= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
brian_jaress comments on Pract: A Guessing and Testing Game - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (42)
I don't expect that. Maybe it didn't come through in the post, but I support the idea that players can and should agree to modify the rules to suit them. To some extent, that's what I mean by being reasonable. I think of the rules I've written as a suggested starting point.
I definitely expect that people who actually play Pract will discover things I didn't anticipate, maybe things no one anticipated.
Great. Well, if you'll agree to my (other.length + 10 > my.length) appeal clause then I'll challenge you to a game:
Wedrifid> 1, 2
Wedrifid> in
brian> in
brian> 7, 5, 4
brian> out
I really have to run, but I'll be back. Thanks.
wedrifid> out
wedrifid> 2, 3
wedrifid> in
brian> in
brian> 2, 4, 6
brian> out
Y'know, every comment has your name right at the top. You don't need to mimic IRC labels.
When I wrote the examples, I had the notion that they were on IRC, but I think we've been using it as a way to distinguish moves from remarks.
At least I think that's why we're doing it. Maybe we're each just following the other's lead.
Wedrifid?
wedrifid> out
wedrifid> 2, 3, 5
wedrifid> in
brian> out
brian> 1, 2, 2
brian> in
I was starting to think we somehow had the same set. Very unlikely after so few turns, but I guess that's where superstitions come from.