ackanomic Digest Thursday, January 14 1999 Volume 04 : Issue 013 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Palmer Subject: Re: Acka: A new Observer Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 01:24:56 -0500 (EST) Welcome Hannah, don't stand too close to the pool, and no running on the deck. Hope you enjoy as an observer what has confused me as a player... time will tell. JT wrote: > Please join me in welcoming Hannah MacKenzie (H.L.Mackenzie@durham.ac.uk) > who joins us as an observer. > > Welcome aboard Hannah. > > --JT, Registar > > [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] > [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ] > [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ] > [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] ------------------------------ From: Duncan Richer Subject: Acka: Payment for Services Rendered Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:50:40 -0500 (EST) Sorry this is overdue. I give Trent A$30 for being Clerk of the Court and sometime Map-Harfer. I give K 2 A$15 for harfing some of the Web pages (including Phoebe and the Houses - well spotted). -- Duncan C. Richer aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother | Queens' College http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~dcr24/ Ackanomic | U. of Cambridge Web-Harfer, Clerk of the Court, Map-Harfer, Justice | 2nd Year PhD(PMa) ------------------------------ From: Duncan Richer Subject: Acka: CFJ 716 (WoHo) (fwd) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:50:43 -0500 (EST) WoHo has gone deadbeat. 404 Not Found has been selected. Call for Judgment 716 - Jan 5, 1998 Subject: Illuminatus Win Condition Initiator: JT (Sent Dec 30 1998, 10:50 Acka) 1st Judge: WoHo (chosen Jan 5 1999, 17:11 Acka) (deadbeat) 2nd Judge: 404 Not Found Judgement: Statement: JT has an Unclaimed Winning Condition by Rule 431 (H number H6-5-6) (Illuminatus). Reasoning: The Magic Number is 233. The rule mentioned above makes it a Priveledge of the Illuminatus to win by points if it is publically knowable that eir score is greater than 5/6ths of the Magic Number. 5/6ths of the Magic Number is 194. According to K 2's current score page, I have a score of 202. 202 is greater than 194. K 2 also posted a message showing that I had passed (and how) the 195 point mark. Therefore this CFJ should be ruled TRUE. -- Trent Acting CotC, Butthead, Crazy French-Scotsman, Daring Adventurer, DeeJay, Dungeon Master, Grey Councillor, Really Weird, Rules-Harfer, Worker Caste, Weird ------------------------------ From: Duncan Richer Subject: Acka: CFJ 719 (TRUE) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:50:50 -0500 (EST) Eric. has judged this TRUE without reasoning. Call for Judgement 719 - January 10, 1999 Subject: Remind me: Which thread are we in anyway? Initiator: K 2 (sent Jan 10 1999, 17:44 Acka) Judge: Eric. (chosen Jan 12 1999, 18:24 Acka) Judgement: TRUE Statement: The required number of YES votes for a proposal to be accepted is a majority of the total number of YES and NO votes legally cast within the prescribed voting period. Reasoning: The attempted actions performed by the four players who like to call themselves 'The Diktat' failed. It is alleged that Organisational Actions are unregulated, however, Rule 1-2-6 (Public Actions) states: " Each attempt to perform an action either succeeds or fails. To perform an action entails two things: first, to attempt the action; and second, for the attempt to succeed. Referring to information contained in other documents or data sources does not constitute including that information in the message. " While it is uncontested that to attempt an Organisational Action is unregulated, the success of such an action is regulated - Rule 6-4-14 (Org Harfer): " (c) determining whether Organisational Actions and Motions to Corporations succeed or fail, as per Rule 1006, and whether the Standard Harfer Fee was paid. " On 02 Jan 1999 19:39:51 else...if made the statement: " I approve all suggestions made to the Diktat. " This is highly ambiguous since at the time no named entity was named thus (the four players had as yet not made the rule change to name themselves) Assuming that statement (and a similar one made by Alfvaen) succeeded in being unambiguous in approving the action; it was then publicly knowable that the four players were _attempting_ an Organisational Action - all that remains is to determine if it _succeeded_. At the time Rule 1006 had the flowing to say about Organisational Actions: " If Church Policy is silent about methods for suggesting and approving Organisational Actions, then the Founder has the authority to suggest and approve Organisational Actions of behalf of the Church. An announcement by the Founder that the Church takes a certain Organisational Action, that announcement is taken to implicitly include both the suggestion and the approval. " The four players have no founder and 'becoming' a founder is regulated by R1006. " If a given Church has no Founder, and Church Policy is silent about method for suggesting and approving Organisational Actions, then the following procedure is followed: a. Any member of the Church may publicly suggest that the Church take a certain Organisational Action. b. If within three days at least 2/3 of the members of the Church who are also Active players publicly approve, and not a single Priest debunks it, the Organisational Action is attempted. If all the Priests who are also Active players publicly approve before three days have elapsed, then Organisational Action is attempted when the public message of the last Priest to approve is posted. " The four players are not defined as being a church, nor can they become a church since rule 1006 regulates the creation of such non-entities. Thus we have the situation were there are no members of the church to suggest an action nor any to approve it. Since, according to rule 1006, either a founder, or a _chruch member_ must make a suggestion and then approve of it for an Organisational Action to occur and since Rule 6-4-14 regulates the success of Organisational actions, all actions attempted by the four players selected according to Rule 4-9 have failed. Thus the modification made to Rule 2-1 by P3892 to change the acceptance level for proposals to >50% remains. Judge's Reasoning: (none) ------------------------------ From: Hannah Subject: Re: Acka: A new Observer Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 06:19:36 -0500 (EST) Thanks for welcoming me to ackanomic - i am going to sit back and enjoy. Oh by the way - i am a 3rd year law student at Durham University. I found NOMIC through our departments law and computing webpage. later... Hannah JT wrote: > Please join me in welcoming Hannah MacKenzie (H.L.Mackenzie@durham.ac.uk) > who joins us as an observer. > > Welcome aboard Hannah. > > --JT, Registar > > [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] > [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ] > [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ] > [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] ------------------------------ End of ackanomic Digest V4 #13 ******************************