Thread for your miscellaneous posts and discussions

[b-engine]

Roleplay threads be like:

Code: Select all

x = 70, y = 23, rule = B3-c4w/S23History
2D2.2D$D.D.D.D$2D2.2D$D.D.D$D.D.D2$2.3A$2.A.A$2.3A$12.2A7.3D6.D23.D2.
D$12.A.A7.D7.D23.D$14.A7.D2.2D2.3D.3D.3D.D.D.3D.2D2.3D.D.3D.2D3.2D$14.
2A6.D2.D.D2.D2.D3.D3.D.D.D3.D.D2.D2.D.D.D.D.D2.D$21.3D.D.D2.D3.2D.D4.
D3.2D.D.D2.D2.D.3D.D.D.2D5$22.D3.D5.D.D.D$21.D3.D8.D2.D$21.D2.3D2.2D.
D.D2.D$21.D3.D2.D.D.D.D2.D$22.D2.D3.2D.D.D.D!

Now:

Code: Select all

x = 81, y = 30, rule = B3-c4w/S23History
14.B$13.3A$13.ABA$12.B3AB$12.5B$12.5B$9.11B$9.10B3A$8.11BABAB$6.3B2A8B
3A$6.3B2A9B$6.11B3.B$3.20B$.3A19B$BABA10B.8B$.3A20B$3.22B7.3D6.D23.D2.
D$6.5B.5B2.7B7.D7.D23.D$6.3B2A9B2.B.3B6.D2.2D2.3D.3D.3D.D.D.3D.2D2.3D
.D.3D.2D3.2D$6.3B2A8B3A2.3B6.D2.D.D2.D2.D3.D3.D.D.D3.D.D2.D2.D.D.D.D.
D2.D$8.11BABAB2.B6.3D.D.D2.D3.2D.D4.D3.2D.D.D2.D2.D.3D.D.D.2D$9.10B3A
$9.11B$12.5B$12.5B$12.B3AB16.D3.D5.D.D.D$13.ABA16.D3.D8.D2.D$13.3A16.
D2.3D2.2D.D.D2.D$14.B17.D3.D2.D.D.D.D2.D$33.D2.D3.2D.D.D.D!

Consequences:

Code: Select all

#C Lots of debris = consequences
x = 81, y = 30, rule = B3-c4w/S23History
14.B$13.3A$13.ABA$12.B3AB$12.5B$12.5B$9.11B$9.10B3A$8.11BABAB$6.3B2A8B
3A$6.3B2A9B$6.11B3.B$3.20B$.3A19B$BABA10B.8B$.3A20B$3.22B7.3D6.D23.D2.
D$6.5B.5B2.7B7.D7.D23.D$6.3B2A9B2.B.3B6.D2.2D2.3D.3D.3D.D.D.3D.2D2.3D
.D.3D.2D3.2D$6.3B2A8B3A2.3B6.D2.D.D2.D2.D3.D3.D.D.D3.D.D2.D2.D.D.D.D.
D2.D$8.11BABAB2.B6.3D.D.D2.D3.2D.D4.D3.2D.D.D2.D2.D.3D.D.D.2D$9.10B3A
$9.11B$12.5B$12.5B$12.B3AB16.D3.D5.D.D.D$13.ABA16.D3.D8.D2.D$13.3A16.
D2.3D2.2D.D.D2.D$14.B17.D3.D2.D.D.D.D2.D$33.D2.D3.2D.D.D.D! 
[[ STARTFROM 300 ]]

What I'm trying to do right now:

Code: Select all

x = 30, y = 35, rule = B3-c4w/S23History
17.2A$17.2A2$17.B$16.3A$16.ABA$15.B3AB$15.5B$15.5B$12.11B$12.10B3A2.2A
$11.11BABAB.2A$9.3B2A8B3A$9.3B2A9B$9.11B3.B$6.20B$2A2.3A19B$2A.BABA10B
.8B$4.3A20B$6.22B$9.5B.5B2.7B$9.3B2A9B2.B.3B$9.3B2A8B3A2.3B$11.11BABA
B.2A$12.10B3A2.2A$12.11B$15.5B$15.5B$15.B3AB$16.ABA$16.3A$17.B2$17.2A
$17.2A!

[CARuler]

What is the replicator meant to be an analogy for?

[unname4798]

And what I am trying to do:

Code: Select all

x = 81, y = 30, rule = B3-c4w/S23Investigator
14.B$13.3A$13.ABA$12.B3AB$12.5B$12.5B$9.11B$9.10B3A$8.11BABAB$6.3B2A8B
3A$6.3B2A9B$6.11B3.B$3.20B$.3A19B$BABA10B.8B$.3A20B$3.22B7.3D6.D23.D2.
D$6.5B.5B2.7B7.D7.D23.D$6.3B2A9B2.B.3B6.D2.2D2.3D.3D.3D.D.D.3D.2D2.3D
.D.3D.2D3.2D$6.3B2A8B3A2.3B6.D2.D.D2.D2.D3.D3.D.D.D3.D.D2.D2.D.D.D.D.
D2.D$8.11BABAB2.B6.3D.D.D2.D3.2D.D4.D3.2D.D.D2.D2.D.3D.D.D.2D$9.10B3A
$9.11B$12.5B$12.5B$12.B3AB16.D3.D5.D.D.D$13.ABA16.D3.D8.D2.D$13.3A16.
D2.3D2.2D.D.D2.D$14.B17.D3.D2.D.D.D.D2.D$33.D2.D3.2D.D.D.D!

Oh no, interventions have consequences.

[Aleph]

My ideal world:

Code: Select all

x = 19, y = 23, rule = B3-c4w/S23
12b2o$11bobo$12bo$2o14b2o$bo14bo$bobo10bobo$2b2o10b2o$8b3o$8bobo$8b3o
7$3b2o10b2o$2bobo10bobo$2bo14bo$b2o14b2o$6bo$5bobo$5b2o!

[b-engine]

What is the replicator meant to be an analogy for?

Meant to represent roleplays. The eater means interventions by other users, mostly b-engine and confocaloid.

-

Is it a good idea to create "Thread for your unsure discoveries in OCA"?

[islptng]

I'm using F12 Browser (on mobile) on Samsung A14 (Android 14).

Testing:
This text size is same as that text size on my device
Output on my browser:
This text size is same as that text size on my device

Your browser is not up-to-dated. Setting size to 1 doesn't work on IE and some other old browsers.

What? It's time to empty my garbage can! It was full of unname4798! Help!

[CARuler]

Meant to represent roleplays. The eater means interventions by other users, mostly b-engine and confocaloid.

Have you looked at these "interventions" they seem to be just a lot of spam complaints taken at every turn

[Citation needed]

Some users do not have the scripts they need (Catagolue, one-letter finds, etc.) and only have LifeViewer. There is almost nothing except roleplaying that they are capable of.

ColorfulGalaxy happened to have found the "one cell growth per generation" project that just requires LifeViewer to contribute to.

[b-engine]

How to use block:

Code: Select all

#C "Sharp catalysis": look for pre-block like front end and
#C place a block so it eats the tip from lower than the pre-block.
#C "Blunt catalysis": look for delayed V-spark front end #C and place a block so ot eats the tip; orientation doesn't matter much.
x = 56, y = 22, rule = LifeHistory
30.D14.D$.EB18.CB7.2D4.CB7.2D4.2C2A$.2E.2A14.ABC.2A2.5D2.A.C3A2.5D2.A
.B2.A$2.B.2A14.ACB.2A4.2D3.ACB3A4.2D3.ACB2.A$30.D14.D8.A2$42.A$.EB17.
2A9.2A8.A.A$A2E.2A13.A2.A.2A4.A2.A.2A4.A2.A.2A$2.B.2A14.2A2.2A4.A.A2.
2A5.2A2.2A$31.A3$AEB$A2E.2A$2.B.2A3$A$AEB$.2E.2A$ACB.2A!

[b-engine]

(Sorry for doublepost)

huh, I was sure that it was set as chaotic, ah well. Also b-engine you seem to be a very active user on conway's game of life forums!

Such posts won't belong here; refrain from making non-productive posts in productive threads. You could just select everything in the quote tags and delete them; or even modify the quotes (through not encouraged).

[b-engine]

Some users do not have the scripts they need (Catagolue, one-letter finds, etc.) and only have LifeViewer. There is almost nothing except roleplaying that they are capable of.

Most of the time I only have access to LifeViewer - yet I still could make OCA discoveries, even writing ruletables. I do not understand why LifeViewer cannot be a tool of discovery.

[islptng]

I don't know whether "Patterns that grow by 1 cell per generation" would be nominated.

Do anyone want to nominate something else? Like this post if you don't want the voting thread to be created in half a month.

Would "Patterns that grow by 1 cell per generation" be nominated?

He must be <censored> on the 1CPG project. Also, I think this doesn't deserve a nomination of OCA DOTY.

EDIT 1: Fix grammar

[Citation needed]

He must be <censored> on the 1CPG project. Also, I think this doesn't deserve a nomination of OCA DOTY.

I agree with you. I will remind ColorfulGalaxy to try something new.

[CARuler]

The pop-up lifeviewer is probably what is meant

[b-engine]

That's c/9. 2/18=1/9.

c/9 isn't the same as 2c/18 (period 18 c/9) - although it's indeed c/9 simplified.
You won't need to simplify the fraction in this context.

[hotcrystal0]

Why do I feel like moderation has been getting stricter and stricter over the years here? Is this a byproduct of the growing community here, interpreting the forum rules differently over the years, or something else? Of course, the forums are reluctantly moderated, but even five years ago, I’ll bet moderators would agree that say, off-topic discussion is fine, and allowed more (CA) game threads. Now look at today. “Nope, it’s staying locked. We don’t need it anyways. This is an academic forum, after all.” “All posts must be CA-related.” “Looking back at this thread, there are some potentially rule-violating jokes about other users.” “Other topics belong on other websites.” Aleph knows what it’s like. She used to be in a locked thread, after all. I would say this could lead to parts of us wanting to break off.

A good analogy would be this pattern. The “exploding XWSS” represents our community, starting from late 2008. Man, it’s crazy to think that our forums existed before Minecraft did. The growing of that represents the growing the our community, and the oscillators represent threads cornerstones of our community at that time, like Random Posts, Conwaylife Skyscraper, and Stories:3 that were lost. The “exploding XWSS” released backwards later represents part of the community breaking off.

Code: Select all

x = 2027, y = 636, rule = B3-cey4ajkntwz5jnqry6ei7e/S2-ac3-ace4ckn5r6e
2017bo$2016b2o$2016bo$2024b2o$2023bo2bo$2023bobo$2024bo17$1953b3o$1953bobo$1953b2o607$2b7o$b9o$8ob2o$8b2o!

[hotdogPi]

I've found the exact opposite. Look in the early days of the forum (pre-COVID) and especially 2008-2013, and people were entirely on topic. There are now too many pointless Sandbox threads, and the main reason stuff the roleplay threads haven't been locked is because they're self-contained. When someone makes a direct attack on another user (not of the "I attack for 2 damage" type, of course), then we start to get problems. While the problem hasn't gotten worse since 2021 (remember BokaBB?), it still seems like it's only reluctantly tolerated rather than fully accepted.

If there was no "must be related to CA" rule, there would be even more BokaBB-type threads.

[Sokwe]

Why do I feel like moderation has been getting stricter and stricter over the years here?

Strict moderation isn't bad. It keeps the forums focused on their purpose (CA discussion) while generally reducing tensions between users. The alternative is restricted access, which I think is much less desirable. Restricted access is how the LifeCA mailing list operated, and to be fair, it needed absolutely no moderation, as everyone constantly stayed on topic and I can't recall a single instance of a rude or unkind message.

I’ll bet moderators would agree that say, off-topic discussion is fine, and allowed more (CA) game threads.

Off-topic discussions were always merely tolerated. They started getting banned when they became a frequent source of rule 1 violations. CA games were and are still allowed. However, some of the current "CA games" have very little to do with CA. For example, the various role play threads are more like word games with drawings. From my perspective, they don't seem to utilize CA in an interesting or challenging way. By contrast, I think the catalyses game is a good example of a CA game that actually utilizes CA in a meaningful way. If nothing else, it gives users practice in applying catalysts in Conway's Game of Life, which improves the community's overall CA knowledge.

I would say this could lead to parts of us wanting to break off.

I'm not sure what exactly is meant by "break off" here, but anyone is welcome to post both here on the conwaylife.com forums and elsewhere on the internet. There's no need to leave this forum for another, because a user could always simply participate in both.

cornerstones of our community at that time, like Random Posts, Conwaylife Skyscraper, and Stories

I don't agree that off-topic discussions represent "cornerstones" of our community. I believe the community is entirely based on a shared interest in cellular automata.

[hotcrystal0]

Strict moderation isn't bad. It keeps the forums focused on their purpose (CA discussion) while generally reducing tensions between users. The alternative is restricted access, which I think is much less desirable.

Good point.

They started getting banned when they became a frequent source of rule 1 violations.

Ugh, you could have told us the truth sooner. You just said “Other topics belong on other websites” and all that, and you never told us why it wasn’t that way 5 years ago outside of that time period. (sorry if this sounds a little bit rude to you)

However, some of the current "CA games" have very little to do with CA. For example, the various role play threads are more like word games with drawings.

I agree with this. There is something between me and two other people, and I suggest any storytellers or roleplayers here head there.

cornerstones of our community at that time, like Random Posts, Conwaylife Skyscraper, and Stories

I don't agree that off-topic discussions represent "cornerstones" of our community. I believe the community is entirely based on a shared interest in cellular automata.

Well, those topics had some significance. Random Posts can go away just fine, but Conwaylife Skyscraper was more than just “Random Posts but include a floor number”. The only reason it was no longer fine was because people stretched the limits of what was OK to post there. Remember how I asked whether there was more reported posts in the first half or the second half of the thread? And Stories? All I see is harmless mentions of other people that are not joking about them. Yes, this community is based on the interest, but is that all we are? No. We have in-jokes like the U-turner thing and the Curse, and we do arguably have a culture.

[Sokwe]

They started getting banned when they became a frequent source of rule 1 violations.

Ugh, you could have told us the truth sooner. You just spat out “Other topics belong on other websites” and all that, and telling the truth can never hurt. (sorry if this sounds a little bit rude to you)

If you think your comment might sound rude, then you probably shouldn't make it, or you should find a way to reword it so that it isn't rude. Claiming that I didn't tell the truth, and that I "spat out" some statement is pretty clearly a violation of rule 1(a): "Assume the best of others".

Furthermore, your claim that I did not tell the truth is completely unfounded. When I locked the original Random Posts thread, I gave the following as the only reason

This thread has been very difficult to moderate and contains several posts that probably constitute violations of rule 1.

That perfectly matches what I wrote above.

The statement "other topics belong on other websites" is a simple explanation of why banning off-topic discussions is not actually harmful. You can have those off-topic discussions elsewhere, so you aren't really being restricted in a meaningful way. There are many websites on the internet that allow discussion of whatever topic you choose (within reason, of course). If you want to discuss CA (or math/programming/computer science), you can do it here. If you want to discuss something else, do it on another website.

All I see is harmless mentions of other people that are not joking about them.

Not everyone will agree on what is "harmless". I often have to deal with posts that some people think are harmless while others view them as rule violations. This takes up my time and makes it harder for me to moderate the rest of the forums. There are certain topics that aren't actually productive and seem more likely to cause conflicts, so I have made restrictions that seek to avoid such topics. For example there is typically very little reason to discuss other users, while discussing other users has a much higher likelihood of resulting in problems. Therefore, I have put restrictions on certain threads to disallow the discussion of other users.

those topics had some significance.

"Significance" isn't necessarily a positive quality. Those threads were off-topic and were difficult to moderate. I don't believe I should need any further reason to lock them.

Yes, this community is based on the interest, but is that all we are? No. We have in-jokes like the U-turner thing and the Curse, and we do arguably have a culture.

Notice that CA-related jokes are not banned, and we even have a specific topic for them. I don't think banning completely off-topic discussion will do any damage to the "culture" of the community. I would even postulate that it improves the culture. Off-topic discussions were resulting in more rule 1 violations, which are harmful to the community.

[b-engine]

This thread is problematic because it began with a set of misguided ideas about what could work as contribution. It was spammy earlier, with lots of noisy posts. Then it became inactive, until you bumped it again.

Your suggestion essentially amounts to suggesting to make this thread spammy and noisy again.

The reason why the actually interesting stuff should be posted in MDiOCA at least, is that it belongs there. Here in the Sandbox, it will simply be lost forever.

The thread (Pass the rule) is not problematic at all. It do help users practicing rulegolfing, similar to how Catalyses (game) help users practicing how to use catalysts.

However, some of the current "CA games" have very little to do with CA. For example, the various role play threads are more like word games with drawings. From my perspective, they don't seem to utilize CA in an interesting or challenging way. By contrast, I think the catalyses game is a good example of a CA game that actually utilizes CA in a meaningful way. If nothing else, it gives users practice in applying catalysts in Conway's Game of Life, which improves the community's overall CA knowledge.

The thread is not spammy at all (unlike roleplays as it don't involve large patterns or storytelling), expect the complaints which should be moved here. Of there's something interesting enough for further discussion, it could be cross-posted.

Waiting for moderators to comment about this.

[CARuler]

On the topic of the cgol skyscraper, was this locked when [not mentioned] spam reported all my posts?

Also, why do moderators do all of this somewhere we can't see their reasons? Why don't you give the threads a right to a free trial?

[hotdogPi]

luveelvoom posted this on Discord. He can't post it here because of the DDOS issue. (This sentence previously said Cloudflare; he was mistaken.)

In defense of the moderators.
Recently, I've seen some discussion that the forum moderators have been overbearing and harsh on off-topic threads in the Sandbox, with some people claiming that they're stifling the community. While there are valid points here, I feel that the actions of the moderators are overall reasonable and not worthy of the unfriendly rhetoric I've noticed in some of these posts.

--Locking of threads--
Several users have complained about the locking of threads (skyscraper, random posts, ca roleplay), saying that these threads "were part of the community" and "weren't given a fair chance". Well, I don't think they really were part of the community (although an argument could be made for skyscraper.) These threads had little to nothing to do with CA and their locking, while perhaps saddening some forum users, doesn't affect the CA community as a whole. In addition, after random posts was locked, the moderators laid out a fairly distinct idea for what constituted a random posts-esque thread. Besides skyscraper, which I think is really the only case out of this whole debacle where the moderator's actions can be said to be unfair in some way, the other threads had a fair warning and didn't listen. In addition, the threads were hard to moderate and make sure that they remained stable especially given the actions of Two Specific Unnamed Con way life users. Generally I feel that the moderators have acted well and not done much to harm the community.

--The unfortunate response--
What I feel the real problem is now is twofold: users attacking the moderators because they misconstrue the intent of their actions, and user(s) attacking the sandbox threads because they feel that they have been given license to do so by the moderators. I feel like fair discussion and criticism of moderator actions is perfectly healthy for a community, but the way that I've seen it being done on the forums by some people is not. The moderators are trying to defend their perspective from upwards of five users attacking them, some of whom aren't actually looking at the real events and simply jumping on the bandwagon of moderator hate. I feel like everyone needs to take a step back and actually look at the effect that recent events have had on the community- the damage done by locking threads is less than the damage done by arguing about the locking of them. Regarding the attacks on sandbox threads, it's never a good idea to report a message simply because you disagree with its contents, and people have to stop writing long arguments on how [insert sandbox thread here] is (horribly unproductive/damaging to the ca community/both/uses nomenclature incorrectly). It's really dampening the forums being an open area for discussion of cellular automata when certain aspects of cellular automata can't be discussed because doing so would be too microbloggy or chatty, which of course is not what the forums are.

TLDR: I believe the actions of the moderators are mostly resonable and the response to them is blown far out of proportion.
Thanks for reading, hopefully this doesn't violate rule 10.

(For reference, Discord rule 10 is not to rant about the forum.)

[islptng]

As per the forum rules, this is an English language discussion forum. Please don't post exchanges like the one above --

"Ancient articles"
"No archaeology allowed here, unless you have something new worth posting in one place."

Translate to English, because English is the common language used on conwaylife.com. Not everyone reading these posts will be familiar with any specific non-English language, and it's not polite to expect everyone to individually take the time to translate non-English posts.

I'm Chinese, and I understand that the English line pifricted wrote in that post is his translation (but not so accurate and doesn't look like a translation).

By the way, If one uses size tags:

用一个列表或者vector存储细胞,节省算力,并且网格无限大,不然64x64的格子要算4096次还有限;
Use a list or vector to store cells, this speeds up the evolution, and the grid becomes infinite; In a 64x64 grid, however, it needs to calculate 4096 times and the grid is still finite

==============================
Please, moderators, we need a way to quote posts in a locked thread but replying in a not locked thread. Also, WHY CAN'T WE CREATE A POLL IN THE SANDBOX???? (Edit: can't in OCA, either)

[Sokwe]

On the topic of the cgol skyscraper, was this locked when...

The reason it was locked is given in the last post of the thread. When I lock an active thread, I virtually always add a post explaining why.

Also, why do moderators do all of this somewhere we can't see their reasons? Why don't you give the threads a right to a free trial?

Again, I virtually always explain why threads get locked. There isn't anything hidden about the process. There is no need for a "trial" before locking off-topic threads, and such a trial would consume unreasonable amounts of the moderators' time. My time is valuable to me, and I would rather not spend it moderating forums, especially when it involves off-topic content that doesn't really need to be here in the first place.

I also feel I've had to spend an unreasonable amount of time explaining why I locked off-topic threads, even though my explanations are already present in the locked thread. I would like to request that everyone please stop discussing these locked threads.

Please, moderators, we need a way to quote posts in a locked thread but replying in a not locked thread.

Generally, you should not quote posts from locked threads. The threads were locked to end the discussions that they contained. For that reason, I am against creating an easy method for quoting posts in locked threads.

I'm Chinese, and I understand that the English line pifricted wrote in that post is his translation (but not so accurate and doesn't look like a translation).

Indeed, it seems that pifricted was simply trying to explain rule 3(b) in multiple languages to increase the chance that it their explanation would be understood, which seems perfectly reasonable. One difficulty of non-English text in posts is that it's hard to moderate if we can't read the language. Fortunately, web browsers are generally getting better at translating such text, but it's still a bit time consuming and not perfectly accurate.

Besides skyscraper, which I think is really the only case out of this whole debacle where the moderator's actions can be said to be unfair in some way, the other threads had a fair warning and didn't listen.

The "skyscraper" thread was basically a random posts thread with a floor number included in each post. As I see it, there was no need to give a warning before locking a thread after three essentially equivalent threads had already been locked.