The Lexicon game is played in 8 turns, one for each of eight different "letter groups," essentially corresponding to a phone number pad -- so there would be an ABC turn (in which you write one entry for either an A-word, a B-word, or a C-word, your choice), and turn two would be DEF, three would be GHI, et cetera. If we did about one entry every 3 days, we'd be done in a month. Five days a turn would be a month and a half.

1. Turns cycle from ABC to DEF to GHI to JKL to MNO to PQRS to TUV to WXYZ.
2. New Entries: Scholars reserve and write one new entry each turn. 250 word minimum, which is like... half a page.
   1. When writing new entries for turns 1, 2, and 3, scholars must create to two new phantom (i.e., unwritten) entries to cite that fall into some letter grouping that hasn't been done yet.
   2. After the first turn, scholars must also cite to one already-written entry.
   3. On turn 4, you only create one new entry and back-link to two already-create (but not necessarily done) entries, and on turns 5, 6, 7, and 8 you don't create any new links, and have to link to at least three already-created entries.
   4. It is academic heresy to cite one's own work, so a scholar may not cite an entry he has written, unless you've already cited the requisite number of OTHER entries.
   5. Entries should not cite to entries in that turn ( e.g. a 'DEF' article cannot cite to another 'DEF' article), unless you've already cited the requisite number of OTHER entries..
3. Finishing Phantom Entries: When the next turn starts, scholars then pick a phantom entry for that letter group and write it. For example, when new entries for 'Turn DEF' are due, then any and all phantom entries for the Letters 'DEF' should be written (if we don't have enough, you can make a new one). No fair making more phantom entries for a letter grouping than we have players.
   1. Scholars are barred from writing a phantom entry they created in the first place, unless there are no other options.
4. Accuracy of Cited Entries: Regardless of how misguided a scholar's peers are, they are honest. Therefore, scholars must treat other scholar's entries as factually accurate. However, a scholar is free to question the interpretation of another scholar, and even introduce new facts to support his argument.