Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 00:24:02 -0500
From: "Josh Adelson" <adelson.05@NOSPAM.comcast.net>
Newsgroups: alt.games
References: <1111241312.846907.315410@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <JamesQuick1967-BE2110.10460919032005@news.verizon.net> <1111257162.947093.98830@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <+qq*5l7Jq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> <MWGvjUDdK1PCFwaq@mnemosyne.demon.co.uk> <slrnd40sdm.i3s.sbleas@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <qsK2e.9467$f%4.3024@bignews1.bellsouth.net> <pan.2005.03.31.05.33.51.52032@sympatico.ca> <6osCMqACD7SCFw2n@mnemosyne.demon.co.uk> <87zmwkmc4c.fsf@becket.becket.net> <slrnd4o5us.2sf.bruno@localhost.localdomain> <878y43w01c.fsf@becket.becket.net> <Vkj3e.32$gH1.28@fe1.columbus.rr.com> <WuidnSc5mq6ZeNDfRVn-ow@comcast.com> <tnD3e.6825$Fh4.2343@fe2.columbus.rr.com> <OIWdnb9_wLIZjtLfRVn-vw@comcast.com> <tSX3e.4696$tI6.938@fe2.columbus.rr.com> <MZydnU0Ls7sqwM3fRVn-rQ@comcast.com> <93diiiqcdr3$.fb5z1a8jymcq$.dlg@40tude.net> <krWdnbdQ6sGdeM3fRVn-sw@comcast.com> <_h05e.13607$m31.134175@typhoon.sonic.net>
Subject: Re: Zero-sum games was: Monopoly (was: Monopoly)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 22:24:01 -0700
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Message-ID: <L5WdnYxuXv9vXsnfRVn-1g@comcast.com>
Lines: 26
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.244.61.42
X-Trace: sv3-kthlxEMKcPN10QbhYqzvhGPuW2lqCuRisIltb0GzJcuEdR82iMESyGVf7KBxr/JdrOd7ajcXSgAxOgq!4CwWNdtwoolKuG1Ery6R3oQKgze2E57WCwUseE50yTO8PgYKhTsDkU86pY7lkoPEFYdeP29o0gMO!Cg==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.31
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.games:1162
"Rookie-Move" wrote
> "Josh Adelson" <adelson.05@NOSPAM.comcast.net>
> (btw, apologies for any previous faulty attributions):
> # Victory in this "game" is defined solely as surviving to see the demise
> of
> # your opponent.
>
> granted that, certain things do follow.
>
> # As you note, it's possible for both to "lose", in the sense of failing
> to
> # achieve that goal,
>
> unless "playing" includes taking shots at one another until someone does
> wins or a "draw" is reached by the victory conditions specified. without
> specifying what "playing" is and where any particular "game" begins and
> ends (establishing 'victory conditions', 'draw conditions', etc.), many
> confusing things might be conjectured.
You've granted my victory condition. The rest of your post just indicates
to me that you drew absolutely no intuitive inference from it. I'll put it
to rest thusly: Duelling is not a game you should play with the kids.
|
|