219:2 VALID, +2.3 style

From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: Tue Nov 25 2003 - 12:52:00 PST

On 2003.11.25 11:30 jcm3_at_cec.wustl.edu wrote:

> 1+ Each sentence immediately preceded by a number and a minus sign is
> considered to be a "modification," as specified in 219:1.1, of all
> restrictions in all rules with the same number preceded by a plus sign.
> 7+ A "modification" as specified in 219:2.1 *replaces* the modified rules.
> 2+ At some point, the world will be consumed by nanobots.
> 31+ I, Jae at jcm3_at_cec.wustl.edu, am not a nanobot. [R:Charlotte]
> 2- When this round started there was just 1 nanobot, but the number
> doubles (and has been doubling) every time the word nanobot is used in a
> rule.
> 11+ This restriction contains the word "nanobot."

Note the exact wording at the end of 1+.  2- does not modify 2+.  It would
modify +2, if there were a +2.

Note the exact wording at the end of 7+.  If a 219:2.1 style modification
modifies any part of a rule, then it replaces *that entire rule*.  However,
since 2- has no +2 to modify, it does not modify any part of 219:2 (and so
it does not replace 219:2).

2- is still effective as an ordinary English sentence, and implies that
there were 32 nanobots after 219:1 was posted, and 512 nanobots after
219:2 was posted.  (The word "nanobots" does not trigger 2-.)


+1.0  Follows theme
+0.5  Builds on previous rule
+0.5  Newbie bonus
+0.1  Abandoning uniform-increasing restriction numbers
+0.1  Abandoning strict-increasing restriction numbers
-0.1  Glitch in 219:1.1 makes this rule's would-be modification less powerful
+0.2  Glitch in 219:1.2 makes future modifications more powerful

+2.3  Total

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST