oh yah it's pretty obvious - no (0) style for invalid rules.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> hm can't remember what I intended I'll ponder and respond.
>
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > While not explicitly stated in the rules, I read them as suggesting
> > that an INVALID rule can not have style points awarded.
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 11:43 AM Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This is INVALID As per #6: "for you" doesn't address anyone with
> > > "deserved
> > > respect" (while #6 doesn't supply every grammatically appropriate address
> > > in the explicit list of titles, the first clause makes it clear that all
> > > forms of address need similar levels of respect - "you" needs to be "your
> > > honor" or "the court" or similar).
> > > But for getting the arguments back on track, Style: 1.5.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> > > > I humbly submit the following Docket 1 Argument: 4g0r4 is the best game
> > > > of
> > > > all time for six reasons which I will outline for you.
> > > > -The internet nomic is the best form of game in the world because of its
> > > > variance and flexibility.
> > > > -Agora is far older than all other internet nomics such as the FRC.
> > > > -Agora is far more in line with the initial Suberian intent than other
> > > > "nomics" including FRC and Blognomic
> > > > -Agora has an excellent and dedicated playerbase.
> > > > -Agora is superior to all board games because it is itself, currently a
> > > > board game.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 4:43 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Corona wrote:
> > > > > > I submit the following PROCEDURAL argument to the Court: that all
> > > > > > of My
> > > > > > Fellow Counsellors SHALL in their arguments include at least one
> > > > > > word
> > > > > with
> > > > > > a wildly non-standard 5pe11ink, such as the one in this sentence.
> > > > > > This is
> > > > > > necessary, as it allows to more easily differentiate between My
> > > > > > Fellow
> > > > > > Counsellors' styles.
> > > > >
> > > > > Counsellor, I am forced to grudgingly accept this entry as VALID.
> > > > > However,
> > > > > I gave full warning to Consellor Aris concerning grammar, at the
> > > > > beginning
> > > > > of these proceedings. Therefore I would remind all attending that
> > > > > this is
> > > > > a Court of Law, that we do not speak 'l33t' or 'h4x0r' speak as the
> > > > > kids
> > > > > are calling it these days, and it's imposition on the court, now
> > > > > unfortunately required, is an anathema to civilisation as we know it.
> > > > > STYLE: -0.5.
> > > > >
> > > > > Further, that's quite enough PROCEDURE for this court, for the moment.
> > > > > Until further notice (until balance is achieved), arguments applied to
> > > > > Docket #1 will have a baseline Style 1.0 higher than for procedural
> > > > > arguments.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > From V.J. Rada
> > > >
> >
>
>
