Subject: MN-L: Re: Game 11 Buzz on Kevan's last move

From: "Wayper, Paul" <WayperP@p...>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:22:17 +1000

On Monday, January 31, 2000 7:40 PM, Kevan Davis
[SMTP:kevan@s...] wrote:
> Um. Whoops. I must have been forgetting to deplete the Stack. I wonder
> how long it would have taken before I'd realised? Tsk.

Actually, so was I *laughs*. You could have had a real token bonanza there
:-)

> Indeed, feel free. If it leaves any imbalance of Tokens, I'll be happy
> to just decrease those I'm carrying and get on with the game.

Fine by me. I got the first one, so you get five. Play on from there.

Should we, as an incidental, codify something in the ruleset that says that
in situations where more than three moves would have to be rolled back for a
move to be made legally again, that the players shall come to an agreement
whether to end the game, to continue with an agreed-to modified GSD, or
ignored. I just worry that we may be bending some rule here.

Horns,

Paul Wayper -- DPI IS&S ITO Computer Systems Officer
SigClean 1.5a prevents all errors in transcription, transmission, and
reception of eMail, destroys sig and email viruses, and stops flames.
Report all bugs to the author. SigClean is FreeWare. (c) 1998-9 PJW

---

From: "Kevan Davis" <kevan@s...>
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 02:09:43 -0800

> Fine by me. I got the first one, so you get five. Play on from
there.

No problem.

> ignored. I just worry that we may be bending some rule here.

I don't think there's any need, really - in a way such a mechanism is
already part of the ruleset, for any GSD modification is regarded as
permissible if nobody Buzzes it.

Kevan

--
kevan@s...
http://www.stormloader.com/kevan