawasdee.cc.columbia.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO

---160:4---
This sentence FR shall be completely inoperative.

All future invalid rules shall be operative if and only if they do not use
the letter "e".

160:4 is was interesting, because it attemped to be "operative" (did it
succeed?).
---160:4---

I vote AGAINST 160:A.  The Judge's discretion should be respected unless
obviously in error, IMHO.

/Jared Sunshine

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-25 21:57:07 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Apr 26 00:52:46 2001
Received: from mailhost.tue.nl (mailhost.tue.nl [131.155.2.5])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3PMqkd19013
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:52:46 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3PMqju24562
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:52:46 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115424AbRDYWw2>;
        Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:52:28 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AE748C5.880DF1A6@wall.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:59:33 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judgement 160:3 INVALID 0 Style
References: <000701c0cc96$b83d26f0$13c4edd0@eddie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Ed Murphy wrote:

> Rules cannot must be shorter than the previous valid rule.
>
> This rule rule is interesting because it is 'reflective'.
>
> --
> Ed Murphy <ford@jps.net>     http://members.fortunecity.com/emurphy/
>           "Most of the time, it seemed sublimely unaware of its limbs,
>            though it was beginning to suspect it had hands."
>
> --
> Rule Date: 2001-04-24 08:15:58 GMT

Is not "reflective" in any interesting sense that I can see.  Restriction
is not too interesting.

The Wizard.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-25 22:52:28 GMT

From owner-frc@trolltech.com Thu Apr 26 01:31:15 2001
Received: from kweetal.tue.nl (kweetal.tue.nl [131.155.2.7])
	by svbcf02.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3PNVEd19615
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 01:31:14 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lupinella.troll.no (lupinella.troll.no [213.203.59.59])
	by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f3PNVEd08845
	for <engels@win.tue.nl>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 01:31:14 +0200 (MDT)
Received: by trolltech.com id <S115428AbRDYXar>;
        Thu, 26 Apr 2001 01:30:47 +0200
Sender: owner-frc@trolltech.com
Precedence: list
X-Loop: frc
Message-ID: <3AE751AC.FB4D8AD3@wall.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:37:32 -0700
From: Aron Wall <aron@wall.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: frc@trolltech.com
Subject: Judgement 160:4 INVALID -1 Style
References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10104251743170.2807-100000@sawasdee.cc.columbia.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO

Jared S Sunshine wrote:

> ---160:4---
> This sentence FR shall be completely inoperative.
>
> All future invalid rules shall be operative if and only if they do not use
> the letter "e".
>
> 160:4 is was interesting, because it attemped to be "operative" (did it
> succeed?).
> ---160:4---

Validity:  This rule does not use"third", "second", "must", "cannot", or
"valid".  Does the "F" in FR count as a use of "fantasy"?  If so, then rules
must be obliged to used ignored words, so it is the third word which is
struck.  This means, however, that "FR", or maybe just "F", is ignored.
Ignored for what purpose?  Does an ignored word count as a used word?  Well,
if an ignored word does not count as used, then there is a paradox as I would
have to ignore "F" if and only if I don't ignore "F".  So either "F" does not
count as being an occurence of fantasy, in which case "sentence" gets
ignored, or else "F" does count as being used as Fantasy, despite it then
being ignored.  But in the first case, since it is the second word that gets
ignored, the rule would make invalid rules "operative" which would cause a
potential inconsistancy with the R.O.'s if the invalid rule contradicted
them.  In the latter case, "this sentence shall be completely inoperative" is
internally inconsistant, as its operation, making itself inoperative, would
be operative.
Or if...  ARRRRRGHH! <Judge pulls all his hair out>

Starting over.  This rule has many deeply troubling issues, but to preserve
what little remnents of my sanity are left, I will cease to try to analyze
the layers upon layers of ambiguity and interprative choices involved in this
rule.  This rule claims to have the interesting property of "attempting to be
operative".  This is in fact not interesting as most rules attempt to be
operative.  INVALID.  And, in fact, had this rule intended to be operative,
it might have payed a little more attention to detail.  This rule has no
clear definition of exactly what being "operative" means and most of the
obvious choices of meanings cause paradoxes.

-1 style for giving the Judge a headache.

The Wizard.

-- 
Rule Date: 2001-04-25 23:30:47 GMT