On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 14:05 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, ais523 wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:42 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > Hmm, I'm suddenly unconvinced that Win Announcements work at all for > > > most defined win conditions. > > > > > > A win announcement must be factually correct in announcing that > > > someone wins the game (R2186). > > > > A win announcment need not state that someone wins the game. Most of > > mine didn't. (Normally, I make two announcements, e.g. "This is a Win > > Announcement: ais523 has 100 points", then a rules-irrelevant and > > ISIDTID "I win the game" to clarify.) > > Oh but waitaminute, you can't get rid of the "and" so easily! > A win announcement is a factually correct announcement > explicitly labeled as a win announcement and/or clearly stating > that one or more persons win the game.
Err, what? "and/or" is a usual legal abbreviation for inclusive or (i.e. "and or or"). The definition of a win announcement always used to be just the first part (the explicit labeling as a win announcement). Because some people tried to win and forgot to say "Win Announcement:", the rule was amended as a courtesy to newbies, pretty much, the same way that we allow slightly malformed registrations. The old method, stating that the announcement was a win announcement, continued to work; if the new method was broken, that still has no impact on the old version. -- ais523
