New notation for slice moves?

[Ultimate Cuber]

I've got a question for everyone here. When verbally speaking an algorithm (e.g. H perm) do you say "M" or "M Prime"?

"M two prime, U, M two prime, U two, M two prime, U, M two prime."

or

"M two, U, M two, U two, M two, U, M two."

 

[Kirjava]

Why would you bother? People will execute how they execute. Denoting direction on double turns is really only useful for showing non obvious executions when presenting algorithms for learning.

 

[TheNextFeliks]

I've got a question for everyone here. When verbally speaking an algorithm (e.g. H perm) do you say "M" or "M Prime"?

"M two prime, U, M two prime, U two, M two prime, U, M two prime."

or

"M two, U, M two, U two, M two, U, M two."

I just say M two. I don't do two primes. Either way it is 180°

 

[MWilson]

Basing M on the rotation of L or R is arbitrary. The basing of E on U or D, and S on F or B is also arbitrary. Matching the directions of M, E, and S to x, y, and z would mean not relying on intuition or preference. It would make sense universally. As it is currently, whether or not it makes sense to any particular person relies on personal intuition of that person.

Turn R counter clock wise and L clockwise, then do x. The result is what is currently M'. L and R were rotated opposing directions when looking at their faces, so basing M/M' off of either of them is arbitrary. The only move to use as a base without relying on the personal intuition of any person is the x, which in this case would result in R L' x = M.

If there is no way to change it without damaging years of documentation, I don't think it's worth doing. I was also bothered by it when I started out, but quickly forgot about it after just accepting it.

The only possibility I can see for it changing is if someone comes out of nowhere with a website of software the revolutionizes speedsolving in such an incredible way that any serious solver is forced to use it, and the developer chooses to base M, E, and S on x, y, and z. In other words, all previous resources would have to be dwarfed by an incredible new resource uses the new notation for this to be even remotely doable. I don't see that happening.

 

[Ranzha]

The main probelm is that it doesn't align with x/y/z cube rotations. In fact not only do they not go in the same direction but they also don't all go in the opposite direction either.

>The main probelm
>Your main problem
The rest is true.

They should go in the same direction as x/y/z or at least the exact opposite.

Why the exact opposite? Isn't that even more confusing overall? You'd have people asking "Wait, which way does [slice move/rotation] go now/before?", so the problem of people not knowing which direction slices/rotations go is compounded with a new system in place that can't and won't catch on quickly or easily.

However it doesn't.

My point.

M and E rotate clockwise according to L and D but S rotates cw according to F. This makes absolutely no sense and should be changed. I'm not saying that it will change because that is a bit far fetched but it should change and I'm willing to try and change it if enough people agree with me.

It makes perfect sense if you consider slice moves and rotations as separate entities, which they are.

You're trying to argue that there needs to be a change, but you express that you can't foresee the change happening, so you call upon your side's supporters to try and enact a change which will inevitably fail and will only lead to more and more confusion among active cubers old and new.

 

[Renslay]

Although the default direction of the slice moves seems random (for me, for example), but at least they are consistent, so after a while you just get used to it.
Therefore, I'm pretty sure they will remain. It's like a tradition. Deal with it.

 

[Ultimate Cuber]

I just say M two. I don't do two primes. Either way it is 180°

Would you do the same thing with the z perm, or only say "M" when it is NOT a 180 degree move?

 

[Ranzha]

Would you do the same thing with the z perm, or only say "M" when it is a 180 degree move?

Why in the world would someone say M and execute M2(')?

 

[TheNextFeliks]

Why in the world would someone say M and execute M2(')?

That's what I was thinking. What on earth?

 

[Ultimate Cuber]

Why in the world would someone say M and execute M2(')?

That's what I was thinking. What on earth?

Sorry that was a typo. I meant to say "Would you say M two, U, M two, U, M, U two, M two, U two, M, U two, M two" if verbally saying the Z permutation?

 

[CriticalCubing]

That's what I was thinking. What on earth?

Why in the world would someone say M and execute M2(')?

He meant to say M2 U M2 U M' U2 M2 U2 M' U2 (pretty obvious as he said non 180 move)
I would go with notation change as I would always do M' and M when I push it from backwards like doing M in normal notation. That was very confusing. And some days back I posted in Roux disccussion thread that how you do M' because in my head M'=M of the notation and I said that I do it with pushing the M slice with ring finger to make it come front aka if orange is facing on F, I did M' as such red middle piece would come in the front. That was very confusing and just that I would go with move change