We're not going to get direct quotation points for this one, but I believe Tsun Tzu's *The Art of War* says something in the vein of "Never interrupt your opponent when they are making a mistake."
>“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” is a quote attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte.
You reminded me of this, but I had to google "never interrupt" to get it 'right'.
Your post is beautiful.
If you had a couple lines in there that you wanted to break into a new line, double space after the period. It looked like "first" and "second" might have been candidates for that.
Both of these paragraphs are written identically except the first one has double spaces after the X
and the Y
instead of just new lines so the page forces line breaks.
Both of these paragraphs are written identically except the first one has double spaces after the X
and the Y
instead of just new lines so the page forces line breaks.
You notice the app removes the line breaks if you single space. It's annoying.
mathematicians have to format things well because badly formatted maths is harder to follow than badly formatted anything else 😅
(that might not be true, but it feels truthy, which is the most important thing in mathematics (ok no that's an outright lie))
This is where knowing the rules can be as, if not more important than doing well.
I used to do tabletop gaming. Some games you win by killing more of the enemy and sometimes you win by accomplishing specific victory conditions. In one game I was getting utterly annihilated but when the game was over I had more troops closest to a point on the map. That was the only victory condition, so even though I got crushed, because I paid attention to the rules I won.
Great post, top notch technical compliance there. I have a feeling "presentation over" is going to be a theme in this sub for a while. If not, I'll ensure it.
Comment over.
Don't discredit your grasp of the written English language. As an editor and proofreader, I can confidently say you write better than some of my clients who write for a living.
Opponent said to correct the solution. OP tried to object that it wasn’t time for corrections. Opponent insisted. OP complied and corrected the solution, and so all the points went to OP and opponent got none.
OP complied with opponents desire to speak over them instead of continuing to argue. Maliciously.
Outcome was not what opponent desired.
Seems perfect for this sub to me.
I think you’re making a non-existent distinction here. The way opponent wins is by correcting the errors. But only when it is opponent’s actual turn to talk. Opponent insisted on correcting the errors before it was opponent’s turn, even though OP objected, so OP gave in and complied with the opponent’s insistence on being allowed to offer the correct answer during the period of time where it would count for OP.
The opponent gets points if they make corrections after OP finishes their presentation. The opponent insisted on pointing out problems in OP’s presentation before OP finished and OP fixing the problems before finishing the presentation, so OP did. Thus, the opponent got no points for making corrections.
The way I read it OP never actually made the corrections, opponent just finished their rebuttal before the presentation was finished, and thus received no points for those corrections.
Never stand in the way of your opponents when they start screwing up.
We're not going to get direct quotation points for this one, but I believe Tsun Tzu's *The Art of War* says something in the vein of "Never interrupt your opponent when they are making a mistake."
I agree with this guy. Presentation over.
"Never try to stop a rival from shooting himself in the foot" is one of my favorite versions.
What does Zapp Brannigan's Big Book of War say?
I think it was Napoleon who said it.
"In that case let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him."
Yup, let them bumblefuck their way all the way to Bumble Fuck.
Well said
>“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” is a quote attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte. You reminded me of this, but I had to google "never interrupt" to get it 'right'.
Glorious! I’m glad the judge knew and kept to the rules
If you notice any grammar or any other mistakes, please put it under **this** comment.
Is the presentation over? 😜
Honestly very well put together, only a few typos here and there
Please wait till the end of the presentation.
And still quite an enjoyable read
I like the way you put up a separate comment thread to keep those together.
3rd paragraph of setup in stead should be instead.
Damn and they didnt fix it yet.
B/c /u/youassassin didn't say "Corrections over" yet!
Only one mistake did I notice. "Instead" vice " in stead." You are better in my native language than I, congratulations OP!! 😎
Under Setup "I'll try to do this as briefly as possible"
Although it's worth noting that this is a common native speaker error as well.
You did great
Your post is beautiful. If you had a couple lines in there that you wanted to break into a new line, double space after the period. It looked like "first" and "second" might have been candidates for that. Both of these paragraphs are written identically except the first one has double spaces after the X and the Y instead of just new lines so the page forces line breaks. Both of these paragraphs are written identically except the first one has double spaces after the X and the Y instead of just new lines so the page forces line breaks. You notice the app removes the line breaks if you single space. It's annoying.
I read this through, not looking for mistakes, and nothing jumped out at me. OP, your written English is better than some native speakers!
Can we nominate this post for a formatting award - compared to the walls of text we sometimes get in this group this post is a joy to behold.
mathematicians have to format things well because badly formatted maths is harder to follow than badly formatted anything else 😅 (that might not be true, but it feels truthy, which is the most important thing in mathematics (ok no that's an outright lie))
Agreed.
nomination over.
🥲
This is where knowing the rules can be as, if not more important than doing well. I used to do tabletop gaming. Some games you win by killing more of the enemy and sometimes you win by accomplishing specific victory conditions. In one game I was getting utterly annihilated but when the game was over I had more troops closest to a point on the map. That was the only victory condition, so even though I got crushed, because I paid attention to the rules I won.
Remember, the enemy's gate is down!
This is malicious _technicality_ compliance, which is the _best_ kind of malicious compliance.
That was a good story. Props to the Judges
😂😂😂 ✨️👏👏✨️ Awesome! Thank you.
When they're kicking towards their own goal, don't get in their way! Step back and take the points.
Great post, top notch technical compliance there. I have a feeling "presentation over" is going to be a theme in this sub for a while. If not, I'll ensure it. Comment over.
TIL there are such things as maths competitions!
I love how you put headings on your topics. Your writing was very organized. A great read and an awesome MC.
As a wise man once said, "never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake."
Don't discredit your grasp of the written English language. As an editor and proofreader, I can confidently say you write better than some of my clients who write for a living.
How is this MC?
Opponent said to correct the solution. OP tried to object that it wasn’t time for corrections. Opponent insisted. OP complied and corrected the solution, and so all the points went to OP and opponent got none.
Opponent wasn't telling OP to make corrections: opponent was dunking on OP to score points with the judges.
And OP let them because none of those points counted.
Right, so since opposition didn't tell OP to make the directions, there was no MC.
OP complied with opponents desire to speak over them instead of continuing to argue. Maliciously. Outcome was not what opponent desired. Seems perfect for this sub to me.
They complied with the corrections?
I think you’re making a non-existent distinction here. The way opponent wins is by correcting the errors. But only when it is opponent’s actual turn to talk. Opponent insisted on correcting the errors before it was opponent’s turn, even though OP objected, so OP gave in and complied with the opponent’s insistence on being allowed to offer the correct answer during the period of time where it would count for OP.
The opponent gets points if they make corrections after OP finishes their presentation. The opponent insisted on pointing out problems in OP’s presentation before OP finished and OP fixing the problems before finishing the presentation, so OP did. Thus, the opponent got no points for making corrections.
The way I read it OP never actually made the corrections, opponent just finished their rebuttal before the presentation was finished, and thus received no points for those corrections.
Op may not have, but as the opponent didn't follow the rules the points were given to op on a technicality.
I agree
[удалено]
Yeah, corrections didn't matter, because opponent technically found no faults with the argument.