HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.games.frp.live-action
Subject: Re: Looking for info/recommendations
From: oneil@husc10.harvard.edu (John O'Neil)
Date: 26 Jan 93 00:19:10
 <p!l3pyq@rpi.edu><ONEIL.93Jan23152702@husc10.harvard.edu><1993Jan25.204026.14778@colorado.edu>
Organization: Harvard Arts and Sciences Computer Services, Cambridge, MA
In-reply-to: taylorje@juliet.cs.colorado.edu's message of Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:40:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.204026.14778@colorado.edu> taylorje@juliet.cs.colorado.edu (TAYLOR JASON EDMOND) writes:
>
>I submitted toe game to the Sanctioning Committee. It took them 6
>months to even read the thing. Needless to say, I was a bit upset that
>it had taken them so long.

You were lucky.  The GM who wrote the first (as far as I know) IFGS
game in New England had to call Sanctioning Committee members in
Denver twice a week for seven months to get her game approved -- a
game for which they suggested no changes at all!

>However, my solution to the problem was quite different that others
>might choose. I JOINED the SC. No, I wasn't allowed to sanction my own
>game, but my feeling was that, if there's a problem, and nobody was doing
>anything about it, then I should help to fix it. 

Not really an option for my friend, she being in Boston and all....

>But, in reference to John's earlier "old farts" comment (and this is by
>no means a flame), the majority of the SC's current members are under 30,
>and that includes myself. 

Well, the "old fart boundary" is a different age in every field.  In
mathematics it's about 23, and in symphony conducting about 75.  Where
game design is on this scale, I dunno :)
--
John O'Neil
"Occasionally I believed I had thoughts of my own --  who does not now
 and then become the victim of such delusions?"
						-- Paul Feyerabend
Newsgroups: alt.games.frp.live-action
From: taylorje@juliet.cs.colorado.edu (TAYLOR JASON EDMOND)
Subject: Re: Looking for info/recommendations
Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:40:26 GMT

   I have made a commitment not to post any more flame-type stuff to this
group, so I won't. BUT, I have just a few friendly comments...

   I wanted to write a game for IFGS about 3 months after I joined the
organization. The experienced people with whom I consulted were VERY
helpful, and never tried to hide anything from me. In fact, they all gave
me SO much help, I was unable to remember it all.

   I submitted toe game to the Sanctioning Committee. It took them 6
months to even read the thing. Needless to say, I was a bit upset that
it had taken them so long.
   However, my solution to the problem was quite different that others
might choose. I JOINED the SC. No, I wasn't allowed to sanction my own
game, but my feeling was that, if there's a problem, and nobody was doing
anything about it, then I should help to fix it. 

   And so, I have been a member of the SC for about 10 months. It has
improved its efficiency somewhat, though not as much as I'd like, and
it is by no means only my doing.'

   But, in reference to John's earlier "old farts" comment (and this is by
no means a flame), the majority of the SC's current members are under 30,
and that includes myself. 

Take from this what you will.

-Jason
taylorje@rintintin.colorado.edu
From: lkahn@mitre.org (Larry Kahn)
Subject: NATWA Singles
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:54:31 GMT

The NATWA singles is planned for the last weekend in June in Washington.  
Last year we went to an Orioles game on Saturday night and we'll probably 
try to do it again this year.  We could probably move the date a week or 
two if anyone has a conflict but we want to finalize it in the next few 
weeks.
                             Larry

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   | Larry Kahn                       |                                  |
   | The MITRE Corporation            |   BE REASONABLE. DO IT MY WAY.   |
   | lkahn@mitre.org                  |                                  |
   |---------------------------------------------------------------------|
   |  These opinions may not coincide with my employer's (not that they  |
   |  pay any attention to an insignificant lackey like me, anyhow).     |
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jdporter@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
Subject: Re: Gosh, look what's here!
Date: 22 Jan 93 12:07:12 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <1993Jan21.130035.26207@ucl.ac.uk>, ucca61b@ucl.ac.uk (Patrick J Barrie) writes:
> 
> Anyone intending to enter the Marchant Trophy should let me know, as it's
> likely to have some action in February. (That particular tournament is only
> open to teams based in the U.K.).
>
Well, I know OUTS want to put forward a team or two, to see if we can repeat
last year's triumph, i.e. OUTS losing the tournament despite all the people
playing in it being members of OUTS.  On March 6th there should be an
opportunity for anybody wishing to play against our teams to do so in Oxford.
> 
> Happy brundling,
> Patrick Barrie
> (ucca61b@uk.ac.ucl)

Yo ho,

Julian Porter
From: ucca61b@ucl.ac.uk (Patrick J Barrie)
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
Subject: Re: Failure to free (was Gosh, look what's here!)
Keywords: tiddlywinks winks
Date: 23 Jan 93 13:23:31 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium

ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:

>Patrick, would you mind summarising the rules? I think my copy of the
>rules predates the nominated-wink rule. If this is what I think it is
>(opponents get to _play_ a squopping wink) then I see no problem with
>the US rules.

I'll put a copy of the current rules in the post to you. I could, of course,
transmit the whole lot into alt.games.tiddlywinks but it is extremely long
and tedious. So instead here's a summary of the dreaded rule 11:
(1) After a squop up, get n free turns where n is the number of winks on the
field of play neither squopped nor squopping.
(2) After that obliged to free one (or more) of opponents' winks on the first
available _shot_ (ETwA rules), or _turn_ (NATwA rules). This means in Britain 
you are not allowed to attempt to pot a wink and then play a freeing shot, but
have to play the freeing shot immediately, otherwise it's a failure-to-free.
(3) If there is a failure to free, then ETwA rules proscribe a "nominated wink"
(the equivalent of a free ball in snooker) where you can play an opponent's 
wink as if it were your own. I understand NATwA rules are currently in a state
of flux on this; they've recognised the old moving-a-wink-aside rule is often
unworkable, and several of them have indicated to me that they'll happily 
change to the nominated wink rule if ETwA changes to the freeing on first
available _turn_ rule (in point 2). (Any knowledgeable Americans out there?)

>Also, the English rules are ludicrous as they stand. It is perfectly
>legal, though outrageously unsporting, to play a pile shot in such a
>way that no wink could possibly be freed, so it's silly to prevent the
>playing of free winks, into the pot or otherwise.

This is no longer the English rules (but may still be the American). In the 
English rules the only way to prevent a wink being freed is to make a Thorpe's 
ring of all winks and that constitutes the end of the game anyway!

Hope that satisfactorily explains the situation.

Patrick "Bonecrusher" Barrie, ucca61b@uk.ac.ucl
From: abdab@dartmouth.edu (Adam Milligan)
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
Subject: introduction
Date: 25 Jan 93 23:10:32 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College
X-Xxdate: Mon, 25 Jan 93 18:08:56 GMT
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7

Okay, I'm new here.  A friend @cornell from my high school sent me a copy
of a post asking us to introduce ourselves.  Okay.  I'm Adam Milligan
(commonly called Abdab, see below).  I have won no tournaments.  I have
_attended_ no tournaments.  In fact, I basically just got to the point
where I could pot with reasonably probability and squop (sp?) once in a
while. :-)  Severin Drix was my calculus teacher at Ithaca High School. 
Winks was more fun than calculus...

abdab@cornell, are you out there?    :-O

************************************************************************
|        _ _       _ _          __       _ _          _      _         |
|       / /  \   /  \ \        /\ \    /  \ \        / /\   /\ \       |
|      / / /\ | / /\ |_|      /  \_\  | /\ \ \      / /  \  \ \ \      |
|     / /  \/ / \ \/  \ \    / /\ | | \ \/  \ \    / / /\ |  \ \ \     |
|    /_/ /\  /   \  /\ \ \  / / /||_|  \  /\ \_\  / /  \/_/   \ \_\    |
|    \_\/ / /     \ \/ | | / /_// / /   \ \ \/_/ /_/ /\  |     \/_/_   |
|      /_/ /       \  / /  \ \_/ / /     \ \_\   \ \ \/ /        /\ \  |
|      \_\/         \/_/    \___/_/       \/_/    \_\_ /         \/_/  |
|                                                                      |
|                       Adam.Milligan@Dartmouth.edu                    |
************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: sachs@FID.Morgan.COM (Josef Sachs)
Subject: Re: Foul shot vs out of turn
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., Fixed Income Research Dept., NYC
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 05:36:42 GMT

>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:31:57 GMT, lkahn@mitre.org (Larry Kahn) said:

	lkahn> Let me see if I have this straight.  Dave (red) and I
	lkahn> (blue) are playing Jon (green) and Alan (yellow).  Blue
	lkahn> has just gone, then Alan plays his yellow.  This is out
	lkahn> of turn, and either the shot is accepted and blue now
	lkahn> goes, or else the shot goes back and green shoots.

Based on my understanding of NATwA rules at the time of TROFCT79, that is
what we would do in NATwA.  However, it appears to be contrary to ETwA92
Rule 12 Section (d), which calls for red to play next if the yellow shot
is accepted.  I'm sure someone will let me know if the NATwA rule was
changed during my absence from the game.

	lkahn> If this had been a singles game, it would have been
	lkahn> considered a foul shot, and if accepted then it is red
	lkahn> to go.  (This is not what Natwa had been doing for
	lkahn> years but I think the new interperetation is probably
	lkahn> more consistent).

Under ETwA92, it would be red to play, regardless of whether the yellow shot
was considered a foul shot or out-of-turn.  In NATwA, I would argue that it
should be considered out-of-turn, with blue to play if accepted.  In my mind,
part of the honor of the game is to take into account intentions.  In your
example, if the singles player plays yellow, with the intention of playing
yellow and in the belief that it was yellow's turn to play, then that should
be considered yellow out-of-turn and not a foul shot in green's turn.  In other
words, I think of the singles player as two separate players, depending upon
the color intended to be shot, residing in a single body.

	lkahn> Returning to the pairs game, if it
	lkahn> was Jon's turn to shoot and Alan shot green instead, is
	lkahn> this a foul shot or out of turn?

It is a foul shot (not to be confused with a foul shot (otherwise known
as a free throw) in basketball, which is worth one point).

	lkahn> Clearly if the shot is not accepted, Jon then will play green,
	lkahn> but if the shot is accepted, which color plays next?

Under both ETwA92 and TROFCT79, it would clearly be red to play.  Under NATwA
rules, I would also adjudicate red to play, although with considerably less
assuredness, since I believe the rules to dictate the order of colors as
opposed to the order of players (theoretically the same).
-- 
Josef Sachs                     \     Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
sachs@FID.Morgan.COM             \    1251 Avenue of the Americas
Fixed Income Research Department  \   New York, NY  10020 USA
(212) 703-7031                     \
From: shepa@sersun1 (Shepherd A J)
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
Subject: Tiddlywinks for Windows :-)
Date: 28 Jan 93 12:12:39 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


Now that would be an idea of a computer game. Tiddlywinks for Windows!

The idea would be the longer you pressed down on the mouse button the
harder the counter (wink?) would fly into the air.

By the way, what a _strange_ idea for a group.
--
Look up, Look Down, Look at Mr. Frying Pan - SPLAT! - 
---> Antony J. "Doppelganger" Shepherd - shepa@essex.ac.uk <---
Freedom for Tooting!
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Subject: Failure to free (was Gosh, look what's here!)
Keywords: tiddlywinks winks
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:20:15 GMT


Patrick, would you mind summarising the rules? I think my copy of the
rules predates the nominated-wink rule. If this is what I think it is
(opponents get to _play_ a squopping wink) then I see no problem with
the US rules.

Also, the English rules are ludicrous as they stand. It is perfectly
legal, though outrageously unsporting, to play a pile shot in such a
way that no wink could possibly be freed, so it's silly to prevent the
playing of free winks, into the pot or otherwise.
--
Alasdair.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk
From: jdporter@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
Subject: ETwA newsletter - tournament dates
Date: 21 Jan 93 12:12:42 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

Right ho, here are dates for the next two forthcoming tournaments:

(1) The Oxfordshire Open week-end

This is the week-end of the 6-7 March.  On the Saturday there will be a room
booked in which people who want tio turn up can play random games, or perhaps
take part in games for the Marchant Trophy.  Then on the Saturday evening OUTS
are hosting a dinner, to which those who want to come can.  Then on the Sunday
comes the tournament -- the usual thing with fixed pairs playing in a Swiss
with bidding system.

If you want to take part in the tournament and have a fixed pairing in midn, please
contact me (e-mail JDPORTER@UK.AC.OX.VAX) to let me know.  I will also act as a
clearing house to find partners for those who want them.

Accommodation over the Saturday night is limited in quantity and will be made
available on a first come-first served basis to those who get in touch in
advance.  Please contact Katherine Woolfitt (E-mail SO93002@UK.AC.OX) if you
want accomodation over the night.

(2) The Scottish National Pairs

This will be held on the week-end of 17-18 April in St-Andrews.  It is going to
be a fixed pairs tournament as its title suggests,a nd I am told that if you
want to go, or just want data in general, you are to contact Jo Mitchell at St.
Andrews (E-Mail JVM@UK.AC.ST-ANDREWS) and she will tell all and make suitable
arrangements.

I don't know much about what is happening for this one, but I gather that the
winkers of ST. Andrews will be mightily pleased if lots of people turn up, and
especially if some of the people who do turn up might be willing to partner St.
Andrew's winkers.


Well, that's all for now.  Next installment the English National Pairs . . .


Julian Porter
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: sachs@FID.Morgan.COM (Josef Sachs)
Subject: New group
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., Fixed Income Research Dept., NYC
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 05:19:19 GMT

In case anyone didn't see the newgroup control messages, here they are:

  From: daveh@vax.ox.ac.uk (Dave Hastings, OUCS)
  Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks.ctl
  Subject: newgroup alt.games.tiddlywinks
  Message-ID: <1993Jan20.163138.2862@clts1.comlab.ox.ac.uk>
  Date: 20 Jan 93 16:31:38 GMT
  Control: newgroup alt.games.tiddlywinks
  Sender: Malcolm.Harper@comlab.ox.ac.uk (Malcolm Harper)
  Organization: Oxford University Computing Services, UK
  Lines: 10
  Approved: news@comlab.ox.ac.uk
  Originator: malcolm@clts1.comlab
  Nntp-Posting-Host: clts1.comlab.ox.ac.uk

  Charter:

  To promote discussion about the game of tiddlywinks, enable announcements as
  to forthcoming tournaments, descriptions of tournament results and general
  discussion as to the rules and nature of the game.

  For your newsgroups file:
  alt.games.tiddlywinks : All aspects of the game of Tiddlywinks

and:

  From: news@signal.dra.hmg.gb
  Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks.ctl
  Subject: newgroup alt.games.tiddlywinks
  Message-ID: <news-alt.games.tiddlywinks-21-Jan-1993-143616-WET@signal.dra.hmg.gb>
  Date: 21 Jan 93 12:36:16 GMT
  Control: newgroup alt.games.tiddlywinks
  Lines: 8
  Approved: news

  The idea behind having a group for winks on the NET is to allow for the
  following:

   - Publication by the national organisations of their tournaments
   - Posting of tournament reports, as well as articles from journals of
     the national organisations
   - To allow general discussion of the game, proposals and counter-
     proposals about its rules, etc.

Would the authors of the above messages care to introduce themselves to us?
I was wondering whether the two messages were the product of collaboration.
It's just a bit weird -- I don't recall ever before seeing a USENET newsgroup
newgroup'ed by multiple parties.

I'm a bit irked to see a winks newsgroup in the alt.games hierarchy.  Wouldn't
alt.sport have been far superior?  As it is, I believe a.g.t to be the first
group in alt.games or rec.games for a game which requires physical activity
in any real sense (no offense intended to players of board games, video games,
and computer games).  Can we agree on rec.sport.tiddlywinks if we ever go
"mainstream"?

In any event, I'm looking forward to new avenues of interaction with winkers
and winker-wannabes around the world.
-- 
Josef Sachs                     \     Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
sachs@FID.Morgan.COM             \    1251 Avenue of the Americas
Fixed Income Research Department  \   New York, NY  10020 USA
(212) 703-7031                     \
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: sachs@FID.Morgan.COM (Josef Sachs)
Subject: Did Bill Clinton cheat at tiddlywinks?
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., Fixed Income Research Dept., NYC
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 05:42:54 GMT

Does anyone know whether Bill Clinton had any contact with winks or winkers
when he was at Oxford from 1968 to 1970 on a Rhodes scholarship?  Does anyone
have access to Oxford records from that period?
-- 
Josef Sachs                     \     Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
sachs@FID.Morgan.COM             \    1251 Avenue of the Americas
Fixed Income Research Department  \   New York, NY  10020 USA
(212) 703-7031                     \
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: sachs@FID.Morgan.COM (Josef Sachs)
Subject: Introductions
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., Fixed Income Research Dept., NYC
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 05:26:29 GMT

I'd like to suggest that we establish a custom, here on a.g.t., that we
introduce ourselves to the group.  I hope this will encourage a true sense
of community with other winkers worldwide.

As for myself, I started playing at MIT in 1973.  I have served as NATwA
SecGen and as Newswink editor.  My titles include NATwA Pairs (with Severin
Drix in 1979, and with Charles Frankston in 1982) and World Pairs (with
Charles in '82).  I just returned to the game last year, after being absent
since the Walmsley winks were outlawed.  I have been most strongly influenced
by Lockwood, Tucker, Frankston, Drix, Sunshine and Henninge.

Okay, how about the rest of you?  Don't be shy.
-- 
Josef Sachs                     \     Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
sachs@FID.Morgan.COM             \    1251 Avenue of the Americas
Fixed Income Research Department  \   New York, NY  10020 USA
(212) 703-7031                     \
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: rwtucker@starbase.mitre.org (Richard W. Tucker)
Subject: Re: Failure to free (was Gosh, look what's here!)
Keywords: tiddlywinks winks
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Distribution: global
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:15:13 GMT

In <1993Jan23.132331.30889@ucl.ac.uk> ucca61b@ucl.ac.uk (Patrick J Barrie) writes:

>ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:

>(2) After that obliged to free one (or more) of opponents' winks on the first
>available _shot_ (ETwA rules), or _turn_ (NATwA rules). This means in Britain 
>you are not allowed to attempt to pot a wink and then play a freeing shot, but
>have to play the freeing shot immediately, otherwise it's a failure-to-free.

Hmm.  Haven't you Brits caved in to the NATwA "turn" here yet?

>(3) If there is a failure to free, then ETwA rules proscribe a "nominated wink"
>(the equivalent of a free ball in snooker) where you can play an opponent's 
>wink as if it were your own. I understand NATwA rules are currently in a state
>of flux on this; they've recognised the old moving-a-wink-aside rule is often
>unworkable, and several of them have indicated to me that they'll happily 
>change to the nominated wink rule if ETwA changes to the freeing on first
>available _turn_ rule (in point 2). (Any knowledgeable Americans out there?)

I still think the ETwA nominated-wink rule is an abomination since any
winks of the nominated color potted during the shot are thereafter
owned by the color shooting, not the color of the wink.  And what if
one or more winks go off the table, of either the shooting color or
the color shot?  This nominated-wink rule needs a lot of clean-up
before I will support it.  The concept of shooting a nominated wink to
resolve the failure-to-free problem does have potential, however.
(That's the first time you've heard THAT from me.)  I also think that
it is too strong a remedy for the squopped-out pair to be able to nominate any
free on the mat to shoot.  Some restrictions should be provided.

Plus the ETwA 6th round shot rule is stupid.  Get rid of it!

>>Also, the English rules are ludicrous as they stand. It is perfectly
>>legal, though outrageously unsporting, to play a pile shot in such a
>>way that no wink could possibly be freed, so it's silly to prevent the
>>playing of free winks, into the pot or otherwise.

>This is no longer the English rules (but may still be the American).

This is still legal in the American rules.  The American rules are
predicated not on requiring a player to make a shot of a certain kind
(e.g. one which frees an opponent), but provides a mechanism to get
a wink free (currently, by moving aside winks to reveal one).  I
believe most Americans would prefer to make whatever choice of shot
they desire and let the rules provide a way to resolve problems
resulting thereto.  Witness the (still-not-official NATwA) Perimeter
rule, which permits a winker to send a wink off the table, but
provides that the opponents can place it anywhere they want on the
perimeter of the mat.

 - Rick Tucker   rwtucker@mitre.org
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
From: jdporter@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.games.tiddlywinks
Subject: alt.games.tiddlywinks CREATED!!
Date: 21 Jan 93 11:06:23 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

Well, here we are, alt.games.tiddlywinks is now in business, so there.  Let me
repeat the charter aims, viz:

(1) To allow dissemination of information about tournaments, events and other
doings in the winking world

(2) To carry tournament reports

(3) To allow for general discussion of the game, proposals about what is
happening and general networking amongst winkers

So there, we've got it, so let's try to keep it!

Julian Porter