Do you feel lucky?

[Gary Lynch]

C. During any players turn in addition to making a proposal they may choose to gamble any number thier points against any number of other players. H.

E. All players involved choose a number between 1 and 100 and email it in private to Tom. A. Tom will then use a random number generator and post the results. T.

Y .The player who guessed closest wins all the points gambled. F. If the player making the challange wins they also receive a 15 point bonus. A.

C. Players may not gamble more points than they or any opponent have. E.

[Dan Barrett]

Indeed, how the fuck did none of us notice this?!

I put it in binary in white text on one of my previous threads, but that line got removed because of the tag... :(

Thomas David Baker said:

Weak. Sauce.

[Thomas David Baker]

type [Topic]
title [Do you feel lucky?]
createdDate [2010-03-11T01:13:10.499Z]
updatedDate [2010-03-17T09:49:08.545Z]

type [Comment]
description [Why??? ...]
createdDate [2010-03-17T00:00:02.593Z]


Gary Lynch said:

Why???
Thomas David Baker said:

Weak. Sauce.

[Gary Lynch]

Hey it's called cheatyface for a reason :)

if this is unallowed then I suggest you remove the points scored by people on your turn as their had allready been replies before you added in a large number of card names.

Thomas David Baker said:

type [Topic] title [Do you feel lucky?] createdDate [2010-03-11T01:13:10.499Z]
updatedDate [2010-03-17T09:49:08.545Z]

type [Comment]
description [Why??? ...]
createdDate [2010-03-17T00:00:02.593Z]


Gary Lynch said:

Why???
Thomas David Baker said:

Weak. Sauce.

[Thomas David Baker]

My reasoning is:

- We can't allow this in future in case someone edits their post to include enough cards to win the game at the last second then claims the points.
- Therefore we can't allow it now.

Does that seem reasonable?

I'm not quite sure if it follows that Kieran's points should also be rescinded or not.

Anyone have an opinion on all of this?

[Gary Lynch]

Sorry for the double post. Stupid phone.

Kieran should loose his points as the words were not already in your proposal when other people saw it so it seems unfair.

I didn't really expect this to work.

Thomas David Baker said:

My reasoning is: - We can't allow this in future in case someone edits their post to include enough cards to win the game at the last second then claims the points.
- Therefore we can't allow it now.

Does that seem reasonable?

I'm not quite sure if it follows that Kieran's points should also be rescinded or not.

Anyone have an opinion on all of this?

[Dan Barrett]

Ahh, now i see why none of us missed it!

Yea, i'm with Tom on this i'm afraid Gary. What did Kieran do?

Thomas David Baker said:

My reasoning is:

- We can't allow this in future in case someone edits their post to include enough cards to win the game at the last second then claims the points.
- Therefore we can't allow it now.

Does that seem reasonable?

I'm not quite sure if it follows that Kieran's points should also be rescinded or not.

Anyone have an opinion on all of this?

[Gary Lynch]

Also as you said you can't allow it now means it shouldn't have been allowed before.

If Kieran hadn't spotted all your words you would have scored a lit of points in the same way I have just been disallowed

Gary Lynch said:

Sorry for the double post. Stupid phone. Kieran should loose his points as the words were not already in your proposal when other people saw it so it seems unfair.

I didn't really expect this to work.

Thomas David Baker said:

My reasoning is: - We can't allow this in future in case someone edits their post to include enough cards to win the game at the last second then claims the points. - Therefore we can't allow it now.

Does that seem reasonable?

I'm not quite sure if it follows that Kieran's points should also be rescinded or not.

Anyone have an opinion on all of this?

[Gary Lynch]

It wasn't what kieran did it wad what Tom did. When he originaly made his post it said Kieran and ben can't vote. It was then changed to a very long post containing lots of card names. Kieran was the first to see the change an scored 45 points. I believe Tom got 1 or 2 as well.

As the words were not in his original post they should not be available for scoring.

Dan Barrett said:

Ahh, now i see why none of us missed it! Yea, i'm with Tom on this i'm afraid Gary. What did Kieran do?

Thomas David Baker said:

My reasoning is:

- We can't allow this in future in case someone edits their post to include enough cards to win the game at the last second then claims the points.
- Therefore we can't allow it now.

Does that seem reasonable?

I'm not quite sure if it follows that Kieran's points should also be rescinded or not.

Anyone have an opinion on all of this?

[Paul Young]

I was gonna point out it was Toms third post and so kierans bonus points should be deducted. So if we need to vote on it i say gary and kieran should not get those bonus points. It allows too much abuse.

[Ben Titmarsh]

Tom is it possible to lock opening posts so that we can avoid this happening in the future? If anyone needs to ammend their proposal for genuine reasons, they can do it in the body of the thread.

[Kieran Symington]

I knew there was something suspicious about this! It just seemed way too obvious for everyone to have missed. Nice try, though - definately in the spirit of cheating to victory!

Unsurprisingly, I think I should still get my points from Tom's proposal. The situations are completely different. Tom's change was a forced one as his proposal had to be amended due to objections - following the procedure of rule 111, meaning that the voting was reopened from when he proposed the amended rule. Voting was already closed on this proposal when Gary amended it in an attempt to rinse us.