From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: Wed Mar 19 2003 - 20:44:46 PST
Round 204 final summary
Player Eligible until Style
Richard Holmes Sun 16 Mar 13:17:03 +1.5
Mark Nau Mon 17 Mar 18:09:06 +0.5
Steve Gardner Tue 18 Mar 04:22:26 +2.0 *** new Judge and Wizard ***
Joshua Mon 17 Mar 03:58:31 +1.5
everyone else Mon 17 Mar 13:17:03 +0.0
----- 204:1 by Richard -----
> : " ."
> : " ?"
> : " !"
> : " ."
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for silent speech
+0.5 for silent names
----
+1.0 total
----- 204:2 by Mark -----
> Mark: "I'm demonstrating the new rule."
> : " ?"
> : " !"
> : " ."
> [ ]
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for building on previous rule
-0.5 for extending the length of an existing silence
+0.5 for extending previous rule in a subtly different way
----
+0.5 total
----- 204:3 by Steve -----
> Mark: "I'm demonstrating the new rule."
> Stv: "You mean, always fill in the blanks?"
> : " !"
> : " ."
> [ ]
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for building on previous rule
+0.5 for maintaining lengths of existing silences in a creative way
-0.5 for not extending previous rule
----
+0.5 total
----- 204:4 by Joshua -----
> Mark: "I'm demonstrating the new rule."
> Stv: "You mean, always fill in the blanks?"
> Joshu: "Of course always!"
> : " ."
> [ ]
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for building
-0.5 for changing length
-0.5 for not extending
----
-0.5 total
----- 204:5 by Steve -----
> Mark: "I'm demonstrating the new rule."
> Stv: "You mean, always fill in the blanks?"
> Joshu: "Of course always!"
> Stev: "But we'll run out of blanks."
> [ ]
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for building
+0.5 for preserving lengths
-0.5 for not extending
----
+0.5 total
----- 204:6 by Joshua -----
> : " the new ."
> Stv: "You mean, always fill in the blanks?"
> Joshu: "Of course always!"
> Stev: "But we'll run out of blanks."
> [unfill some]
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for building
+0.5 for preserving lengths
+0.5 for a solution to the space problem that is more creative
than just tacking on more spaces (which 204:2 already did)
+0.5 for blanking only part of the first line
----
+2.0 total
----- 204:7 by Steve -----
> Steve: "Ah replace 'em by the new ones."
> : " , the ?"
> Joshu: "Of course always!"
> Stev: "But we'll run out of blanks."
> [unfill some]
VALID, no problems.
+0.5 for building
+0.5 for preserving lengths
+0.5 for leaving a mid-line punctuation mark unblanked
-0.5 for not extending
----
+1.0 total
----- 204:8 by Richard -----
> Steve: "Ah replace 'em by the new ones."
> Rch: "Mandates, bracketed, can be altered?"
> Joshu: "O s a !"
> Stev: "But we'll run out of blanks."
> [unfill some]
> [next restriction goes here]
INVALID. The text "the" in the second line is changed without
having been unfilled first.
+0.5 for building
-1.0 for changing without unfilling first
+0.5 for leaving "Joshu" filled
+0.5 for extending
----
+0.5 total
----- 204:9 by Joshua -----
> !
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <whisper> if you canna be silent. Be quiet.</whisper>
INVALID. Does not follow 204:4's restriction to fill in the blanks.
-0.5 for not building
+0.5 for general adherence to theme
----
+0.0 total
----- 204:10 by Joshua (already ineligible) -----
> Steve: "Ah replace 'em by the new ones."
> Who: "Although, be yet mindful prior rule?"
> : " !"
> Stev: "Soon we'll lack rule spaces."
> [unfill some]
> [reword some]
>
> Rival dialog begins:
> Lopez:" "
> Carlos:"Heh, heh. Small chance of that."
The following judgment and style would have been valid
if Joshua had been eligible:
VALID. I'm okay with a rule using a new form of change, so long as it
explicitly requires or allows that form of change.
+0.5 for building
+0.5 for "reword some"
+0.5 for "rival dialog"
----
+1.5 total
--
Ed Murphy <emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com> "I'm not sure I can go through
http://members.fortunecity.com/emurphy/ with it. Leave, I mean."
--
Rule Date: 2003-03-20 04:52:46 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST