Re: 196:13

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