Yet Another Composition Rule Puzzle
Richard Heathfield
one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has occurred. I have not
checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily longwinded sentences
unlikely.
Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: normal service will be restored as soon as possible. Please do not
adjust your email clients.
Mark P
> I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles. Here is
> one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has occurred. I have not
> checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily longwinded sentences
> unlikely.
>
> Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
>
I found the hint excessively generous. I believe this paragraph meets
all requirements. However I'm uncertain that it's a "retort". I'll
call it a "reply". (I realize you were unable to designate likewise.)
Mark
Tim S Roberts
"Mark P" <use...@fall2005REMOVE.fastmailCAPS.fm> wrote in message
news:YTA6h.15603$B31....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
Isn't it funny - I reached the solution numerically. And this is definitely
a reply! But would also qualify as a retort!
Tim
Richard Heathfield
I constantly misunderestimate[1] the ingenuity of recpuzzlers! Naturally,
your reply is correct.
[1] I hope my usage doesn't constitute patent infringement.
Richard Heathfield
My last sentence had a curious twist. I noticed the property only *after*
composing it!
CBFalconer
>
> I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles.
> Here is one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has
> occurred. I have not checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily
> longwinded sentences unlikely.
>
> Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
Yes. I can. I have.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
No ands or commas.
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
rthe...@hotmail.com
Richard Heathfield wrote:
> I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles. Here is
> one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has occurred. I have not
> checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily longwinded sentences
> unlikely.
>
> Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
Yes.
Do you want a longer reply?
Roy
ken
Making a lengthy legitimate response certainly tests limitations of
one's organisational capabilities, resourcefulness, and determination.
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>> I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles.
>> Here is one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has
>> occurred. I have not checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily
>> longwinded sentences unlikely.
>>
>> Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
>
> Yes. I can. I have.
<snip>
> No ands or commas.
Not quite that elementary, my friend. But your observation is accurate, I
agree. Nevertheless, commas are acceptable. Also, 'and' is allowed.
Richard Heathfield
That is one! :-)
Clearly, a longer reply demonstrates knowledge of the solution less
ambiguously.
Richard Heathfield
<snip>
> Making a lengthy legitimate response certainly tests limitations of
> one's organisational capabilities, resourcefulness, and determination.
Bravo, ken! Such prestilexitation's a delight to behold.
Arthur J. O'Dwyer
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
> I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles. Here is
> one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has occurred. I have not
> checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily longwinded sentences
> unlikely.
>
> Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
I can; this is extra simple! Even I could figure it out! Still in the
dark /a propos/ puzzles advanced elsewhere.
My first idea was a stricter guideline; however, simplicity proved
superior. In this reply I follow the tougher protocol.
-Arthur
Richard Heathfield
> My first idea was a stricter guideline; however, simplicity proved
> superior.
Simplicity notwithstanding, that sentence fails to follow the pattern I
premeditated.
Alan Morgan
Richard Heathfield <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles. Here is
>one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has occurred. I have not
>checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily longwinded sentences
>unlikely.
>
>Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
I really hope somebody is archiving these and collecting
quality puzzlements. Yes? No? I enjoy them greatly, but
so frustrating!
(FYI: first sentence matches more demanding constraint)
Alan
--
Defendit numerus
Arthur J. O'Dwyer
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
>> My first idea was a stricter guideline; however, simplicity proved
>> superior.
>
> Simplicity notwithstanding, that sentence fails to follow the pattern I
> premeditated.
I messed up --- too fast altering strikes again! "My first idea was a
stricter guideline; however, simplicity proved predominant."
-Arthur
Richard Heathfield
>
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Arthur J. O'Dwyer said:
>>
>>> My first idea was a stricter guideline; however, simplicity proved
>>> superior.
>>
>> Simplicity notwithstanding, that sentence fails to follow the pattern I
>> premeditated.
>
> I messed up --- too fast altering strikes again! "My first idea was a
> stricter guideline; however, simplicity proved predominant."
Yes, that is a skilful shift, Arthur - superbly, perfectly conforming.
Ed Murphy
> I have not tried deciphering recent composition metarule puzzles. Here is
> one I designed myself. I trust no rule duplication has occurred. I have not
> checked. My simple rule renders extraordinarily longwinded sentences
> unlikely.
>
> Can anybody construct a retort that observes my rules?
What /is/ the answer to this one, anyhow?
Richard Heathfield
S
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
S
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
S
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
Oops, sorry, Ed. The rule is simple. Enumerate the letters within each
sentence's words. Within a sentence, no repeats are permitted.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Ed Murphy
So one cannot use, for instance, "eat" and its past-tense form in the
same sentence? For once, I appear to have avoided the mines, even not
understanding their nature.
Richard Heathfield
Right. That would violate the... oh, stuff it. Yes, the rule was simply that
each word in the sentence must have a number of letters in it that is not
duplicated by any other word, and this paragraph contains several
violations of that rule.