in reply to Re^2: Perl Golf Ethics
in thread Perl Golf Ethics
Ton's brilliant magic formula won the original roman tournament by only three strokes. It is also worth noting from the fonality golf post mortem that TedYoung (presumably a first time golfer) produced a score of 116.50 before finding Ton's magic formula ... and that a score of 169.51 was enough to win a prize. Also, Jasper, who is part of the Perl golf community, "forgot" about Ton's magic formula, yet was still able to finish in ninth place with a score of 125.
So not knowing this formula did not "shut out" people from winning a prize. Moreover, searching for perl golf (via google and/or SuperSearch) would have uncovered the original perl golf roman numerals game easily enough (as Ted Young did).
Perhaps the rules should have been clarified to state, as Ton says, that golfers are expected to research and learn from prior art and that it is not cheating to do so.
In summary, I do not blame Fonality for this and, despite the prior roman art, the wide range of scores and creative approaches showed that there was a lot of golf played in this competition outside the magic formula.
Re^3: Perl Golf Ethics
Replies are listed 'Best First'.
|Re^4: Perl Golf Ethics|
by petdance (Parson) on Jan 03, 2007 at 02:49 UTC