Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Insomniac]

BTW Schneau you hadn't invalidated my guess until way later with Logical

[Squidd]

No, "Is it as sweet as my rule was?" is 22 characters and wrong.

[Jorbles]

I'm fine with this, although... the issue I see is people pushing the boundary. I can't say for certain though.

I think the most important rule is that the rules be simple. If people do that then the boundaries probably won't be pushed too hard. Anyone who makes a rule that's too hard should be mercilessly mocked and shunned as the rules state. That'll be a deterrent for anyone who gets too imaginative.

PPE:

In the original Zendo, rules may only refer to the pieces of the koan under consideration and the surface of the table, which is assumed to be infinite and featureless. This is "the Spock rule," since we should be able to build a koan here and beam it up to the Enterprise without in any way affecting its legality.

I wasn't aware of that rule. It wasn't stated and I'd never encountered this game before. I did read the relevant section of the rules before crafting the rule, and thought it fell well within the bounds. If Axxle needs to clarify the rules he should include that there, though I (obviously) think the expanded playing field I was working with is more interesting.

Logical, is that captain?

If a question can be asked twice and be given two different answers, it's not within the parameters of the game.

That's not clear from the rules which state: At the beginning of the round, the Oracle invents a secret rule, completely mechanical, based on - and solely on - the exact wording of the questions asked. This rule will, given the exact wording of a question, tell the Oracle to reply either "Yes" or "No".

My rule did state that the Oracle should reply either Yes or No, was mechanical, and was based entirely on the exact wordings of the questions asked. If you want the questions to be considered in a vacuum I'd suggest appending the Spock clarification to the rules to prevent future confusion. (I expect this thread will go long and people won't read through all the old conversation.)

[Voltgloss]

That's not clear from the rules which state: At the beginning of the round, the Oracle invents a secret rule, completely mechanical, based on - and solely on - the exact wording of the questions asked. This rule will, given the exact wording of a question, tell the Oracle to reply either "Yes" or "No".

Bolded sentence indicates that the "exact wording" that matters is of the question asked, not the entire list of questions asked up to that point.

[Schneau]

Guess: Average word length is greater than 4 characters

Exactly correct! I had to make a judgement call about " ?", and decided that the average length of 0 words is "no" even though it's undefined. Your turn Squidd!

[Squidd]

That was a tough one.

I have a rule.

[Voltgloss]

Is it bigger than a breadbox?
Will it blend?
Derphammer?
Should vigs ever shoot?

[Insomniac]

Kickball?
Insomniac?

[Squidd]

Is it bigger than a breadbox?  Yes.
Will it blend?  No.
Derphammer?  No.
Should vigs ever shoot?  Yes.
Kickball?  No.
Insomniac?  No.

[Insomniac]

Will you blend?
Will I blend?
Can it blend?
Can you blend?
Can I blend?

[Squidd]

Is it bigger than a breadbox?  Yes.
Will it blend?  No.
Derphammer?  No.
Should vigs ever shoot?  Yes.
Kickball?  No.
Insomniac?  No.
Will you blend?  No.
Will I blend?  No.
Can it blend?  No.
Can you blend?  No.
Can I blend?  No.

[Insomniac]

123456789012345?
1234567890123456?
12345678901234567?
123456789012345678?
1234567890123456789?
12345678901234567890?
123456789012345678901?
1234567890123456789012?

[Squidd]

Is it bigger than a breadbox?  Yes.
Will it blend?  No.
Derphammer?  No.
Should vigs ever shoot?  Yes.
Kickball?  No.
Insomniac?  No.
Will you blend?  No.
Will I blend?  No.
Can it blend?  No.
Can you blend?  No.
Can I blend?  No.
123456789012345?  No.
1234567890123456?  No.
12345678901234567?  No.
123456789012345678?  No.
1234567890123456789?  No.
12345678901234567890?  No.
123456789012345678901?  No.
1234567890123456789012?  No.

[Axxle]

I'm fine with this, although... the issue I see is people pushing the boundary. I can't say for certain though.

I think the most important rule is that the rules be simple. If people do that then the boundaries probably won't be pushed too hard. Anyone who makes a rule that's too hard should be mercilessly mocked and shunned as the rules state. That'll be a deterrent for anyone who gets too imaginative.

PPE:

In the original Zendo, rules may only refer to the pieces of the koan under consideration and the surface of the table, which is assumed to be infinite and featureless. This is "the Spock rule," since we should be able to build a koan here and beam it up to the Enterprise without in any way affecting its legality.

I wasn't aware of that rule. It wasn't stated and I'd never encountered this game before. I did read the relevant section of the rules before crafting the rule, and thought it fell well within the bounds. If Axxle needs to clarify the rules he should include that there, though I (obviously) think the expanded playing field I was working with is more interesting.

Logical, is that captain?

If a question can be asked twice and be given two different answers, it's not within the parameters of the game.

That's not clear from the rules which state: At the beginning of the round, the Oracle invents a secret rule, completely mechanical, based on - and solely on - the exact wording of the questions asked. This rule will, given the exact wording of a question, tell the Oracle to reply either "Yes" or "No".

My rule did state that the Oracle should reply either Yes or No, was mechanical, and was based entirely on the exact wordings of the questions asked. If you want the questions to be considered in a vacuum I'd suggest appending the Spock clarification to the rules to prevent future confusion. (I expect this thread will go long and people won't read through all the old conversation.)

Your rule was also based on the *order* of the questions asked, so it wasn't solely based on wording.

edit: I added this to the rule in question "You must be able to answer the same question the same way, regardless of the context of the question."

[Insomniac]

Guess: Even number of words?

[theory]

Shameless steal attempt:

Guess: composite number of words?

[Schneau]

Guess: contains a "v" or a "x".

[cayvie]

guess: four or more words?

[Schneau]

If I were to learn to fly on the way to the drug store, would I be considered a super hero?

[Squidd]

Is it bigger than a breadbox?  Yes.
Will it blend?  No.
Derphammer?  No.
Should vigs ever shoot?  Yes.
Kickball?  No.
Insomniac?  No.
Will you blend?  No.
Will I blend?  No.
Can it blend?  No.
Can you blend?  No.
Can I blend?  No.
123456789012345?  No.
1234567890123456?  No.
12345678901234567?  No.
123456789012345678?  No.
1234567890123456789?  No.
12345678901234567890?  No.
123456789012345678901?  No.
1234567890123456789012?  No.

Guess: Even number of words? Incorrect:
Does the number of words need to be even?  Yes.
Guess: composite number of words? Incorrect:
Can the number of words be prime?  No.
Guess: contains a "v" or a "x". Incorrect:
A vexing requirement of Scrabbly letters?  Yes.
Guess: four or more words? Incorrect:
Short questions forbidden?  Yes.

If I were to learn to fly on the way to the drug store, would I be considered a super hero?  Yes.

[Insomniac]

Guess: contains a "v" or a "x". Incorrect:
A vexing requirement of Scrabbly letters?  Yes.


That doesn't disprove the guess..

other ones there do though.

[cayvie]

Guess: contains a "v" or a "x". Incorrect:
A vexing requirement of Scrabbly letters?  Yes.


That doesn't disprove the guess..

other ones there do though.

did you mean strict "or" then?

[cayvie]

"can the number of words be prime" being "no" doesn't disprove the prime/composite theory, though.

"short questions forbidden" being "yes" does.

[Insomniac]

"can the number of words be prime" being "no" doesn't disprove the prime/composite theory, though.

"short questions forbidden" being "yes" does.

Twasn't my guess but I assume most people don't mean exclusive or when they speak

[Schneau]

If a an I or is, go to we am he it me?