• Re: CalculaTrivia?

    From Marik Chrisman@21:1/5 to Mark Brader on Tue Aug 9 14:25:58 2022
    On Sunday, January 29, 1995 at 5:33:02 AM UTC-5, Mark Brader wrote:
    The Net? Sounds like cheating to me.

    In what way? Team solving is certainly not cheating, and I use every reference at my disposal to solve. The first time I was shocked to
    find that many solvers had made calls to assorted experts, etc., but
    that is a part of the game.
    Yes it is; I shouldn't have said "cheating", which would imply a
    violation of contest rules. What really concerns me is violation of netiquette. In past Games contests, we have seen things like:
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: sci.math
    Subject: dodecahedron
    Lines: 1
    How many vertices does a dodecahedron have? Thanks.
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
    Subject: Jimmy Stewart
    Lines: 1
    What was the year of Jimmy Stewart's first feature film? Thanks.
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: sci.astro,alt.science.planetary
    Subject: Saturn's moons
    Lines: 1
    How many moons does Saturn have? Thanks.
    I'd like to think that solving a Calculatrivia should require a bit more
    work than identifying 40 newsgroups to post to, and that was why my first reaction was to call this sort of thing cheating. With messages of the
    sort illustrated above -- and they truly are representation of some that we've seen -- I think it's reasonable to call them abuse of Usenet, since they conceal the poster's intent to profit monetarily by the answer.
    If people are honest about what they're doing, that's different. And if
    the intent was not to refer to Usenet postings, *that's* different.
    May I suggest that further discussion migrate (with sufficient context)
    to rec.puzzles?
    ObCrossword:
    Unwieldy prize using electric power (7)

    AWKWARD (AWARD + KW)
    --
    Mark Brader, m...@sq.com | "Where is down special?" ... "Good."
    SoftQuad Inc., Toronto | "Do you refuse to answer my question?" "Don't know." This article is in the public domain.

    Will Shortz killed Eugene T. Maleska

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marik Chrisman@21:1/5 to Mark Brader on Tue Aug 9 14:19:01 2022
    On Sunday, January 29, 1995 at 5:33:02 AM UTC-5, Mark Brader wrote:
    The Net? Sounds like cheating to me.

    In what way? Team solving is certainly not cheating, and I use every reference at my disposal to solve. The first time I was shocked to
    find that many solvers had made calls to assorted experts, etc., but
    that is a part of the game.
    Yes it is; I shouldn't have said "cheating", which would imply a
    violation of contest rules. What really concerns me is violation of netiquette. In past Games contests, we have seen things like:
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: sci.math
    Subject: dodecahedron
    Lines: 1
    How many vertices does a dodecahedron have? Thanks.
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
    Subject: Jimmy Stewart
    Lines: 1
    What was the year of Jimmy Stewart's first feature film? Thanks.
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: sci.astro,alt.science.planetary
    Subject: Saturn's moons
    Lines: 1
    How many moons does Saturn have? Thanks.
    I'd like to think that solving a Calculatrivia should require a bit more
    work than identifying 40 newsgroups to post to, and that was why my first reaction was to call this sort of thing cheating. With messages of the
    sort illustrated above -- and they truly are representation of some that we've seen -- I think it's reasonable to call them abuse of Usenet, since they conceal the poster's intent to profit monetarily by the answer.
    If people are honest about what they're doing, that's different. And if
    the intent was not to refer to Usenet postings, *that's* different.
    May I suggest that further discussion migrate (with sufficient context)
    to rec.puzzles?
    ObCrossword:
    Unwieldy prize using electric power (7)

    AWKWARD (AWARD + KW)
    --
    Mark Brader, m...@sq.com | "Where is down special?" ... "Good."
    SoftQuad Inc., Toronto | "Do you refuse to answer my question?" "Don't know." This article is in the public domain.

    Yea fuck that guy man.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ryan Teschke@21:1/5 to Marik Chrisman on Wed Aug 10 14:08:57 2022
    On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:25:59 PM UTC-4, Marik Chrisman wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 1995 at 5:33:02 AM UTC-5, Mark Brader wrote:
    The Net? Sounds like cheating to me.

    In what way? Team solving is certainly not cheating, and I use every reference at my disposal to solve. The first time I was shocked to
    find that many solvers had made calls to assorted experts, etc., but that is a part of the game.
    Yes it is; I shouldn't have said "cheating", which would imply a
    violation of contest rules. What really concerns me is violation of netiquette. In past Games contests, we have seen things like:
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: sci.math
    Subject: dodecahedron
    Lines: 1
    How many vertices does a dodecahedron have? Thanks.
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
    Subject: Jimmy Stewart
    Lines: 1
    What was the year of Jimmy Stewart's first feature film? Thanks.
    From: x...@abc.def.ghi.edu (Xavier Y. Ziggurat)
    Newsgroups: sci.astro,alt.science.planetary
    Subject: Saturn's moons
    Lines: 1
    How many moons does Saturn have? Thanks.
    I'd like to think that solving a Calculatrivia should require a bit more work than identifying 40 newsgroups to post to, and that was why my first reaction was to call this sort of thing cheating. With messages of the sort illustrated above -- and they truly are representation of some that we've seen -- I think it's reasonable to call them abuse of Usenet, since they conceal the poster's intent to profit monetarily by the answer.
    If people are honest about what they're doing, that's different. And if the intent was not to refer to Usenet postings, *that's* different.
    May I suggest that further discussion migrate (with sufficient context)
    to rec.puzzles?
    ObCrossword:
    Unwieldy prize using electric power (7)

    AWKWARD (AWARD + KW)
    --
    Mark Brader, m...@sq.com | "Where is down special?" ... "Good."
    SoftQuad Inc., Toronto | "Do you refuse to answer my question?" "Don't know."
    This article is in the public domain.
    Will Shortz killed Eugene T. Maleska
    I am glad to see so may people who agree!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)