ackanomic Digest Thursday, January 21 1999 Volume 04 : Issue 020 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bryan" Subject: Re: Acka: All Good Things Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 01:08:26 -0500 (EST) I support this nomination >On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote: >>I hereby declare my intention to leave the game of Ackanomic. > >I hereby nominate Alfvaen for admission into the Hall of Elders. >For a man who did a lot of the work I'm now doing for the game, I hope >that you will join me in supporting this nomination. > >--JT, Speaker. > R-attila ------------------------------ From: Thierry Joffrain Subject: Re: Acka: All Good Things Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 01:16:57 -0500 (EST) >I support this nomination I support Alfvaen's nomination. CnH ------------------------------ From: Duncan Richer Subject: Re: Acka: End of Cycle 33 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 02:29:44 -0500 (EST) On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, JT wrote: > i) If the cycle was won by points (i.e. the Winning Condition was due > to Rule 8-4), then amend Rule 8-4 to change the base value of the > Magic Number to the smallest prime number greater than (the current > Magic Number*1.2). If the last two cycles were not won by points, then > amend Rule 8-4 to change the base value of the Magic Number to the > smallest prime number greater than (the current Magic Number*0.9). > > This cycle was won by points. This cycle was won by points, but not by virtue of Rule 8-4, so the MN would not be incremented. > The base value of the Magic Number is set to 281. -- 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: JT Subject: Re: Acka: End of Cycle 33 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 02:58:35 -0500 (EST) On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Duncan Richer wrote: >On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, JT wrote: > >> i) If the cycle was won by points (i.e. the Winning Condition was due >> to Rule 8-4), then amend Rule 8-4 to change the base value of the >> Magic Number to the smallest prime number greater than (the current >> Magic Number*1.2). If the last two cycles were not won by points, then >> amend Rule 8-4 to change the base value of the Magic Number to the >> smallest prime number greater than (the current Magic Number*0.9). >> >> This cycle was won by points. > >This cycle was won by points, but not by virtue of Rule 8-4, so the MN >would not be incremented. I believe you are correct after rereading rule 8-4, the illuminatus rule and rule 8-2. If rule 8-2 merely said 'won a cycle by points' then the magic number would have been changed. However, since it explicitly says "(ie: the winning condition was due to rule 8-4)" that takes precedence and thus no change to the magic number occured. --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: K 2 Subject: Re: Acka: All Good Things Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 03:24:12 -0500 (EST) Aaron V. Humphrey wrote: > Anti-Hubert one; any volunteers for Custodian(K 2?), let me know. Sure, I'll do that :) Sorry to see you go tho. I support Alfvaen's nomination and encourage all voting *and* non-voting players to do like-wise.... K 2 ------------------------------ From: Uri Bruck Subject: Re: Acka: All Good Things Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 05:07:00 -0500 (EST) On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, JT wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote: > >I hereby declare my intention to leave the game of Ackanomic. > > I hereby nominate Alfvaen for admission into the Hall of Elders. > For a man who did a lot of the work I'm now doing for the game, I hope > thatyou will join me in supporting this nomination. > > --JT, Speaker. I support this nomination > > [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] > [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ] > [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ] > [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] > > > > ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ From: "James McGregor" <9720137@tiree.sms.ed.ac.uk> Subject: Acka: here we go again Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 09:25:10 -0500 (EST) Noticing a rather large hole in the ice up ahead I quickly remove my skates and get off the frozen loch, changing my status to voting in the process. Euphrates ------------------------------ From: "Duncan C. \"Slakko\" Richer" Subject: Acka: Mmmmmmmmmphh Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:59:37 -0500 (EST) Today is Thursday the 21st of January, the third Thursday of the month, and I am Chewing the Gumball. The Gumball wrapper this week has only one thing on it: VOTE IDIOTBOY FOR PRESIDENT! I'm convinced. Yours, Slakko -- Duncan C. "Slakko" Richer - http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~dcr24/ Queens' College Cambridge, 2nd Year Ph.D. (Pure Maths) - Graph Theory Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Clerk of the Court ------------------------------ From: JT Subject: Re: Acka: here we go again Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:26:39 -0500 (EST) On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, James McGregor wrote: >Noticing a rather large hole in the ice up ahead I quickly remove my >skates and get off the frozen loch, changing my status to voting in >the process. Good morning and welcome back to the land of the living (or at least non-frozen). --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 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:45:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: (no subject) #retract 4019 #end I retract Proposal 4019. I spotted an error in it.. I'll resubmit fixing that error. (namely it didn't actually make any rules Unassailable.. the word unassailable was left off the last bit) --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: Acka: Re: (no subject) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:48:48 -0500 (EST) On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, JT wrote: [something] I growl at myself for having forgot the Acka: in the line, but decide that it's just not worth hosing myself over. I do apologize to the rest of Ackanomic however. --JT, feeling non-poetic today [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty. ] [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ] [-------------------------------------------------------------------------] ------------------------------ From: Matt Miller Subject: Re: Acka: Mmmmmmmmmphh Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 14:12:11 -0500 (EST) On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Duncan C. "Slakko" Richer wrote: > Today is Thursday the 21st of January, the third Thursday of the month, > and I am Chewing the Gumball. > The Gumball wrapper this week has only one thing on it: > > VOTE IDIOTBOY FOR PRESIDENT! > That wacky Gumball. _I_ am not even voting IdiotBoy for President! IdiotBoy ------------------------------ From: Matt Miller Subject: Acka: Slakko's right. Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:20:59 -0500 (EST) #retract 4018 #end I retract proposal 4018. The confusion factor is probably too high. I would support a change of Mentor to Mentos, though I am too abashed to submit it myself. IB ------------------------------ From: Tom Walmsley Subject: Re: acka : The Presidential Debate - the Questions! Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 17:48:12 -0500 (EST) > I. Do you care about the proper use of bracket/smiley occurances? As the only person in the history of all Ackanomic ever to be tarred and feathered on two distinct occaisions the usage of brackets and smileys is one I can well understand. It is my general belief that a smiley is a self contained entity which does not count as a closed bracket. However when correct behaviour is decreed upon us from above I feel the need to rebel. If you vote me in as president then I will guarantee that I will not place any restrictions on player behaviour. > II. If you were being transformed into a dog by a magical spell or some > odd side-effect of the rules, etc., and you got to choose what type of dog > you would be, what type of dog would you choose to be? I would choose to be any type of dog that had sufficient magic powers to change itself back into a human, because that seems by far the most logical thing to do. However if this was not allowed by the magical spell or rules or whatever then I would change to a Chihuaua or however the hell you spell that word. This would be to allow confusion to reign supreme next full moon when Eric. gets lycanthropic. > III. What rule do you least like and what rule do you most like from the > current ruleset? My least favourite rule is probably winning by points. As I have made vocal in the past I consider bboth winning and points to be dull and boring. I dislike anything that discriminates according to points. If some people wish to play for points then that is their prerogative but that shouldn't put those of us who don't care about points at a disadvantage. That is why I recently repealed the fortnightly dividends rule and why I will continue to oppose any changes towards "points elitism". My favourite rule is probably We Don't Need Gravity. This is a wonderful piece of harf which in a way I feel embodies Ackanomic. > IV. My question: "Prove Fermat's last theorem, without using any vowels." This is a tricky question. Actually it isn't because it is a request/command rather than a question, but I shall attempt to answer to to the best of my ability. Before answering though, it is necessary to discuss the meaning of the word "prove". Strictly speaking, nothing can be proved beyond any doubt because there must always be an initial axiom, premise, or postulate. Now, Fermat's Last Theorem is effectively that x^n+y^n=z^n is not true where x, y, z and n are all integers and n is greter than 2. My initial postulate in proving this is that x^n+y^n=z^n is not true where x, y, z and n are all integers and n is greter than 2 if I am capable of typing the letters p, x and l. Hence my proof: pxl. > V. What can/should be done (if anything) to increase interest in Acka? This is a difficult question. I believe it is important for all Ackazens to attempt to come up with new concepts. Some of these will be good ideas, and some will not. Some will have the support of other players and some will not. However, if everyone is coming up with new ideas then the game will become a more interesting place. This will make the game much more lively, and a more desirable place to be. This will attract new players, who will then in turn make the game more interesting. > VI. Do you intend to promote relations and cultural exchange with other > nomics? If so, how? If not, what would do should another nomic declare > war on Ackanomic? It is my belief that Internomic trade, etc. cannot work. This is a conclusion reached from watching the collapsde of the original Internomic, the failure of the old rule 1060 (Transnomic trade pacts) and other similar systems. I do believe that communication between nomics could be useful however, to allow for the spread of ideas. As far as war goes it would depend on how this war opperated. If the opposing nomic had the goal of destroying Ackanomic, then I would support an invasion of their nomic by players of Acka, since I would consider trying to destroy a nomic, unprovoked, to be in extremely bad taste. If it was a more abstract war I would take part, but be sceptical that any meaningful results could be reached. > VII. Is this a question. Yes, although a badly formed one. > VIII. Do you think that the recent repeals of vast quantities of > Ackanomic's rules is a good thing, or perhaps more to the point, do you > favour complexity or simplicity in the rule set? I think that both simplicity and complexity have things to be said for them and don't mind either way really. Above all, I believe that the rulesshould be fun. For that reason I supported many of the recent repeals on thegrounds that they removed rules which I didn't consider fun, and leave more room for fun rules. Laa Laa. -- Tom Walmsley womble@tmbg.org http://website.lineone.net/~t.walmsley/index.html AIM: TGW666 ICQ 2925739 Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston, lausajne estas rano en mia bideo. ------------------------------ From: "Gavin Logan" Subject: Re: acka : The Presidential Debate - the Questions! Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:19:54 -0500 (EST) Before I answer the questions set to me as a candidate for the office of president, I'd just like to include some blatant propaganda: IdiotBoy for President! >I. Do you care about the proper use of bracket/smiley occurances? Yes. In my opinion, Bracket/Smiley Pedantry Hearings were one of the most important aspects of Ackan life. The repeal of that rule was a undeniable sign that the modern Ackan has little concern for the ancient art of pedantry, a code with which I am well acquainted. Why, even yesterday I rewrote all my sentences to prevent them from ending in a preposition... ahem, I mean from having a preposition ending... I mean, oh never mind. >II. If you were being transformed into a dog by a magical spell or some >odd side-effect of the rules, etc., and you got to choose what type of dog >you would be, what type of dog would you choose to be? I'm afraid I was herberted by Laa Laa on this one. I too would choose Chihuahuahuauauhuauahua but for very different reasons. These would include: hitting cats in the face with an oversized comedy fist; screaming "You eeee-diot!" at the top of my hoarse little voice; being mistaken for a misquito. The list is figuratively endless. >III. What rule do you least like and what rule do you most like from the > current ruleset? My favourite rule by far is The Steel Flea. This rule is a paragon of rule writing; incorporating the four pillars upon which Ackanomic was founded: harf, creativity, clarity and silliness. My least favourite rule is the new numbering system. The one so annoying that I don't even know its number. What can I say? I'm a reactionary. >IV. My question: "Prove Fermat's last theorem, without using any vowels." I have an elegant and straightforward proof of this theorem but it would be impossible to convey it (sans vowels) in the limited space I have available here. >V. What can/should be done (if anything) to increase interest in Acka? The introduction of sugar coated bakery products (in particular the donut) could have a drastic effect on our nomic. Overnight it would become a hotbed of intrigue and betrayal. A nomic where life is cheap and additional plastic beakers of weak coffee are cheaper. Where men are men, women are women, and soft furnishings are a form of torture. >VI. Do you intend to promote relations and cultural exchange with other >nomics? If so, how? If not, what would do should another nomic declare >war on Ackanomic? Yes. Well, not in this nomic. I don't think that popular opinion is strong enough to get Acka into a cross-nomical experiment. Not because the associated problems are insurmountable (that never stopped us before) but rather because our collective interest lies elsewhere. If another nomic declared war on Ackanomic, I would attempt peace talks and negotiations to produce a more fruitful and beneficial relationship. I am a strict pacifist and what is more believe that nomics pose themselves enough internal problems without the threat of external attack. >VII. Is this a question. If this is a statement? >VIII. Do you think that the recent repeals of vast quantities of >Ackanomic's rules is a good thing, or perhaps more to the point, do you >favour complexity or simplicity in the rule set? I hate repeals. Repeal yourself next time. Complexity, complexity and more complexity that's what I say. Well, actually I say "TJ Hooker, he'd make a good elder. And even better, if we could get William Shatner to play Ackanomic, he'd already be a player! How! Cool! Is! That! Ok, not as cool as Yoda being an elder but in the same ball park it is... mmm?" O Olde Alpha ------------------------------ From: "Gavin M. Doig" Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 720 (Wild Card) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 22:05:23 -0500 (EST) >Call for Judgement 720 - January 17, 1999 >Subject: We're all allowed one mistake >Initiator: Studge (sent Jan 17 1999, 11:04 Acka) >Judge: Wild Card >Judgement:FALSE > >Statement: >If all rules were repealed then any rule could be created with anyone's >command. > I am appealing this CFJ. Reasoning: While there would be no rules, that does not prevent the creation of rules. As an example, consider the foundation of Acka (or any other nomic). It could be argued that it would be possible to start a new game in this manner, but not to change the rules of the current game. I would argue that just because there are currently no explicitly defined rules, it does not follow that the game is over. Some games (e.g. the canonical roleplaying example, cowboys and indians) can be played with only the vaguest of rules. If the game doesn't end with the repeal of all rules then it would be possible to create new rules within the game. Blest Lax Monk Pal. ------------------------------ End of ackanomic Digest V4 #20 ******************************