My interpretation is that it does not violate the spock rule because although YOU think of it in terms of "a legal scrabble rule", any other player can find an equivalent (although terribly complex) rule and express it and be correct.
To use a simpler example, if I have the rule "all warm" in mind, and you express it as "only contains red and yellow", then we have equivalent rules, even tho we have not phrased it the same way. This is why there is a discussion between the master and the student to make sure they both understand each other.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Ryan Hackel
<deeplogic@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Since we're on the subject of the Spock Rule, I have a question from a recent session that I've been meaning to bring up.
The rule was "A koan has the Buddha Nature if the first letter of each color in a stack of pyramids, read from top to bottom, spells out a legit Scrabble-acceptable word." For example, a stack of pyramids with a "B"lue on top of an "O"range on top of a "G"reen spells "BOG" and thus has the Buddha Nature, while a stack of Red-Purple-Yellow spells 'RPY" and lacks the Buddha Nature.
Our cunning master argued that the BH was a function of the pyramids alone, independent of other things, and met the Spock Rule. I countered, saying that it falsely assumed that Spock can spell in the English language. (We also argued about whether purple also counted as violet.)
Bottom Line: Does a rule that involves spelling or language violate the Spock Rule?
---Ryan
_______________________________________________
Icehouse mailing list
Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse