From: Anton Cox (A.G.Cox_at_city.ac.uk)
Date: Thu May 30 2002 - 09:56:37 PDT
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Jonathan Van Matre wrote: > <not a rule> > I'm curious about the traditional un-stylishness of re-submitting rules. > It would seem to me that resubmitting a stylishly INVALID rule in a > VALID fashion would be a stylish act, since it offers the opportunity > for those stylish restrictions to actually become a valid part of the > game. I think the primary argument against resubmission is that it is in some sense a cop-out - in that one has had the benefit of the judge's opinion as to the validity of the rule. Some judges sometimes only point out one error, but usually a judgement will tell you how the rule could have been rewritten to succeed. Thus this is just as unstylish as posting a private copy to the judge, getting them to vet it, and then post the corrected version to the FRC! > I ask this not out of any great concern for the style ruling on my > resubmitted rule, but because it seems that this might be a contributing > factor in the lethargic participation the FRC has seen lately (as long > as I have been a member, in fact). It appears to me that the primary > purpose of style points is to recognize things that make the game > interesting. I havent taken part for ages because I am too busy, and also because hardly any of the rounds have interested me. I doubt that resubmission of rules would have helped (there have not exactly been swathes of invalid ones!). > By penalizing the resubmission of rules previously acknowledged as > stylish, don't we discourage the incorporation into the round of > whatever it was that made those rules interesting? Yes, but then one is encouraged to find new interesting devices :-) > And yes, I'll accept that one should ideally "get it right the first > time", but the penalty for not doing so can always be applied to the > initial rule. E.g. Our esteemed Judge this round deducted 1 Style Point > from my rule upon realizing it was INVALID. That should be incentive > enough for me not to repeat the offense. To penalize the resubmission > too is effectively double jeopardy, unless of course the resubmission > proves to be equally INVALID, and then it deserves whatever it gets. Except the judge has gifted you an analysis of the rule's errors. Posting a rule that has been pre-vetted is unstylish, as it involves no risk! Best Wishes, Anton -- Rule Date: 2002-05-30 16:57:21 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST