Thread for your miscellaneous posts and discussions

[yujh]

it actually also creates four-way rakes so it is technically a breeder

Code: Select all

x = 20, y = 12, rule = 23/34678/8|0123578/3/8
4$2.ACAGE4.2A$.2A2C2G4.2A$2.2ADG$5.DAGE.G5.2A$5.2AGE.G5.2A!

A rake is a linear growth, hence not a breeder.

Edit: oops, sorry, my bad. nevermind then.

[get_Snacked]

Pretty sure they're talking about the quoted pattern

[CARuler]

it actually also creates four-way rakes so it is technically a breeder

Code: Select all

x = 20, y = 12, rule = 23/34678/8|0123578/3/8
4$2.ACAGE4.2A$.2A2C2G4.2A$2.2ADG$5.DAGE.G5.2A$5.2AGE.G5.2A!

A rake is a linear growth, hence not a breeder.

I was talking about this

Code: Select all

x = 14, y = 11, rule = 23/34678/8|0123578/3/8
9.A$8.3A$7.A2C2A$6.3A2EA$5.ACE2G2EA$4.4AC2.2A$3.ABEG4.2F$2.4ACEG2.EFE
$.2ADG6.C.C$2A2CGEG4.GA$.ACA!

[b-engine]

I was talking about this

Code: Select all

x = 14, y = 11, rule = 23/34678/8|0123578/3/8
9.A$8.3A$7.A2C2A$6.3A2EA$5.ACE2G2EA$4.4AC2.2A$3.ABEG4.2F$2.4ACEG2.EFE
$.2ADG6.C.C$2A2CGEG4.GA$.ACA!

Always remember to quote (and trim it if necessary) the post you're referring.

[confocaloid]

[...] Always remember to quote (and trim it if necessary) the post you're referring.

... which they did? viewtopic.php?p=191578#p191578
Also, it's not always necessary to quote a post one is referring to. E.g. when referring to an immediately preceding post, and especially in cases when that is for some reason inconvenient to quote (too long post, hard to trim due to large RLEs, etc.)

[b-engine]

Last Updated: August 11, 2024

Be kind, honest, and respectful. Assume the best of others. If their comments can be taken in a positive light, do so. Example:

I found a c/3 spaceship:

Code: Select all

RLE of dart

This is dart, don't spam the forums

It's known as dart, but fascinating rediscovery! What search program you had used to find it?

This is an English-language academic forum:

• Minor usage of other languages is acceptable; entire posts in other languages are not.

• Foul language/profanity is not acceptable here.

In order to keep the forums organized, please:

• Do not post multiple messages consecutively in the same topic (multipost). If your message is the most recent one in a topic, simply edit it (by hitting the pencil icon) if you have additional things to add.

• Do not post in topics (necropost) that have been inactive for over a year without good reason.

• Keep the formatting in your posts simple. The use of bold/italics/underline/font color/font size is not necessary in most cases, unless you absolutely need to highlight some thing.

• Quoting earlier posts is fine (and encouraged), but only quote text that is actually relevant to your post. Do not nest quotes too deeply (e.g., do not quote a quote of a quote of a quote). You can edit quote just as if they're normal text.

This is an academic forum, not a chat or microblogging platform. Please spend some time doing some research to familiarize yourself with what is and isn't already known about the Game of Life before posting your discoveries. Some places where you can look up what is known about Life include:

• Jason Summers' Life page (jslife)

• Mark Niemiec's pattern searcher.

• Catagolue's object identifier.

• Our own LifeWiki.

Some specific examples of discoveries that won't be of interest to this community include:

• A new still life.

• A methuselah that lasts fewer than 20,000 generations or is larger than a 20-by-20 box.

• An alternate stabilization for a reaction (unless it is smaller than the smallest currently known).

In OCA this also includes:

• A very explosive or stable rule.

• Any Life-like rule, unless it's a notable discovery in a specific rule.

• An orthogonal lightspeed puffer in a Generations rule.

If you decide to share your discovery with the forums, please do not post an image of the pattern. Instead, post the RLE code of the pattern within "pattern" tags. The easiest way to obtain the RLE code of a pattern is to select the pattern in Golly or LifeViewer and then copy it to your clipboard.
It's okay to use "LV" (i.e., LifeViewer) tags instead of "pattern" tags occasionally, especially when the topic of the post is an animation displayed by LifeViewer waypoint commands included in the RLE comments -- and especially when the [[ THUMBNAIL ]] command is used to reduce the amount of vertical space taken up by the viewer. But in most cases it's considered polite to let people make their own decisions about whether to invoke LifeViewer, by using predominantly "pattern" tags.
Readers of your post should have a rough idea of what to expect when they open your RLE in LifeViewer or copy it into another program. Outside of the Sandbox forum, at least briefly describe (or quote another post that describes) what pattern(s) you're posting. Descriptions also make it much easier to find patterns by searching the forums.

[confocaloid]

Last Updated: August 11, 2024
[...]

What are all differences between the existing rules and the above post? It would be easier to understand the suggestion if it listed or otherwise clearly highlighted the changes.

[...] If their comments can be taken in a positive light, do so. Example: [...]

There's an unfortunate caveat. It is counterproductive to read things too literally and AGF at all costs, at the expense of maintaining a reasonably healthy environment.

Sometimes it's fairly clear that someone isn't here to contribute something on-topic. While it's still technically possible to "take their comments in a positive light", it's also fairly clear that it's a bad idea to do anything that could encourage them to continue going offtopic, or interfering with attempts of others to have some productive on-topic conversation, or "doing unreasonable things just to see how others would react to them", and so on.

Some further reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... OV_pushing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superficial_charm
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Virtues/Politeness

[Sokwe]

[lengthy rant]

I have been busy lately and unfortunately did not see this. I hate to bring this topic back up, but I want it to be absolutely clear:

Any sort of discrimination based on gender or gender identity is a violation of rule 1 and will result in a ban. This includes intentionally referring to a person by pronouns that they have asked you not to use.

Do not test the boundaries on this. Do not discuss gender issues if you are not completely sure that you will not violate this rule.

[H. H. P. M. P. Cole]

[lengthy rant]

I have been busy lately and unfortunately did not see this. I hate to bring this topic back up, but I want it to be absolutely clear:

Any sort of discrimination based on gender or gender identity is a violation of rule 1 and will result in a ban. This includes intentionally referring to a person by pronouns that they have asked you not to use.

Do not test the boundaries on this. Do not discuss gender issues if you are not completely sure that you will not violate this rule.

Look, I'm terribly sorry. I promise this will not happen again. If I have offended any of the folks here, I am sorry if I unintentionally did.

I have learned from my mistake and have moved on.

[b-engine]

It can be proven that every polyplet SL in this rule is an SL in the rule B/S12V rotated 45 degrees.

PROOF: B2a3i allows every orthogonal line of cells to expand unless there is a stable covering covering the line. Hence all of the allowed moves are diagonal, hence, every polyplet SL in this rule is a SL in the rule B/S12V rotated 45 degrees.

(origin)

I can prove it false by suppressing B2a3i using this zigzag technique:

Code: Select all

x = 17, y = 13, rule = B2a3i/S12
bo5bo5bo$o5bo5bo$b2o4b2o4b2o$3bo5bo5bo$2bo3b3o3b3o$5bo5bo$6b2o4b4o$8b
o7bo$7bo5b3o$12bo$13b2o$15bo$14bo!

[pifricted]

https://conwaylife.com/wiki/Special:Log/newusers

08:46, 18 August 2024 User account Please give me the trusted flag so I can insert crap in CG's user pages talk contribs was created
08:45, 18 August 2024 User account Page crapper from explain xkcd talk contribs was created

Will mods delete them?

[Moosey]

I have learned from my mistake and have moved on.

Lying shamelessly to the moderators of *THIS* site to get out of trouble is a new low for you.

You should tell everyone about the conlang you're making that shows you very much haven't moved on from it, given that you use it primarily to, I guess, write rude things about me and smugly smile to yourself "that'll show her!":

cole_conlang_1.png (68.54 KiB) Viewed 317 times

cole_conlang_2.png (62.81 KiB) Viewed 317 times

or that over the past few days, you've been joining mostly-empty discord servers I'm in to generally be a nuisance to me:

please_move_on.png (105.8 KiB) Viewed 317 times

[confocaloid]

Is there any evidence of them being present among users visible in the screenshots (and not, say, someone else impersonating them)?

[Moosey]

Is there any evidence of them being present among users visible in the screenshots (and not, say, someone else impersonating them)?

Well, for one, it's the account that he was originally using when he got banned from the conwaylife discord for good, and in particular the only account that he could have possibly seen the comic I drew which he complained about here:

original_cole.png (462.06 KiB) Viewed 259 times

more_original_cole.png (213.13 KiB) Viewed 259 times

Also, plenty of people from the discord will vouch for the fact that he is cole.

He also admitted his identity as cole to nimblerogue earlier:

nimblerogue_re_cole.png (277.53 KiB) Viewed 254 times

[confocaloid]

A rather ridiculous thing about this I can see from my viewpoint, is that there are several people without any recent CA-related activity on the forums on one side, and someone with a significant amount of recent constructive CA-related activity on the other side.

The picture feels incomplete. Something is left unexplained.

[H. H. P. M. P. Cole]

A rather ridiculous thing about this I can see from my viewpoint, is that there are several people without any recent CA-related activity on the forums on one side, and someone with a significant amount of recent constructive CA-related activity on the other side.

The picture feels incomplete. Something is left unexplained.

I have a long list of CA-related activities I am planning on doing (which includes contributing to the spaceships in Lifelike CA project) but I can't seem to find time to do them (due to lack of computing resources).

Also, you are right. About the forums specifically, I personally don't understand why most people who have the majority of their posts in the Sandbox do not usually post in other fora.

[confocaloid]

These forums are about Conway's Life and other cellular automata. Are you here to contribute something on-topic?

[H. H. P. M. P. Cole]

These forums are about Conway's Life and other cellular automata. Are you here to contribute something on-topic?

Yes. And as a matter of fact, since this discussion is not about CA I will be disengaging from it.

[Moosey]

A rather ridiculous thing about this I can see from my viewpoint, is that there are several people without any recent CA-related activity on the forums on one side, and someone with a significant amount of recent constructive CA-related activity on the other side.

This is utterly irrelevant and just a plain genetic fallacy.
My recent inactivity here compared to Cole obviously doesn't mean I lose the privilege to call him out when he lies to the mods or tries to undertake a trolling campaign against me.

[confocaloid]

Your most recent post here looks like a clear violation of forum rule 1 to me.
Other people acting in bad ways do not give any excuse for you acting in bad ways.

[very]

cole, confocaloid, and anyone who disagrees with musi from now on immediately lose permission to request scourge searches connected to the charity engine & OSG backend when it comes out in ~1 month

[confocaloid]

A rather ridiculous thing about this I can see from my viewpoint, is that there are several people without any recent CA-related activity on the forums on one side, and someone with a significant amount of recent constructive CA-related activity on the other side.

The picture feels incomplete. Something is left unexplained.

A rather ridiculous thing about this I can see from my viewpoint, is that there are several people without any recent CA-related activity on the forums on one side, and someone with a significant amount of recent constructive CA-related activity on the other side.

This is utterly irrelevant and just a plain genetic fallacy. [...]

The relevance is in the part you didn't quote. As I wrote, the picture feels incomplete (to me). Something in this situation is left unexplained.
Maybe it should be left unexplained, as long as nobody pretends to understand it all.

Sometimes people with differing recent interests / recent activity find it hard to understand each other. I think this is relevant to the situation.

"Genetic fallacy" you mentioned is indeed irrelevant, on the other hand. I'm not dismissing or ignoring anything at the moment. I'm just finding it hard to understand the situation.

[KittyTac]

I was there for most of the debacle.

The gist of it is that Cole made a Discord post which was a lengthy, incoherent rant where he accused queer people of being mentally ill, including Moosey, to her face. He got muted on the Conwaylife Lounge, and was able to talk in the channel for the muted people that we set up. There, he constantly made similarly phobic statements, and accused the moderators of blasphemy when they mentioned God in any context. He eventually left the server and made the post on the previous page. After this he changed his avatar and username on Discord-- these previous posts with the "conlang" are the same account.

It's admittedly very ineffective harassment but it is harassment. He lied that he knows better now. And before that, he blatantly lied about being hacked (during during this "hack" he made NSFW comments to Drone Better), blatantly lied about having a son, and blatantly lied about being in university.

I have proof for each of these, can provide if needed.

[confocaloid]

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, this neither explains the situation, nor provides any excuse for any actions of any involved people.

I see claims regarding what happened. I don't see an answer to why. And I don't see any reason to "be on someone's side".

I think your post breaks forum rule 1 in the penultimate paragraph.

[...] I have proof for each of these, can provide if needed.

This kind of thing certainly shouldn't be posted here. If you believe it is relevant, send it to a moderator.

Posting it here will not explain anything, will not help to solve any actual or perceived problem, and will likely create more problems.

[Moosey]

Your most recent post here looks like a clear violation of forum rule 1 to me.
Other people acting in bad ways do not give any excuse for you acting in bad ways.

Which post? The post where I point out that your earlier point is a genetic fallacy?
That is definitely more diplomatically worded than the post where I called cole out for his trolling campaign, which I'll admit I should have and could have phrased better, and was largely frustrated as I was losing my patience with his extremely petty behavior.

The relevance is in the part you didn't quote. As I wrote, the picture feels incomplete (to me). Something in this situation is left unexplained.
Maybe it should be left unexplained, as long as nobody pretends to understand it all.

Sometimes people with differing recent interests / recent activity find it hard to understand each other. I think this is relevant to the situation.

"Genetic fallacy" you mentioned is indeed irrelevant, on the other hand. I'm not dismissing or ignoring anything at the moment. I'm just finding it hard to understand the situation.

I omitted the last part of your quote because I didn't see in what sense it adds to the beginning of your post. I had assumed you were surprised to learn that an active contributor could behave like cole has behaved.

However, I do not think there is really any nuance in the way you mention. Cole is, again, very deliberately trying to undertake some manner of trolling campaign against me because he considers me to be toxic, because I stopped being patient with him after over a month of tolerating his behavior. He is doing this despite claiming to sokwe that he has "learned from [his] mistake and have moved on". This is not a mere issue of difficulty in understanding each other.

I would like to point out that enthusiasm for CA (and by proxy, capacity to contribute); and maturity, politeness, and good judgement are two independent spectra.

I think your post breaks forum rule 1 in the penultimate paragraph.

What on earth is your understanding of rule 1? As far as I can tell, you seem to be suggesting that accusing people of doing wrong is inherently breaking rule 1, even if these accusations are true or nearly certain to be true. To accuse people of wrongdoing when you know they have done wrong hardly violates a maxim to assume the best of others.

There's a difference between not being nice and being unwilling to say it when someone does wrong.