Forum for Strange Living Shapes
request revert [#2888]
To 172.0.9.139 regarding latest diff
Please make a greater effort to understand why something might be interesting even if it is desperately wrong, obscure, or at first reading a very mild statement. Some of the greatest sentences in history have these qualities. These examples are of plenty of interest to people interested in the mechanics of living shapes e.g. programmers, or looking for, as it were, arcana. (Specialized knowledge or detail that is mysterious to the average person:) Well within the parameters of the page - if not mysterious, strange. If not that, consider the philosophy of a wiki. Sorry if this is confrontational, but I want to spend less time defending some content that I remember taking some pleasure from.
It is a wiki, if you feel strongly about something -> edit it. A revert is the clearest possible statement of opinion, as long as people don't end up reverting back and forth everything is fine.
P.S. Personally, I would like to present living and dead shapes always with surrounding stones. It is an infinite source of confusion to beginners, when people present dead shapes without surrounding stones. I changed some examples to small board with surrounding and added the most arcane shape -> Eternal Life.
Thumbs up to this. A lot of the example shapes (not just on this page) need surrounding stones.
I don't know how to revert or retrieve the content in version...37? Isn't there a quick way to do that for the librarian?
See: Reviving Pages. You can indeed only revive the last version and only if you change yourself into deshi, i.e. experienced user. Then, however, you don't need outside help to do so. And you can always get by with the help of the page diff if you bother to remove "- " or "+ ".
Dear Slarty,
Please explain what you take to be mysterious about the shapes I deleted (one of which tapir restored). If you're 2d, as your user profile says, you should be able to understand in a glance why some of these "arcana" might be considered unusual (all the eyes are false) whereas others are completely normal (two complete eyes).
If this shape is "arcana":
![[Diagram]](diagrams/5/2a120a83fb0632a17e2a963a88f762a0.png)
![[Diagram]](diagrams/42/6cc9cb921407066ff96c5f59e641ff98.png)
![[Diagram]](diagrams/22/e57e56129320c120ad35ebdd058dd3d4.png)
All the eyes in the middle are false - the one in the corner has no additional stones but is a real eye. This isn't a surprise if you look at it with some understanding, but just by the visuals people might be surprised that similarly arranged stones produce an eye in the corner. Not sure I fancy this explanation myself, well :)
The difference is that the living "group" is composed of multiple units. The example with four groups sharing two eyes is the best. The example with an arbitrary number of false eyes is perhaps belaboring the point.
![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")