Play. The. Game.

Alright bitches. We seem to have forgotten a key component of V:TES. Don't do dumb shit. Play. The. Game. Seriously. Play. The. Game. QED, bitches. Ankur Play. The. Game. (In case you forgot.)

[ quoted text not captured ] I hit reply so you could read Ankur's post again. -- Dorrinal Blackmantle Chantry Elder of Salt Lake City

On Jun 26, 12:17 pm, Dorrinal Blackmantle <john.mcgl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 26, 11:11 am, Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > > > > > Alright bitches. > > > We seem to have forgotten a key component of V:TES. > > > Don't do dumb shit. > > > Play. The. Game. > > > Seriously. > > > Play. The. Game. > > > QED, bitches. > > > Ankur > > Play. The. Game. (In case you forgot.) > > I hit reply so you could read Ankur's post again. I hit reply because I didn't want to feel left out. > -- > Dorrinal Blackmantle > Chantry Elder of Salt Lake City -John Flournoy

Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > Alright bitches. > We seem to have forgotten a key component of V:TES. > Don't do dumb shit. > Play. The. Game. > Seriously. > Play. The. Game. > QED, bitches. Mix the cards and arrange them, picture side down, in front of you. Sit still and relax. When you are ready, take a card. Take time to look at the picture and read the text. The *CARD*'s message can be helpful for you. It can help you to think positive, peaceful, and loving thoughts toward yourself and other people. Let these positive thoughts stay with you in everything you do.

In article <Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu>, Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I *am* playing the game! I am engaging in a lengthy, detailed discussion, building an argument to sell my table split deal! It is irrelevant that no one has played a card or taken an action for half an hour! Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

> I *am* playing the game! I am engaging in a lengthy, detailed > discussion, building an argument to sell my table split deal! It is > irrelevant that no one has played a card or taken an action for half an > hour! I would say something about bitches and playing the game, but it may not be novel anymore. Oh wait. Who the hell cares? Bitches. Play. The. Game. Ankur Game. Play. It. Bitches.

[ quoted text not captured ] QED. witness1 -science! it works, bitches!

[ quoted text not captured ] Never. Ever. Under *ANY* Circumstances. Play. The. Game. In San Francisco. :)

> Never. Ever. Under *ANY* Circumstances. > > Play. The. Game. > > In San Francisco. > > :) Heathen. Play. The. Game. QED. Bitches. Ankur. Excessive. Periods. Rock. Play. The. Game.

Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote in news:Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu: [ quoted text not captured ] Oh, I'll play it... in ways you've never dreamed of, pal ;-) DZ AW

On Jun 26, 10:14 pm, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote innews:Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu: > > > > > Alright bitches. > > > We seem to have forgotten a key component of V:TES. > > > Don't do dumb shit. > > > Play. The. Game. > > > Seriously. > > > Play. The. Game. > > > QED, bitches. > > > Ankur > > Play. The. Game. (In case you forgot.) > > Oh, I'll play it... in ways you've never dreamed of, pal ;-) I hope these ways will not lead you to bad play ;-) -- Damnans http://www.almadrava.net/damnans http://www.vtes.net http://es.groups.yahoo.com/group/vteshispania/

[ quoted text not captured ] I risk going against the hype by pointing out - in a politically correct fashion for a change - that this topic-starter post is very hard to tell from a content-wise challenged post posted by a mentally challenged person. Of course we all know it's not like that, but still... ;) -- Regards, Daneel

> I risk going against the hype by pointing out - in a politically correct > fashion for a change - that this topic-starter post is very hard to tell > from a content-wise challenged post posted by a mentally challenged person. Why would you ever risk going against the hype? Hype is awesome. QED. Bitches. Ankur Play. The. Game.

> Alright bitches. Who you calling bitch, bitch ?! ;-) Orpheus Kill. Them. Dead. (and make some Shamblings)

"Ankur Gupta" <agu...@cs.duke.edu> schreef in bericht > Play. The. Game. > Every time I see that phrase, I lose the game. Thanks a lot... > Excessive. Periods. Rock. About 50% of the word's population disagrees, i'm afraid.

[ quoted text not captured ] I'm comfortable with them all being wrong. Ankur Play. The. Game.

Ankur Gupta a écrit : [ quoted text not captured ] I can't play now, i went out with the bitches :!:

On 27 jun, 14:26, Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > >> Excessive. Periods. Rock. > > > About 50% of the word's population disagrees, i'm afraid. > > I'm comfortable with them all being wrong. I know it was a stupid pun, but I don't get your answer...

In article <Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu>, Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > I'm comfortable with them all being wrong. (I'd just like to clarify for those who might be confused, the madness that myself and David are currently involved in is all in the name of people playing the game more and talking about playing the game less) [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Ok, see, about 50% of the world disagrees that excessive periods rock. They're all wrong. I have no problem with the fact that they are wrong. Because they are wrong. Ankur Play. The. Game.

> Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: >> I'm comfortable with them all being wrong. > > (I'd just like to clarify for those who might be confused, the madness > that myself and David are currently involved in is all in the name of > people playing the game more and talking about playing the game less) Meh. Judgement should be used. It's pretty simple. Play. The. Game. Ankur Play. The. Game.

[ quoted text not captured ] You work for Alldays?

In article <Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu>, Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > Meh. Judgement should be used. It's pretty simple. See, that is the problem. I don't know if you have been following all this absurd discussion, but all indications are that, unless obvious stalling is going on, judgement *can't* be used, and if 3 people are earnestly spending half an hour hammering out a deal, they are perfectly in their rights to do so. Which strikes me as a vast impediment to playing the game. Where other folks are like "that is playing the game". And thus, madness ensues. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in message news:pdb6-1FF5E6.1...@news-server.stny.rr.com... > In article <Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu>, > Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > >> Meh. Judgement should be used. It's pretty simple. > > See, that is the problem. I don't know if you have been following all > this absurd discussion, but all indications are that, unless obvious > stalling is going on, judgement *can't* be used, and if 3 people are > earnestly spending half an hour hammering out a deal, they are > perfectly > in their rights to do so. But that never happens. ("Never", here, meaning "virtually never".) > Which strikes me as a vast impediment to playing the game. Where other > folks are like "that is playing the game". > > And thus, madness ensues. In the madhouse it does, anyway. :-) All indications to me are that judgement can be used whenever it is appropriate, and it would have a perfectly good chance to be appropriate when somebody tries to spend fifteen minutes doing any one thing in a game of VTES. I think Scott was basically on that page when he wrote "Probably because you think that the 15 minutes isn't being spent as earnestly as all that, and you think the judge may agree.", and I think that answer is equally applicable to 15-minute discussions, if you think the 15 minutes isn't being spent as earnestly as all that there, either. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/bd597675734b28b1 If it's really going to take those guys 30 minutes to hammer out a deal, they need to either find their brains wherever they left them, or find a game to play that they are actually competent to participate in. Sheesh. Josh channeling the impatience of matt morgan today, apparently

Ankur Gupta wrote: >> On 27 jun, 14:26, Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: >>>>> Excessive. Periods. Rock. >>> >>>> About 50% of the word's population disagrees, i'm afraid. >>> >>> I'm comfortable with them all being wrong. >> >> I know it was a stupid pun, but I don't get your answer... > > Ok, see, about 50% of the world disagrees that excessive periods rock. I think Jeroen meant periods in another sense. Like PMS, you know? best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auct...@superfuncards.com

In article <5efge0F...@mid.individual.net>, "Joshua Duffin" <jtduf...@gmail.DOT.com> wrote: > But that never happens. ("Never", here, meaning "virtually never".) Emiliano seems to indicate that it happens around him with regularity. > If it's really going to take those guys 30 minutes to hammer out a deal, > they need to either find their brains wherever they left them, or find a > game to play that they are actually competent to participate in. I'd think that this was the case as well. But then other folks seem to feel that dealmaking is so important and so instrumental to the game that this sort of thing (dealing for an amount of time that I would personally find absurd) that it is simply my unwillingness to participate in "that part of the game" that makes it unacceptable to me, not the time spent. That being said, yeah, ok, I'm done. I'm no longer accomplishing anything (if I ever was, other than rilling up Dave :-) and even though I am on vacation, I probably should do something useful. Like paint my window trim or build my JOL deck. White Flag: Hoisted! > Josh > > channeling the impatience of matt morgan today, apparently Ya know, I accidentally listend to Matt's album yesterday for, like, 5 hours straight, and man, it is freaking awsome. I mean, yeah, ok, the singer seems to be doing her best to channel Corrin Tucker, so it is kind of like they were sitting around in a room one day and said "Hmm. How do we make a band that *Peter* will love?", but in any case, yeah. Fantastic! [ quoted text not captured ]

>> Meh. Judgement should be used. It's pretty simple. > > See, that is the problem. I don't know if you have been following all > this absurd discussion, but all indications are that, unless obvious > stalling is going on, judgement *can't* be used, and if 3 people are > earnestly spending half an hour hammering out a deal, they are perfectly > in their rights to do so. I haven't been following the absurd discussion, but yes, it is absurd. Half an hour? Are they jerking each other off underneath the table in sequence? I have one phrase for this: Beatings. In. Parking. Lot. > Which strikes me as a vast impediment to playing the game. Where other > folks are like "that is playing the game". > > And thus, madness ensues. You go tell them bitches that they're bitches. Ankur Play. The. Game.

>>>>> About 50% of the word's population disagrees, i'm afraid. >>>> >>>> I'm comfortable with them all being wrong. >>> >>> I know it was a stupid pun, but I don't get your answer... >> >> Ok, see, about 50% of the world disagrees that excessive periods rock. > > I think Jeroen meant periods in another sense. Like PMS, you know? Oooooh. I didn't get his pun. :) Ankur Play. The. Game. Don't. Piss. Off. Women.

Peter D Bakija wrote: > In article <Pine.LNX.4.63.07...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu>, > Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > >> Meh. Judgement should be used. It's pretty simple. > > See, that is the problem. I don't know if you have been following all > this absurd discussion, but all indications are that, unless obvious > stalling is going on, judgement *can't* be used, Quite the contrary. Those who have been following have seen that judgment is allowed. Perhaps you are misreading some of the set-ups. The set-ups that receive a clear answer (meaning an answer that doesn't invoke judgment calls, such as the answer: "playing the game is allowed") all involve the assumption that the activity is proper (not stalling). > and if 3 people are > earnestly spending half an hour hammering out a deal, they are perfectly > in their rights to do so. Yes, if they are not stalling, they are free to play the game in a legal manner.

In message <pdb6-9CD7B9.1...@news-server.stny.rr.com>, Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> writes: >In article <5efge0F...@mid.individual.net>, > "Joshua Duffin" <jtduf...@gmail.DOT.com> wrote: > >> But that never happens. ("Never", here, meaning "virtually never".) > >Emiliano seems to indicate that it happens around him with regularity. Emiliano has indicated that players are allowed to spend that amount of time doing so. I've not yet seen him indicate why he thinks this is timely. The perceived problem may simply be a judge not enforcing the existing rules on slow play. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

James Coupe wrote: > In message <pdb6-9CD7B9.1...@news-server.stny.rr.com>, > Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> writes: >> In article <5efge0F...@mid.individual.net>, >> "Joshua Duffin" <jtduf...@gmail.DOT.com> wrote: >> >>> But that never happens. ("Never", here, meaning "virtually never".) >> >> Emiliano seems to indicate that it happens around him with >> regularity. > > Emiliano has indicated that players are allowed to spend that amount > of time doing so. > > I've not yet seen him indicate why he thinks this is timely. > > The perceived problem may simply be a judge not enforcing the existing > rules on slow play. I already pointed, in fact, but you either don't understad or you won't do that - It's not slow play. It's the game as it stands now: in front of complicated situations, players do need actually time to discuss the would be deal and possible set up - that consumes time. As LSJ confirmed, as long as that is done by the PTW and not for stalling, it's legal play, it's part of the game, and players have to be left to play it. Emiliano

On 4 jul, 09:05, "Tetragrammaton" <nos...@none.com> wrote: > James Coupe wrote: > > In message <pdb6-9CD7B9.12381327062...@news-server.stny.rr.com>, > > Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> writes: > >> In article <5efge0F37o5v...@mid.individual.net>, > >> "Joshua Duffin" <jtduffin...@gmail.DOT.com> wrote: > > >>> But that never happens. ("Never", here, meaning "virtually never".) > > >> Emiliano seems to indicate that it happens around him with > >> regularity. > > > Emiliano has indicated that players are allowed to spend that amount > > of time doing so. > > > I've not yet seen him indicate why he thinks this is timely. > > > The perceived problem may simply be a judge not enforcing the existing > > rules on slow play. > > I already pointed, in fact, but you either don't understad or you won't do > that - > It's not slow play. It can be, that's his point. I think you don't understand what he's saying. > It's the game as it stands now: in front of complicated situations, > players do need actually time to discuss the would be deal and > possible set up - that consumes time. > As LSJ confirmed, as long as that is done by the PTW and not for stalling, slow play and stalling are not the same thing, per se. > it's legal play, it's part of the game, and players have to be left to play > it. Unless the judge thinks they are not doing it in a timely fashion. Wich you obviously don't because otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with the rules as they are.

[ quoted text not captured ] "Timely fashion" , unless time will be somewhat quantified, implies a subjective perception - as long as they debate for granting themselves the best set up in front of a complicated deal, they have to be left discussing - that can't take all the round, granted, but can take a considerable amount of time. > Wich you obviously don't because otherwise you wouldn't have a problem > with the rules as they are. I do actually. Or, please support your blame with some kind of quantification of time. Emiliano

Jeroen wrote: > On 4 jul, 13:08, "Tetragrammaton" <nos...@none.com> wrote: >> Jeroen wrote: >>> On 4 jul, 09:05, "Tetragrammaton" <nos...@none.com> wrote: >>>> James Coupe wrote: >>>>> In message <pdb6-9CD7B9.12381327062...@news-server.stny.rr.com>, >>>>> Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> writes: >>>>>> In article <5efge0F37o5v...@mid.individual.net>, >>>>>> "Joshua Duffin" <jtduffin...@gmail.DOT.com> wrote: >> > > Judgement. That is not a quantification - A judgement it's exaclty what's the judge is supposed to do (judging) - as stated, as long as players deals by the ptw and to reach the best set up for themselves (and not to stalling the game), the judge ins't supposed to step in, as much as the judge isn't supposed to step in when a player takes his long turn with the time needed for resolving 10 combats with a weenie rush, or whatever the like.

In message <WfMii.40351$y05....@tornado.fastwebnet.it>, Tetragrammaton <nos...@none.com> writes: >That is not a quantification - A judgement it's exaclty what's the judge is >supposed to do (judging) - as stated, as long as players deals by the >ptw and to reach the best set up for themselves (and not to stalling the >game), >the judge ins't supposed to step in, As previously stated, you are wrong. See: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=veknRules 5.3. Slow Play Players must take their turns in a timely fashion. Whereas taking a reasonable amount of time to think through game strategy is acceptable, playing excessively slowly or stalling for time is not. If a judge determines that a player is stalling for time or playing excessively slowly at any point during the tournament, the responsible player will be subject to the appropriate provisions of the V:EKN Penalty Guidelines. Playing excessively slowly is not the same as stalling. (This is also confirmed by the Judges Guidelines.) If the players play excessively slowly, the judge steps in, as required by 5.3. It does not matter if they are stalling or not. How do you tell if a player (or players) are being excessively slow? Judgement. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > In message <WfMii.40351$y05....@tornado.fastwebnet.it>, > Tetragrammaton <nos...@none.com> writes: >> That is not a quantification - A judgement it's exaclty what's the >> judge is supposed to do (judging) - as stated, as long as players >> deals by the >> ptw and to reach the best set up for themselves (and not to stalling >> the game), >> the judge ins't supposed to step in, > > As previously stated, you are wrong. > No, i am not. > See: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=veknRules > > 5.3. Slow Play > > Players must take their turns in a timely fashion. Whereas > taking a reasonable amount of time to think through game > strategy is acceptable, playing excessively slowly or stalling > for time is not. If a judge determines that a player is > stalling for time or playing excessively slowly at any point > during the tournament, the responsible player will be subject > to the appropriate provisions of the V:EKN Penalty Guidelines. > > Playing excessively slowly is not the same as stalling. Please read carrefully that sentence. "if a judge determines that *a* player" A deals does not involve just "one player taking his/her turn" - it involves several players at the table arguing and counter-dealing, eventually. You can be the target of a deal, during your turn, even if you do not propose it yourself. And the condition for a judge about "if a player" (singular) can't cover, of course, the complexities implied in a table talk split/vps split discussion between *several* players, that's granted. Question is simpler, i think - unless you're adressing some kind of time limit even for earnestly table talks, done following the ptw rule (and not for stalling or draining away time purposely), you're plain wrong: you cant' step in the deal process as a judge, as much as you can't step in when a player plays a deck that drains away more time than an average deck, as the already given example of a weenie rush, an imbued deck with lots of permanent on the table, and so on. > (This is also > confirmed by the Judges Guidelines.) If the players play excessively > slowly, the judge steps in, as required by 5.3. It does not matter if > they are stalling or not. Add slow play then, if oyu like. Question is the same, there's no slow play on purpose with a complicated table talk set up. Unless, again, you want some kind of predetermined amount of time for that. > > How do you tell if a player (or players) are being excessively slow? > Judgement. Indeed.