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