0 or 00

[BktBallRef]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bgtg19

Originally posted by BktBallRef

BktBallRef, thank you for delivering this irony. As you plead for "common sense" to prevail on the court, you insist on literal perfection on the discussion threads. I stand both corrected and entertained! :-)

That's why I'm here.

Don't take a offense. Just pointing out a small error, when I was probably tired of reading someone else's garbage.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Smitty
7 pages and still going strong...this is brilliant.

I suddenly miss the belted pants threads...

Shall I start one, Smitty?

[Smitty]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Shall I start one, Smitty?

Hey, consistency counts for something, doesn't it? This 0/00 thing puts into perspective just how intelligent a discussion about pants can be. A lot of people say there are no stupid questions. I'd like to invite those people here and get a second opinion.

[bgtg19]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Don't take a offense. Just pointing out a small error, when I was probably tired of reading someone else's garbage.

No offense taken! I don't mind being corrected (and I even appreciate the opportunity to improve - so, thanks!).

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Smitty

Hey, consistency counts for something, doesn't it? This 0/00 thing puts into perspective just how intelligent a discussion about pants can be. A lot of people say there are no stupid questions. I'd like to invite those people here and get a second opinion.

There are no stupid questions...just stupid people.



btw, I prefer the pleated pants myself. no belt, of course.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
[/B]

There are no stupid questions...just stupid people.

[/B][/QUOTE]Wrong thread.

See "Soapbox" above.

[Back In The Saddle]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bgtg19

Originally posted by tomegun

tomegun, perhaps I should be more transparent in the irony: "0" and "00" are the same, but "2.3" and "2-3" are not the same. In any event, what *you* said -- that one must know the rules to apply common sense to them -- does indeed make perfect sense!

I think you missed the biggest irony of all. If there were a 2.3, it wouldn't be a 2-3 situation. In other words, something that is spelled out in the case book is, in fact, covered by rule and therefore does not fall under the "elastic powers" of 2-3. Now that is entertaining irony

[Back In The Saddle]

Clark,

You're looking for a guiding philosophy on this, here's how I generally look at these situations. As a lawyer, I'm sure you can appreciate the parallels to the legal system and society.

Over the course of years, it has become necessary to address issues that have arisen. Usually it's because somebody figured out a way to gain an advantage that was deemed damaging to the game. So a rule is created to prevent that advantage. Like all such rules (and as far as I can tell, laws), the intent was not that everybody should suddenly change how they play the game, or that penalties for incidental infractions should be regularly assessed (that would also change the nature of the game). Only that people should not be able to take unfair advantage.

So when it comes to enforcement of rules that are not part of the game (like administrative stuff), let the spirit of the rule be your guide. If a person is obviously trying to gain an unfair advantage by breaking a rule, penalize them. If a person has innocently run afoul of the rule, while seeking no advantage, fix it and move on. The over-zealous, thoughtless enforcement of obscure rules and administrivia is as damaging to the game as over-zealous, thoughtless enforcement of analgous laws is damaging to society.

[totalnewbie]

BitS-

That makes sense to me.

tomegun-

You forgot the most important phrase in Vegas: "lap dance."

Clark

[Back In The Saddle]

The discussion about 0, 00, 4, 04 and legal numbers in general is interesting. Coming from a computer programmer's point of view, my perspective is perhaps a little different.

First of all, I would agree with everybody who has asserted that 0 and 00 are the same number (same with 4 and 04). They are mathematically equal and merely different representations. For any single number, there are an infinite number of representations. Not only can we get wild and whacky with the leading zeroes -- and this is where the arguement about $600 and $060 is flawed, leading zeroes do not change the value of a number, trailing zeroes before the decimal point do -- but propeller heads like myself often deal with numbers in entirely different bases. Computers only understand binary (base 2). Programmers chaffe at dealing with binary and use the more "convenient" hexadecimal when forced to deal with how computers represent numbers. For the uninitiated, hexadecimal is base 16 and uses digits 0-9 and A-F. We humans prefer decimal (base 10), probably because we can cheat and count on our fingers

The wording of the rule is technically ambiguous. It appears they've attempted to enumerate the set of all legal numbers. But a set, by strict definition, contains only a single instance of any member. Since they have included 0 and 00, they have included the same number twice. Perhaps what they really meant was to enumerate the set of all legal representations. If this is the case, then the inclusion of both 0 and 00 is valid. It would also mean that the representation 04 is illegal as it is not contained in the set of legal representations. But 04 is a legitimate number, and the rule uses the word number.

Since the wording is ambiguous, we cannot infer the rules committee's exact intent. But this much is clear, both 0 and 00 can legally appear on jerseys and a team cannot use both at the same time. Beyond that, we would be applying personal interpretation. And I'd hate to think we might be penalizing the kids based on something that is our own personal interpretation.


There are only 10 kinds of people in the world: those that understand binary, and those that do not.

[gsf23]

Wow...

20 minutes of my life that I'll never get back..

[totalnewbie]

Not to throw a buddy under a bus or anything...but...

Hey Nevada, get back in here

[gsf23]

All right, here goes.

The reason that both 0 and 00 are listed as legal numbers is that because it is common practice in sports to list Zero as either number. It is not common practice to put 01, 02, 03 and so on, on a jersey. That is why they are not listed as legal numbers.

The reason they both 0 and 00 cannot be in the game is because they are the same number, just like 3 and 03, it is just not commom practice to put 03 on a jersey. If it were, they both 0 and 03 would be listed as legal numbers and only one could be used because they are the same number.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world: those that understand binary, and those that do not.

Huh?

[robinson31ir]

NO T for me, but..i do understand the confusion...i would have just added another 0 in the book and informed the coach so that it wouldnt happen again...