OK Snakeman you have convinced me of the fair brush being applied here to these entries....I mean it was set in stne before the game started right?...and of course once the game's started that's it it terms of rule changes..snake tradition I believe..just a sec my second, Lionel Hutz is rushing towards me crying "we got him, we got him"...sec...
ok re: rule changes pre/post game...
Sypher
Moderator
(SnakeMaster, London-UK) posted 12-13-2000 02:26 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After much debate and bending of the rules, here are the scores after Day 2...
...umm sounds like there is rsome room for negiotiation on rules there...
whoa there just a sec ...good work Lionel...ok Sypher re: double names of snakes...in reply to this post...
"Mamaja
Member
(Prairie Village, KS US) posted 12-12-2000 10:25 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't Karma's entry for today a repeat of Sue's entry yesterday???
...did u say this...
"Sypher
Moderator
(SnakeMaster, London-UK) posted 12-12-2000 10:28 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, Karma's entry is not a repeat of Sue's.
Sue's was Invalid due to the rule about double entries.
There is a snake with just the one word at the end....therefore a totally different snake.. "
I suppose the bit i am alluding to here is the statement, by you is
"......There is a snake with just the one word at the end....therefore a totally different snake.. "
so if u admit that the two snakes are completly different snakes then how can it be that a possible answer to this subject could be disallowed ?.... I mean A) It hasn't been posted by someone else already , that would of been a completly different snake as you say, and B)It is apparently a snake (and therfore eligible) ....how can one snake be deemed good and another no good due to it's unfortunately repititive monniker?....I mean i can understand if u say "Only Snakes with one or two word entries are eligible"...but to rule out a snake on syntex sounds, well damn it it sounds unconstitutional and definitly "not cricket"...i see many entries that have been deemed "legal" which have recurring syntex,...please note I am not casting dispersions or challenging any of the following entries....just trying to get some snake justice....
See the "di" clearly doubled up...
Thunder2's entry yesterday
Typhlopidae Xenotyphlops grandidieri
and this from the " Golden-haired child" from Sydanee on Dec 12..
look for the way that the "er" has been used twice..
Macrovipera lebetina transmediterranea
and this one from the Head Adder yourself...a blantant doubling up of the letters "ph" in this entry from tyhe same day..
"Ramphotyphlops polygrammicus"
...and there are more I can list if you need further evidence...
I appeal to your non-Tottenham side to do the right thing as the snakemaster and allow both mine and Sue's entry to pass, although I would like to point out that Sue has in now been involved with this post and I only mention you Sue coz if I get the points then you should too....please do not let Sue feel the brunt of the certain snake ramifications for questioning the decision of the snake master....
------------------
If all the worlds wealth were divided between every man, woman & child
presently alive on the planet, we would all have $13 million a piece.
**************************************************
$13 Million for every single Human....
**************************************************