From: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby) (jjweston_at_kenny.sir-toby.com)
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 02:07:04 PST
Upon the adoption of this proposal, the decision of the judge for 196:8 will be changed to Valid. My arguments: I really hate to throw yet another proposal out there, but I feel I need to establish this precedent with regards to the requirement of 196:3. 196:3 states: "make all eulogies shorter than those before them". Since it doesn't state the all eulogies must be shorter than the one eulogy immediately before it, we must assume that the eulogy must be shorter than the combination of ALL eulogies that came before it. Below, I've provided a character count of all of the rules up to and including 196:8. Carriage returns have been treated as a character for this count. 196:1 - 462 196:2 - 1016 196:3 - 438 196:4 - 342 196:5 - 219 196:6 - 165 196:7 - 164 196:8 - 1214 There's some confusion about the validity of several rules, but the validity of rules 196:1 and 196:2 has never been questioned. With the character count of just those two rules alone, we have the length of rule 196:8 more than covered. The length of rule 196:8 was the only problem the judge found with it. I don't feel that the length is a problem, given my arguments above. My evidence: Judge's ruling for 196:8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 13:16:55 -0500 From: Tieka <cmhuston_at_mts.net> To: "Jeff Weston (Sir Toby)" <jjweston_at_kenny.sir-toby.com>, frc_at_trolltech.com Subject: Re: 196:8 INVALID +3.0 on 11/13/02 1:12 AM, Jeff Weston (Sir Toby) at jjweston_at_kenny.sir-toby.com wrote: > Ah FRC... It seems I hardly knew thee. My first memories of FRC start > with round 187 in July of this year. While I found the puzzle theme > fascinating, I also found it too tricky to try to participate in it. > However, my fondest memories of FRC come from round 190. You see, that > was the round where I posted my first ever rule. Then there was round > 191 where I was a co-wizard with Ed Murphy. Very fond memories... > *sniff* I'll miss you FRC! > > Of course, I sincerely hope that this eulogy is not needed. 196:2 has > provided us with the excellent suggestion of deciphering the F'rcyeh > Tablets. I understand that even now, scientists have decoded a portion > of the F'rcyeh Tablets! The first secret they have discovered may reveal > the perfect method to keep FRC from assuming room temperature. The name > they have given the snippet is "Fantastic Rule Cooking". Here is the > snippet of the F'rcyeh Tablets that they have deciphered: > > ----- > > ...the oven set at 200 degrees. If the temperature of FRC gets anywhere > near to room temperature, place it in the oven to correct the problem. > Repeat as often... > > ----- > > All further rules must announce a further deciphering of the F'rcyeh > Tablets, and name the new deciphering. > > -- > Rule Date: 2002-11-13 06:19:52 GMT Ah, the agony for the Judge. A beutiful eulogy, and it follows the suggestion (restrictions) of 196:1-7, but alas, it is longer than 196:4. I wish that I could do more for this wonderful rule, but style of +3.0 is all that I can do for this INVALID rule. Tieka, wiping a tear from my eye. -- Rule Date: 2002-11-14 19:18:29 GMT ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I will refrain from voting until I see some of the discussion surrounding this proposal. Once again, I offer my apologies for throwing yet another proposal into an already proposal heavy round. At least this rash of proposals seems to have kicked some new life into FRC, so they can't be all bad. :) -- Jeff Weston (Sir Toby) -- Rule Date: 2002-11-15 10:14:32 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST