February 2023

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728    

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 10:48 am
OK square dancers, I can't make this work from a symmetrical starting formation. Anybody? Bueller?

I am assuming this parse: Echo As Couples (Echo In Tandem (Quarter Right)). I'm willing to listen to anyone who thinks any other parse is valid, although I do not yet (think any other parse is valid).
Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 06:28 pm (UTC)
It wasn't symmetric.

#3 and #4 right and left thru, then roll away
head position lead right
circle to a line
pass thru
wheel and deal
grand chain 8
drift apart
pass thru
girls stable, wheel and deal
echo as couples, echo tandem, quarter right
( thanks the floor )
4x4 bend the line
right and left by by by
promenade
Tuesday, October 25th, 2005 06:47 pm (UTC)
Ahhh. That explains. Thanks.
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 12:20 am (UTC)
Please tell me that you didn't just happen to remember this. I don't care if you have to lie -- just tell me that you talked to Clark & made a photocopy of the sequence.
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 12:33 am (UTC)
Well, he *was* recording while he was there.

I sure hope that's where this came from.
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 01:48 am (UTC)
Absolutely. Yup. I called Clark on the phone and made him search through all his cards after reading CJ's LJ post. Uh huh.
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 01:51 am (UTC)
Thanks. The life you saved may have been your own!
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 04:06 am (UTC)
There were what, 7 laptops and half a mile of cable on stage? I wouldn't be surprised if someone had on-the-fly 3d reconstruction of dancer's trajectories going on or something, with all that ambient computing...
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 05:57 am (UTC)
That is a step I would love to see happen, honestly enough. There are several programs in existence that will compute an ending dancer setup given a starting setup and a [possibly loaded down with modifiers] call. As with many programs designed to process a manmade language, there are situations where the result is not well-defined; each program may react differently. Having the on-the-fly check would:

a) tell the dancers that this command does or does not check out on all the major programs, thus reassuring them (either that they should be okay or that it's bullshit)
b) tell the caller whether or not what he's saying is likely to be seen as bullshit (some of 'em need to be clued in, frankly)
c) allow both caller and dancers to review a sequence to figure out just where it all fell into the toilet

Debuggers. We need debuggers.
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 05:57 am (UTC)
d) Force the program maintainers to keep up with new trends in calling
Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 08:57 pm (UTC)
Alternatively, you could eliminate the "calling" step and just go for direct vestibular stimulation:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_hi_te/remote_control_for_humans (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_hi_te/remote_control_for_humans)


Wednesday, October 26th, 2005 09:03 pm (UTC)
Yeow! I am simultaneously appalled at the potential applications and curious as hell as to what it would feel like.