Re: [Rails-devel] 18EU minor initial sale round bugs

[Chris S. <chr...@gm...>]

I get the feeling we've already spent more time discussing it than it would
have taken to implement it.

At any rate, if any of the developers other than Erik would care to make the
change, it would be appreciated.  I note that the UI is already complicated
by the implementation of the "select, no bid" option and this would simply
be extending that option to the following players.

--
Chris

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.


On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Erik Vos <eri...@xs...> wrote:

>  I consider it an immaterial difference in rules wording, that does not
> merit complicating the UI. But apparently opinions differ. I won't oppose
> such a change, but I have better things to spend my time on.
>
> Erik.
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Chris Shaffer [mailto:chr...@gm...]
> *Sent:* Friday 25 June 2010 22:22
> *To:* Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> *Subject:* Re: [Rails-devel] 18EU minor initial sale round bugs
>
>   [EV] Indeed. I don't actually see why "Pass" would not cover "Decline to
>> bid" as well. I don't see any need to make that distinction.
>>
>
> It is problematic to explain rules when the interface does not match the
> terminology in the rules.  "Pass" has a specific meaning that is different
> from "decline to bid."
>
> I'm not sure why there would be resistance to having Rails match the game
> rules?  What good reason could there be for desiring a conflict in
> terminology?
>
> --
> Chris
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
> lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
>