The flexibility of nactation
Posted By: Timothy Chow In Response To: Money game 2-2 to play (Stick)
Date: Thursday, 28 January 2010, at 5:29 a.m.
In Response To: Money game 2-2 to play (Stick)
Don't worry, if it ever comes to sending files around then I'll make sure to bow to the majority. As I've seen more and more discussions about nactation, however, it has become apparent to me that the system is intentionally flexible. One looks at a move and asks oneself, "What is that move accomplishing?" In some cases different people may have slightly different perceptions of what the move is doing, and more than one symbol may be "correct." As long as there is no miscommunication I do not think one should be too authoritarian about the "right" choice in such cases.
For me, I look at 24/23 13/9 and usually perceive not just a "split" but a "minor split," meaning that I'm using a small number to split. Thus 41Z is what comes to mind. In some thread not too long ago about 21$-62, there was some discussion about 21$-62Z and then someone asked a hypothetical question about 21$-61Z. This struck me as entirely natural. Do we say that it is "wrong" and that the "correct" nactation is 21$-61S? Seems too authoritarian to me.
By the same token, I've backed off from my previous position that 41Z is "right," because sometimes I do find myself thinking of 24/23 13/9 as "just" a split, e.g., when contrasting it with 41U. Then I may find myself writing 41S.
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.