MattArnold
1
3
5
MattArnold has not written any posts yet.
MattArnold has not written any posts yet.
This year's ACX Meetup everywhere in Detroit, MI.
Location: Outdoor seating area, Tenacity Craft, 8517 2nd Ave, Detroit, MI 48202. – ///helps.volunteered.ankle
Contact: matt.mattarn at gmail.com
Location: Outdoor seating area, Tenacity Craft, 8517 2nd Ave, Detroit, MI 48202. – ///helps.volunteered.ankle
The south wall of the building has the words "FISH NOOK" painted on it. There's street parking, as well as a parking lot down on the nearest corner. Look for us in the outdoor seating area with a sign for ACX.
After successful meetups on September 18 and October 9, we have decided to meet again at the same place on October 23.
Contact: matt.mattarn@gmail.com
Just a note to confirm that we are also meeting on Saturday, October 9 at 8pm at Tenacity Craft!
I just now realized that the day and time never made it on to this page. That's my fault; I sent it to the coordinator too late, and failed to notice it wasn't on the event page. It will be 8pm, Saturday September 18. I hope you can still make it!
This year's ACX Meetup everywhere in Detroit, MI.
Location: Outdoor seating area, Tenacity Craft, 8517 2nd Ave, Detroit, MI 48202. – ///helps.volunteered.ankle
After a successful meetup on September 18, we have decided to meet again at the same place on October 9.
Contact: matt.mattarn@gmail.com
Setting aside my intrinsic love for board games, the aspect of this discussion which fascinates me the most from a Less Wrong perspective is the use of words and categories. How do we arrive at a distinction between whether games are "variants" or "in the same family"?
Each category has strongly-bound traits and weakly-bound traits, such as "a matrix of regularly-spaced locations where game materials can be positioned". Even the category of abstract games has traits bound to it, like deterministic non-randomness.
Almost twenty years ago, I made several custom Shogi sets. The kanji characters meant nothing to me, and I had to look them up on a chart each time I took a... (read 438 more words →)
I'm interested in your concept of Chess feeling like it's complete, as if it has completed a platonic solid. You remedied its incompletions with the Cardinal and Marshal, but Omega Chess attempts to fill in the lack of leapers by introducing the Champion and Wizard. The design of Omega Chess was similarly motivated by this sense of completion, but it seems its design locates the gaps in different places from where the design of Grand Chess locates the gaps. Did you consider this? And how did you come to this conclusion?