Date: Oct 11, 1994
From: Paul Hsieh <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: The A.P.O. Drinking Game
Have you ever read a bunch of articles on 'alt.philosophy.objectivism' and been dismayed by how much in-fighting and name-calling goes on?
Have you wondered why people aren't discussing the lofty ideas of Objectivism more?
Have you spent most of your time on a.p.o. tapping the <spacebar> as rapidly as humanly possible because none of the articles were worth reading?
In other words, has a.p.o. lost that "special magic" it once had for you?
Don't be alarmed, folks! There's a solution to your problem. It's the new:
ALT.PHILOSOPHY.OBJECTIVISM DRINKING GAME !!!
Here's how it works:
1) Have a bottle of your favorite hard liquor at your side.
(Preferably at least 80 proof.)
2) Grab a shot glass.
3) Every time you see one of the following from the scoring table (below), pour yourself the requisite number of shots and gulp them down as quickly as possible.
4) Now, even after the most uninspiring session of a.p.o. articles, you'll be virtually guaranteed of always having a good time!
APO Scoring Table
Someone calls another a.p.o. contributor "irrational" -- 1 shot.
Someone refers to another a.p.o. contributor as either "evil" or an "evader" -- 1 shot.
Someone refers to another a.p.o. contributor as an "evil evader" (in one phrase) -- 3 shots.
An article reaches a quote depth of more than 6 (i.e. something horrible like this: ">>>>>>>>") -- 1 shot.
Someone tries to cite quantum mechanics totally out of context to try and prove an obscure philosophical point -- 1 shot.
Betsy Speicher's copyright notice -- 1 shot.
Six or more consecutive Chris Wolf posts appear on your newsreader -- 1 shot.
Someone threatens to put someone else in a "kill file" -- 1 shot.
Someone threatens to stop posting to a.p.o. forever -- 1 shot.
Someone who had previously threatened to stop posting to a.p.o. forever reappears on the newsgroup -- 2 shots.
The word "qua" -- 1 shot.
The word "ilk" -- 2 shots.
The phrase "straw man" -- 1 shot.
The word "sanction" -- 1 shot.
Someone accuses another contributor of dropping context -- 1 shot.
Someone brings up children's rights -- 1 shot.
Someone threatens to sue another contributor for libel or slander -- 1 shot.
Someone demands an apology or a retraction from another contributor -- 1 shot.
Someone actually offers a retraction or an apology to another contributor -- 3 shots.
Someone actually admits that they were wrong -- 5 shots.
Jay Allen and Diana Brickell agree on something -- finish the rest of the bottle. (I heard that this actually happened once!)
(Any other suggested additions to this list are more than welcome.)