[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules

To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
From: Daniel Bump <bump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:19:58 -0700
In-reply-to: <$FwGPWA+qdO7Ewyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (message from Nick Wedd onWed, 27 Jun 2001 14:08:14 +0100)
References: <01C0FE74.E8AAC120.coopert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><kXAgLuB+vPO7EwxK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3B399653.45E7B98B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><qzljS3GpXaO7Ewj2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3B39C922.22148FA7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <$FwGPWA+qdO7Ewyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Nick Wedd wrote:

> Games that take 1000 moves or more are not a problem.  I am strongly
> opposed to having special rules, either for humans or for computers,
> that do not address any problem but just make the ruleset more
> complicated.  A rule that ends the game after some specified finite
> number of moves is an example.

It might be reasonable to give the TD the right to adjudicate
long games.

Dan

References:
- RE: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
  - From: Tom Cooper
- Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
  - From: Nick Wedd
- Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
  - From: Erik van der Werf
- Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
  - From: Nick Wedd
- Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
  - From: Erik van der Werf
- Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
  - From: Nick Wedd

Prev by Date: Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
Next by Date: Re: computer-go: Computer Go Tournament Program
Previous by thread: Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
Next by thread: RE: computer-go: Most simple Go rules
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread