Eventually, sure -- but I'd like them to have a few games under their
belts before I bring up the issue of different versions of the rules.
For context, this is for a class I'm teaching next semester on Games
in Society. It's a section of "Exploration & Discovery", the
college's freshman seminar. Here's the syllabus:
http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/E&D.html
I may just follow Kim and Jeong's pedagogical lead and let the
students experiment with pieces of the rules before trying to play a
complete game. The computer scientist's instinct is to lay down a
terse and elegant set of rules and then deal with the consequences of
those rules, but perhaps that is a bad thing when teaching.
Peter Drake
http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/
On Sep 18, 2008, at 10:43 AM, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
I think you should teach both area scoring and territory scoring.
Area
scoring first because it is simple and can be played without
agreeing to
dead stones, and territory scoring once they have some games under
their
belt. Show that they are essentially equivalent to within a point.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
