acka-research Digest Wednesday, January 06 1999 Volume 04 : Issue 005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: K 2 Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3989-3996 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 09:01:10 -0500 (EST) Huberted!!! - of course I was moving at glacial speed on the "fix the rule precedence/dependency" idea.... My only question is : Why am I required to vote 8 times on the same idea/concept? 80 points instead of 10? K 2 tMoS jtraub@dragoncat.net wrote: > Proposal 3989-3996 > Let's fix Rule Depenacies ------------------------------ From: JT Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4000 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 12:27:07 -0500 (EST) On Wed, 6 Jan 1999 jtraub@dragoncat.net wrote: >Proposal 4000 >Livix >K 2 >Due: Wed Jan 13 09:01:10 1999 > > >{{[Update all rule pointers]}} A proposal (or was it a CSR) passed recently which did this. And in fact, searching through the first 10 or so of these changes in the current rules document, only the change described in number II below hadn't be done, which merely means that the Rule-Harfer missed an update to the Official Rules Document even though the rules are correct. Given that that CSR passed which should have done this, this proposal is at best NULL since none of the renumbering changes would occur as the text they try to replace didn't exist. --JT [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ] [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ] [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] ------------------------------ From: JT Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3989-3996 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 12:29:47 -0500 (EST) On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, K 2 wrote: >Huberted!!! - of course I was moving at glacial speed on the "fix the rule >precedence/dependency" idea.... > >My only question is : Why am I required to vote 8 times on the same >idea/concept? 80 points instead of 10? Then vote No on all of them. I am (partly because of that). IMHO that should have been 1 proposal and Modest. I also (sorta) object to removing the custodianship concept completely, and think it could be reworded to work with the current heirarchical rules (the custodian of a rule may alter that rule and any descendant of that rule via CSR (for instances)) I just haven't had time to sit down and write any props recently. --JT [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ] [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ] [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] ------------------------------ From: Eric Plumb Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3980 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 13:12:04 -0500 (EST) On Sun, 3 Jan 1999, Towsner wrote: > >Shouldn't we work out some way that ackanomic should go? Thank Pheobe I'm > >not ambassador otherwise it would probably be my job. > I have this vision of a half-dozen Ackans showing up and confusing > things. Six? That's pretty optimistic; it's more than bother to vote. -Hubert God is love. Love is blind. Therefore, Ray Charles is God. ------------------------------ From: Gabe Drummond-Cole Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3989-3996 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 14:07:12 -0500 (EST) At 09:01 AM 1/6/99 -0500, you wrote: >Huberted!!! - of course I was moving at glacial speed on the "fix the rule >precedence/dependency" idea.... > >My only question is : Why am I required to vote 8 times on the same >idea/concept? 80 points instead of 10? > >K 2 >tMoS well, let's see... I proposed to remove the one that did the VERY LEAST; the head of the miscellaneous rule suite... and i got it voted down 5-2. I thought that perhaps this way i could avoid controversy on some of them... sheesh... -- Trent Acting CotC, Butthead, Crazy French-Scotsman, Daring Adventurer, DeeJay, Dungeon Master, Grey Councillor, Really Weird, Rules-Harfer, Worker Caste, Weird ------------------------------ From: K 2 Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4000 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 19:28:15 -0500 (EST) JT wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jan 1999 jtraub@dragoncat.net wrote: > >Proposal 4000 > >Livix > >K 2 > >Due: Wed Jan 13 09:01:10 1999 > > > > > >{{[Update all rule pointers]}} > > A proposal (or was it a CSR) passed recently which did this. And in > fact, searching through the first 10 or so of these changes in the current > rules document, only the change described in number II below hadn't be > done, which merely means that the Rule-Harfer missed an update to the > Official Rules Document even though the rules are correct. Given that > that CSR passed which should have done this, this proposal is at best > NULL since none of the renumbering changes would occur as the text they > try to replace didn't exist. > This is what stems from writing proposals on a less than uptodate copy of the rules.... I retract p4000. K 2 ------------------------------ From: K 2 Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4000 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 19:29:17 -0500 (EST) JT wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jan 1999 jtraub@dragoncat.net wrote: > >Proposal 4000 > >Livix > >K 2 > >Due: Wed Jan 13 09:01:10 1999 > > > > > >{{[Update all rule pointers]}} > > A proposal (or was it a CSR) passed recently which did this. And in > fact, searching through the first 10 or so of these changes in the current > rules document, only the change described in number II below hadn't be > done, which merely means that the Rule-Harfer missed an update to the > Official Rules Document even though the rules are correct. Given that > that CSR passed which should have done this, this proposal is at best > NULL since none of the renumbering changes would occur as the text they > try to replace didn't exist. > This is what stems from writing proposals on a less than uptodate copy of the rules.... of course some of the modifications that it would've made had the rule pointers not been updated were not simple xxx becomes yyy. I retract p4000. K 2 ------------------------------ From: Gabe Drummond-Cole Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4000 Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:22:01 -0500 (EST) >This is what stems from writing proposals on a less than uptodate copy of the >rules.... > >I retract p4000. > >K 2 > I give K2 all of my money I sneer in blatant disregard of the rules I disobey church policy I retract all my proposals and change my state to on-ice. -- Trent Acting CotC, Butthead, Crazy French-Scotsman, Daring Adventurer, DeeJay, Dungeon Master, Grey Councillor, Really Weird, Rules-Harfer, Worker Caste, Weird ------------------------------ End of acka-research Digest V4 #5 *********************************