From: Anton Cox (A.G.Cox_at_city.ac.uk)
Date: Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:50 PDT
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Jesse Welton wrote: > Yes, we work by FRC time, and that includes the time associated with > when a player posts a rule. Everywhere the ROs mention the time of a > post, we associate that with the Rule Date. What the judge posted was not a rule, and hence does not need to be interpreted using the conventions adopted in the ROs. Surely that is obvious!!! (sigh) There is a perfectly reasonable interpretation of the judges post, so why the big fuss about it? I only made my point because Richard was nitpicking over the judge's post. (Pedantry deserves closer scrutiny than usual, in my book!) I guess what I am saying is that when I feel that someone is being unduly pedantic, and what they are pointing to can in fact be given a reasonable interpretation, then I am all the more likely to jump in and say so. Unless of course, I am the pedant in question... This committee is most fun when academic pedantry is confined to the action *within* a round. Best Wishes, Anton -- Rule Date: 2002-06-13 15:22:30 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST