From: Nathan Russell (nrussell_at_acsu.buffalo.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 22 2002 - 09:07:47 PST
>On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Steve Gardner wrote: > >> This raises an interesting question: what if a Rule which is in outright >> contradiction to a previous Rule is declared valid by default? Eg, in >> the current round, one of the restrictions in place is that Rules cannot >> use or mention the word 'Fantasy'. What if a new Rule saying that future >> Rules *must* use or mention the word 'Fantasy' were declared valid by >> default (the only way such a Rule could be declared valid, since it >> violates the earlier requirement)? It could happen in other ways - e.g. a requirement that all future rules mention a word beginning with "fant" that was a synonym with "daydream". Something like that might be an excellent strategy, sicne the person posting it would be the last to post a valid rule. Nathan -- Rule Date: 2002-11-22 17:08:31 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST