|
|
| Author |
Message |
orinoco
|
|
Questions, anyone?
| 
Jun 25 13:46 UTC 1996 |
The object of this game is to have a coherent conversation (difficult enough
with some grexers I know), while speaking only in questions. Non-sequiturs
("Isn't it a nice day?" "wouldn't you rather discuss penguins?"), repetitions
("What's your name?" "What's *your* name?"), and statements ("My name's Dan")
are illegal.
In "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead", a more complex version, with
scoring, is played. Although we will not be keeping score, this version
having more than two players, we will follow their convention of restarting
play after each "foul".
So...anyone care to play?
|
| 680 responses total. |
robh
|
|
response 1 of 680:
|
Jun 25 14:32 UTC 1996 |
Why would anyone want to play a game like this?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 2 of 680:
|
Jun 25 19:17 UTC 1996 |
What other games are like this?
|
gandalf
|
|
response 3 of 680:
|
Jun 25 23:29 UTC 1996 |
Is this as stupid as I think it is???
|
rcurl
|
|
response 4 of 680:
|
Jun 26 00:18 UTC 1996 |
If this is as stupid as you think it is, is there any way to reduce
its stupidity?
|
robh
|
|
response 5 of 680:
|
Jun 26 14:07 UTC 1996 |
How does gandalf define "stupidity"?
|
gandalf
|
|
response 6 of 680:
|
Jun 26 16:31 UTC 1996 |
Who knows?
|
orinoco
|
|
response 7 of 680:
|
Jun 26 17:20 UTC 1996 |
shouldn't gandalf know how he defines stupidity?
|
robh
|
|
response 8 of 680:
|
Jun 26 18:18 UTC 1996 |
Does gandalf have Alzheimer's?
|
rywfol
|
|
response 9 of 680:
|
Jun 28 08:03 UTC 1996 |
Shouldn't Alzheimer have Alzheimer's and Gandalf have Gandalf's?
|
orinoco
|
|
response 10 of 680:
|
Jun 28 13:31 UTC 1996 |
And if Gandalf does have Alzheimer's, shouldn't he be giving it back?
|
kain
|
|
response 11 of 680:
|
Jun 28 16:04 UTC 1996 |
what if gandlaf needs alzheimer's?
|
robh
|
|
response 12 of 680:
|
Jun 28 17:57 UTC 1996 |
Why would anyone need Alzheimer's?
|
orinoco
|
|
response 13 of 680:
|
Jun 28 18:31 UTC 1996 |
Why should anyone care if anyone else needs alzheimer's?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 14 of 680:
|
Jun 28 19:55 UTC 1996 |
Didn't someone say the object of this game is to have a coherent conversation?
|
robh
|
|
response 15 of 680:
|
Jun 29 15:56 UTC 1996 |
Did you really think we were going to follow the rules?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 16 of 680:
|
Jun 29 19:40 UTC 1996 |
If we aren't following the rules, why is everyone carrying on the
discussion in this funny way?
|
robh
|
|
response 17 of 680:
|
Jun 30 07:17 UTC 1996 |
Would computer geeks like us have anything better to do?
|
orinoco
|
|
response 18 of 680:
|
Jul 6 20:41 UTC 1996 |
Are you implying that I'm a computer geek?
|
robh
|
|
response 19 of 680:
|
Jul 6 22:00 UTC 1996 |
Are you putting words in my mouth?
|
scott
|
|
response 20 of 680:
|
Jul 6 23:57 UTC 1996 |
Hey, are you guys going to *fight* over this?
|
robh
|
|
response 21 of 680:
|
Jul 7 04:17 UTC 1996 |
Do you think I'm the sort of fellow who backs off from a fight?
|
anne
|
|
response 22 of 680:
|
Jul 15 20:04 UTC 1996 |
Can we try to avoid fighting?
|
robh
|
|
response 23 of 680:
|
Jul 16 08:23 UTC 1996 |
Can't we all just get along?
|
anne
|
|
response 24 of 680:
|
Jul 16 15:55 UTC 1996 |
Wanna give it a try?
|