________________________________________ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 10:29:26 -0500 From: Matthew J Kuhns Subject: Nomic: Lee Olson I propose that Lee Olson be added to our game of Nomic. Matt Kuhns mjkuhns@iastate.edu * * * * * * * * "C'mon, you fuckers think that just 'cause a guy reads comics he can't start some shit? I'll fuckin' take all a' you on!" -Brodie, "Mallrats" ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 14:31:02 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: voting The voting period for Prop. 313 expired without a majority of players casting votes. Consequently, the voting period has been extended as per Rule 307 until such time as the proposal will necessarily pass or fail. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 15:07:43 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Proposal 313, name the game, and the next turn Proposal 313 passed (9-0-0-8). Everyone should now begin submitting game names for consideration. Rich Peter's turn has begun. This may raise an interesting problem: as we haven't heard from Rich yet, we don't know for sure if he's playing or not. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 15:11:18 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Nomic: On names for our Nomic Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 This is, of course, the obvious hands-down All-American A-1 top notch choice name for our nomic. Besides including the tasty words "fuck" and "weasel", the Microsoft-product-naming-convention style will cause the game to become obsolete, assuming it holds up until 2000 (sort of like Windows). Luckily, this sets us up for an uber-geeky Arthur C. Clarke style scheme, wherein our next nomic is named Fuckweasel Nomic 2001, the next Fuckweasel Nomic 2061, and then finally Fuckweasel Nomic 3001: The Final Nomic. Do your civic duty: vote Fuckweasel Nomic 2000! As we here at Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 Campaign Central realize that sometimes one just has personal moral and ideological obigations that force one to, for instance, vote against "Fuckweasel Nomic 2000", we also gladly offer up the following alternate suggestions for Nomic names: we threw gasoline on the fire and now we have stumps for arms and no eyebrows Suffers a bit due to the missing "Nomic", but hey, we here at Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 Campaign Central sometimes buck the trends. Major benefits include trendy-online-lack-of-capitalization, atopicality, and the mention of major burn damage. Who can not like major burn damage? (0x02) The trend started by Purple Rain crooner whatsisname is catching on everywhere, so why not on the Nomic scene? That's why we propose low-ASCII 0x02 as our new name. Unfortunately, most glyph sets are lacking a symbol for 0x02, so we'll have to invent one of our own. Then, benefits of this sassy new symbol will include: nonstandard font requirements, incompatible cross-platform Nomic, and low frequency of use (since no one will be able to type the $%@%! thing). Nick Nomic We'll be honest. We're not too hot on this one - but Nick asked us to put it in here, and hey - it's his rule, so what the hell. This name combines the cool elegance of "Nomic" with the street-smart snap of "Nick". Best when used with Nomics containing only Nick. Well... it looks like Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 is still the clear-cut winner. Regardless, I am going to vote for we threw gasoline on the fire and now we have stumps for arms and no eyebrows because it sounds so damn cool. Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 Campaign Central -- Poets do not go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. I am not, as will be seen, in any sense attacking logic: I only say that this danger does lie in logic, not in imagination. - G.K. Chesterton ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 15:32:46 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: name suggestions ErgoNomic: a double pun on ergo. Firstly, a referal to comfortable design, and seondly, to the Latin word meaning "therefore". The People's Popular Nomic Front: for all those Python fans out there (Splitters!). ASCII 0x07 Nomic (or, alternatively, Beep Nomic): we (that is, Mike, Tom, and I) thought of this before Josh's ASCII 0x02 Nomic, but just didn't post it right away. The Nomic Formerly Known as Nomic: of course, we'd need an arcane symbol to use most of the time instead. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:11:35 -0500 From: Thomas J Plagge Subject: Nomic: Nomic name proposals Josh and Joel have started things off pretty well. Some more proposals: 1. Nomic Popular People's Front For the record, Joel and Mike are splitters. 2. McNomic Did somebody say McNomic? 3. NomicPro Gold '98 How long before Symantic releases this? 4. Jeane Kirkpatrick ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:36:33 -0500 From: Nathan D Ellefson Subject: Nomic: Name I second Tom's proposal of Jeane Kirkpatrick, as any good Bloom County fan should. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:34:04 -0500 From: Nathan D Ellefson Subject: Nomic: Nomic Name I second Tom's proposal of Jeane Kirkpatrick, as any good Bloom County fan should. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:32:42 -0500 From: Nathan D Ellefson Subject: Nomic: name proposal I second Tom's proposal of Jeane Kirkpatrick. Any good Bloom County fan will do so as well. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 17:12:35 CDT From: Haar Subject: Nomic: Nomic Names First off Jeane Kirkpatrick is hands down the only name we can use, but if that sentiment is not shared here are some other possibilities. Bob- Friendly, non-invasive destroyer of Microsoft marketing schemes, Bob is my hero Shitferret Nomic 3000- Just to one up Josh and look witty without trying Haar's Loophole Playground- Ego, pure, unadulterated Ego --- Life used to suck But now I'm better Haar caerdwyn@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 17:32:45 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: judge selection Ben Byrne has been seleced to judge RFJ 25: The "fraction of favorable votes" received by a Proposal in Rule 202/1 refers to the expression (favorable votes)/(total non-neutral votes). J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 17:30:55 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: RFJ 25 I call for Judgment in the following matter: The "fraction of favorable votes" received by a Proposal in Rule 202/1 refers to the expression (favorable votes)/(total non-neutral votes). Comments: Essentially, it is not clear to me whether the rule refers to (favorable votes)/(total possible votes) or (favorable votes)/(total non-neutral votes). As such, I cannot calculate Andy Palecek's score without clarification. I exclude Andy Palecek since this directly affects him, and Rich Peters and Jill Wittrock as I don't know whether they're actually playing. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 17:47:37 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: time limit The submission deadline for names is 16:07 CDT, 10 September. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 17:43:27 -0500 From: Michael S Jensen Subject: Nomic: names Nomic People's Front : Fighting the romans via terrorist action was all my idea to began with (a short jump from my work in Mexico) so Joel, Tom, and anyone else who's not on board with the subcommandante are just splitters. And remember, you're gonna wish you played ball when your back's against the wall. ok, that one was just for form. Now it's time to get down to business. THE PENTAVERATE : this one should be immediately recognized as the pinnacle of perfection. Obviously the next actions would be renaming the web page "The Meadows" and we would have to introduce as players the Queen, the Vatican, the Gettys, the Rothchilds, and, before he goes tits up, the Colonel. (and yes, he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes you crave it fortnightly, smart ass). These complications should not pose a problem, however. B.L.O., division of Games and Recreation : if you haven't heard about the B.L.O, call our toll-free number or send us a SASE for our free pamphlet and money-saving coupons. det(Pleasure Matrix) : visit our website at www.pleasurematrixinformationcenter.com I can't think of another one now, but just wait. Chew on these tasty bits of mutton for a while, but spit the gristle. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 18:10:38 CDT From: Nicholas C Osborn Subject: Nomic: names 1. [chaos, nomic] As Joel pointed out, the above is nonsense because neither "chaos" nor "nomic" represent values. I beg to differ, positing that they represent qualitative values. 2. SuperPar Hurry up and vote for this name before some lousy ska band takes it! 3. This isn't nomic, this is my only source of human interaction, unless you count Churchill or Roosevelt. This requires no explanation. My other submissions are forthcoming. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 19:15:48 -0500 From: Matthew J Kuhns Subject: Nomic: New Game Names --============_-1306822344==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Check it out, five first-rate appelations for this sick sad thing we call "Nomic." *LANPOYS* A connection to the roots of this game. (For those unaware, when Nomic first entered Harwood, it was slyly referred to as "Looking at naked pictures of your sister" to avoid suspicion.) *Stankopoly* With all apologies to Josh Kortbein. *Fun With Fire* No, there is technically no fire directly involved in Nomic yet. But there could be. And doesn't "Fun with Fire" have a sense of little-kid-with-matches-forbidden-excitement? *Nomic II: Urban Harvest* This is the second game of Nomic begun with the same core group of people. And "urban harvest" was the coolest follow-up to "part II" I could think of. *Uckelman for President* It's got a nice disturbing quality which is perversely appealing. Sort of. --- Matt Kuhns mjkuhns@iastate.edu http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mjkuhns --============_-1306822344==_ma============ Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" Check it out, five first-rate appelations for this sick sad thing we call "Nomic." *LANPOYS* A connection to the roots of this game. (For those unaware, when Nomic first entered Harwood, it was slyly referred to as "Looking at naked pictures of your sister" to avoid suspicion.) *Stankopoly* With all apologies to Josh Kortbein. *Fun With Fire* No, there is technically no fire directly involved in Nomic yet. But there could be. And doesn't "Fun with Fire" have a sense of little-kid-with-matches-forbidden-excitement? *Nomic II: Urban Harvest* This is the second game of Nomic begun with the same core group of people. And "urban harvest" was the coolest follow-up to "part II" I could think of. *Uckelman for President* It's got a nice disturbing quality which is perversely appealing. Sort of. --- Matt Kuhns mjkuhns@iastate.edu http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mjkuhns --============_-1306822344==_ma============-- ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 21:52:43 -0700 From: Mueller Subject: Nomic: Name nominations In the spirit of Dada, I randomly opened the American Heritage Dictionary to the word "pander" (in the noun form). Pander n 1 A gobetween or liason in sexual intrigues; procurer. 2 One who caters to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploits their weaknesses. The best of BOTH worlds. It means pimp, it means powerful manipulator, it means perceptive. This is a name to be proud of, especially since it was randomly chosen. If the more tradition-bound insist, I also propose Pandernomic which includes the word nomic and has clever flavors of pandemonium and panic to boot. Finally, I propose the string "Harf!" (for those interested in this reference, follow here: http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~mitcharf/harfproj.html ) To recap: 1. Pandernomic 2. Pander 3. Harf! Tom Mueller mueller4@sonic.net ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 23:51:23 CDT From: caerdwyn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: Name nominations > In the spirit of Dada, I randomly opened the American Heritage Dictionary > to the word "pander" (in the noun form). > > Pander n 1 A gobetween or liason in sexual intrigues; procurer. 2 One who > caters to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploits their weaknesses. > > The best of BOTH worlds. It means pimp, it means powerful manipulator, it > means perceptive. This is a name to be proud of, especially since it was > randomly chosen. > > If the more tradition-bound insist, I also propose Pandernomic which > includes the word nomic and has clever flavors of pandemonium and panic to > boot. > > Finally, I propose the string "Harf!" (for those interested in this > reference, follow here: > http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~mitcharf/harfproj.html ) > > To recap: > > 1. Pandernomic > 2. Pander > 3. Harf! > > Tom Mueller > mueller4@sonic.net Tom, I protest your use of the name Harf! as it impinges on an existing registered trademark. Existing case law prohibits the use of trademarks and names that cause confusion of product to reasonable people. Clearly Harf! is a direct competitor to Haar!, which as we all know is a product enshrined in Harwood and Nomic folklore. Please withdraw this suggested name before legal action is pursued. Thank you and good day. --- Life used to suck But now I'm better Haar caerdwyn@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 01:40:06 -0700 From: Mueller Subject: Re: Nomic: Name nominations On 9/8/98 Haar wrote: >> Finally, I propose the string "Harf!" (for those interested in this >> reference, follow here: >> http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~mitcharf/harfproj.html ) >> >> To recap: >> >> 1. Pandernomic >> 2. Pander >> 3. Harf! > >Tom, I protest your use of the name Harf! as it impinges on an existing >registered trademark. Existing case law prohibits the use of trademarks >and names that cause confusion of product to reasonable people. Clearly >Harf! is a direct competitor to Haar!, which as we all know is a product >enshrined in Harwood and Nomic folklore. Please withdraw this suggested >name before legal action is pursued. > >Thank you and good day. > Fah and Scoff! (Controversial bickering! :) Clearly, no reasonable person could mistake Haar! and Harf! Furthermore, I see that even were I to grant your slanderous lies as true, there is no rule nor judgement which compells me to withdraw the glorious name of Harf! from its place of contention. Even more insidious is YOUR request which would have me violate the good and proper rules of our fair game by perverting a rule-regulated process of name proposing by performing the extra-legal action of retracting a name. Were we able to engage in fisticuffs I would call you outside, valued Fellow Nomican and dishonorable cur! Tom Mueller mueller4@sonic.net PS For all that I must protect the good name of my proposals and self, I'd like to note that among my proposals Pandernomic is my favorite. ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 13:05:22 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: naming At present, I'm partial to (0x02) for our name. The filled-in smiley face conveys so much more than any word ever could. [chuckle]. If perchance we did adopt this name, how would it be represented in the rules? Would the graphical and ASCII code representations be equivalent? Does anyone have a font that contains this character (as none of mine do)? J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 14:14:07 -0500 From: Nathan D Ellefson Subject: Re: Nomic: naming Well, fortuantely, since Jeane Kirkpatrick will be that hands-down winner, this question is completely moot. At 01:05 PM 9/9/98 -0500, you wrote: >At present, I'm partial to (0x02) for our name. The filled-in smiley face >conveys so much more than any word ever could. [chuckle]. > >If perchance we did adopt this name, how would it be represented in the >rules? Would the graphical and ASCII code representations be equivalent? >Does anyone have a font that contains this character (as none of mine do)? > >J. Uckelman >uckelman@iastate.edu > ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 18:57:42 -0500 (CDT) From: "Santos L. Halper" Subject: Nomic: RFJ 25 & name proposals >Ben Byrne has been seleced to judge RFJ 25: > >The "fraction of favorable votes" received by a Proposal in Rule 202/1 >refers to the expression (favorable votes)/(total non-neutral votes). My Judgement: TRUE. Explanation: I get too little sleep these days to be able ot explain my actions. But rest assured they make sense to me. It think it has to do with discouraging fence-sitting neutrality. That is, if you don't want someone scoring points, you should have to actually take action of a definitive nature in order to do, rather than affecting that individuals point total while remaining noncommital. But I'm not sure, really. It just makes more sense this way somehow. Is just me or do I get assigned a lot of cases? Seems odd given that I have admitted to having never read the rules. Seems lik a conspiarcy to cost me points given that checking email for me is a long-distance call. Some game name ideas: That Dumb Game Works well in conversation: "Hey, man, did you see all the new messages from that dumb game?" Plus it offers the ever-popular advnatage of speaking in acronym form, a pastime enjoyed by engineers and computer enthusiasts alike. Imagine how impressed your friends will be when they hear you raked in 15 points in T.D.G. last week! N If it's good enough for Kafka, which no doubt this name is, then it's good enough for you. This option is ideal for those concerned with preserving valuable bandwidth, as well as the lazy typists in the group. Just think of the savings! Additionally, if you've ever wanted to enhance the "secret agent" feel of your life, imagine then adrenaline rush steeming from discussion of N. Lapmojo 11 This term, recently created at the jiggleodrome by assembling various letters from a bag of Hy-Vee alphabet crackers, carries oh-so-unique sexual innuendo coupled with a number so as to emphasize the role technology plays in the game. A must vote for those tired of somehow meaningful names. Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. My score is going down because USWest is full of inept fuckwads who have misplaced my DSL order and now tell me it will be 3 weeks before they can hook me up. It's getting to the point where I need to get a whole 'nother jar of vaseline, and I stay standing in all my classes. beN byrNe --------- "Why am I so fond of inactivity?" -Evan Wyse Looking for unique quotes? Visit http://www.byrneweb.com/BUQ ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 19:29:05 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: points As per Judgment 25, Andy Palecek gets 22 points. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 20:09:55 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: another name suggestion Berserker Nomic: "My love for you is like a truck, berserker...." (this was Kuhns' suggestion, but he used his 5, and this is now my new favorite). J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 21:49:13 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: naming Joel D Uckelman writes: >At present, I'm partial to (0x02) for our name. The filled-in smiley face >conveys so much more than any word ever could. [chuckle]. > >If perchance we did adopt this name, how would it be represented in the >rules? Would the graphical and ASCII code representations be equivalent? >Does anyone have a font that contains this character (as none of mine do)? perl -e 'print pack("c", 0x02), "\n"' You'd have to toss it around using some sort of program, or a very smart editor. I know vi and probably emacs will let you enter control characters into a file; perhaps they'll do the same for skank low ascii values. In many programs and fonts skank characters are shown as other skank-looking, but visible, garbage characters. Other than that, one reading the rules wouldn't be able to see the Nomic's name. Try the perl one-liner above, and see what you get on your system. Josh -- Reductio ad absurdum, which Euclid loved so much, is one of a mathematician's finest weapons. It is a far finer gambit than any chess play: a chess player ma y offer the sacrifice of a pawn or even a piece, but a mathematician offers the g ame. - G.H. Hardy ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 21:42:30 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: RFJ 25 & name proposals [Snippage is for hosers] "Santos L. Halper" writes: >>Ben Byrne has been seleced to judge RFJ 25: >> >>The "fraction of favorable votes" received by a Proposal in Rule 202/1 >>refers to the expression (favorable votes)/(total non-neutral votes). > >My Judgement: > TRUE. > >Explanation: > I get too little sleep these days to be able ot explain my actions. >But rest assured they make sense to me. It think it has to do with >discouraging fence-sitting neutrality. That is, if you don't want someone >scoring points, you should have to actually take action of a definitive >nature in order to do, rather than affecting that individuals point total >while remaining noncommital. But I'm not sure, really. It just makes more >sense this way somehow. > > > > Is just me or do I get assigned a lot of cases? > Seems odd given that I have admitted to having > never read the rules. Seems lik a conspiarcy to cost > me points given that checking email for me is a > long-distance call. You're not the first to suspect something like this. It's unclear whether or not the judge assignment has been random or not, but the evidence (the process by which Joel assigns numbers to choose from to players) seems to favor it actually being random, and you being unlucky. Dial 268-3638 with a terminal program to access the FREE campus modem pool, which is sufficient for checking one's mail, and many other things as well. If you're dying for PPP you can dial in to the modem pool and run slirp on your account. > > > >Some game name ideas: > > >That Dumb Game > Works well in conversation: "Hey, man, did you see all the new >messages from that dumb game?" Plus it offers the ever-popular advnatage of >speaking in acronym form, a pastime enjoyed by engineers and computer >enthusiasts alike. Imagine how impressed your friends will be when they >hear you raked in 15 points in T.D.G. last week! > > >N > If it's good enough for Kafka, which no doubt this name is, then >it's good enough for you. This option is ideal for those concerned with >preserving valuable bandwidth, as well as the lazy typists in the group. >Just think of the savings! Additionally, if you've ever wanted to enhance >the "secret agent" feel of your life, imagine then adrenaline rush steeming >from discussion of N. > > >Lapmojo 11 > This term, recently created at the jiggleodrome by assembling >various letters from a bag of Hy-Vee alphabet crackers, carries >oh-so-unique sexual innuendo coupled with a number so as to emphasize the >role technology plays in the game. A must vote for those tired of somehow >meaningful names. > > >Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. > My score is going down because USWest is full of inept fuckwads who >have misplaced my DSL order and now tell me it will be 3 weeks before they >can hook me up. It's getting to the point where I need to get a whole >'nother jar of vaseline, and I stay standing in all my classes. At least they're equal opportunity assfuckers. They screwed DWX for > 3 weeks this summer, on a BUSINESS order to move T1 lines. Josh -- "I've just had seventeen straight whiskeys, I think that's a record." -Dylan Thomas ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 22:15:30 -0500 (CDT) From: "Santos L. Halper" Subject: Re: Nomic: naming >At present, I'm partial to (0x02) for our name. The filled-in smiley face >conveys so much more than any word ever could. [chuckle]. > >If perchance we did adopt this name, how would it be represented in the >rules? Would the graphical and ASCII code representations be equivalent? >Does anyone have a font that contains this character (as none of mine do)? > Since I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about, I really can't help you out, sorry. I looks to me like "zero multiplied by 2 with an insignificant zero in front of the two" more than a filled-in smiley or whatever it's supposed to represent. Other than the names I have thus far suggested, I'd have to say that Pander, Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 and Jeane Kirkpatrick are the best candidates. I must admit I am amazed by the creativity this group of otherwise-staid technical majors has generated. Best batch of Nomic posts i've ever seen! Ben P.S. Haar! and Harf! are clearly different, anyone who has trouble with those probably can't tell the difference between, say, rule 202 and rule 203. beN byrNe --------- "Why am I so fond of inactivity?" -Evan Wyse Looking for unique quotes? Visit http://www.byrneweb.com/BUQ ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 22:32:19 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: randomness and Judge selection The dice server I use for Judge selection has produced lots of high and low numbers and few in between. I'm not sure if this is indicitive of non-randomness or just "bad luck" as Ben put it - - Mike and I discussed this at length last week. If no one has any objections, I could start using dice to select Judges. I'd like some input on this: should we stick with the current method, or shoud I reach for the dice pouch next time? J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 22:41:38 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: naming At 09:49 PM 9/9/98 -0500, you wrote: >Joel D Uckelman writes: >>At present, I'm partial to (0x02) for our name. The filled-in smiley face >>conveys so much more than any word ever could. [chuckle]. >> >>If perchance we did adopt this name, how would it be represented in the >>rules? Would the graphical and ASCII code representations be equivalent? >>Does anyone have a font that contains this character (as none of mine do)? > >perl -e 'print pack("c", 0x02), "\n"' > >You'd have to toss it around using some sort of program, or a very >smart editor. I know vi and probably emacs will let you enter control >characters into a file; perhaps they'll do the same for skank low >ascii values. > >In many programs and fonts skank characters are shown as other >skank-looking, but visible, garbage characters. > >Other than that, one reading the rules wouldn't be able to see >the Nomic's name. Try the perl one-liner above, and see what you get >on your system. > >Josh For anyone who doesn't know: (0x02) is the hexidecimal ASCII code for a filled-in smiley face. I tried the perl above. When viewed in DOS, the filled-in smiley face shows up just fine; however, it just shows up as a black rectangle in everything else. Unfortunately, this is not as cool as I thought it would be. The smiley has much more character than a black rectangle can convey. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 23:56:08 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: randomness and Judge selection Joel D Uckelman writes: >The dice server I use for Judge selection has produced lots of high and low >numbers and few in between. I'm not sure if this is indicitive of >non-randomness or just "bad luck" as Ben put it - - Mike and I discussed >this at length last week. If no one has any objections, I could start using >dice to select Judges. I'd like some input on this: should we stick with >the current method, or shoud I reach for the dice pouch next time? I think we have far too little data to shy away from the dice server just yet. Josh -- Homer: So you're selling what? Apu: Karmic realignment. Homer: You can't sell that. Karma can only be apportioned by the universe. ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:06:17 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: naming Joel D Uckelman writes: >For anyone who doesn't know: (0x02) is the hexidecimal ASCII code for a >filled-in smiley face. > >I tried the perl above. When viewed in DOS, the filled-in smiley face shows >up just fine; however, it just shows up as a black rectangle in everything >else. Unfortunately, this is not as cool as I thought it would be. The >smiley has much more character than a black rectangle can convey. *BZZZT*! >From the ANSI document defining ASCII: /x02 START OF TEXT (STX) ASCII 0x02 is called "stx" or "" for short. What you see when printed is not, AFAIK, defined by the ASCII definition, and is probably largely terminal- and font-dependent. My guess is that this particular ASCII code is used at some low level like during modem, etc. communications, in order to signal the start of a block of data being transmitted. I didn't see any etymology in my quick search, though. Thus, 0x02 is not the ASCII code for a "filled-in smiley face." There is no such ASCII glyph. It's probably just the case that the font in which you were viewing text (i.e. the skank DOS window font) contained some "garbage" glyphs for the nonprinting characters, either for fun or utility. Some fonts, like the one I'm currently seeing my typing in, will show no glyph for nonprinting characters. Some will display a white square, on my machine. Josh -- If you wind up with a boring, miserable life because you listened to your mom, your dad, your teacher, your priest or some guy on TV telling you how to do your shit, then YOU DESERVE IT. - Zappa ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:51:35 -0500 From: Matthew J Kuhns Subject: Nomic: Please vote on Lee As votes have been kind of slow on the subject of Mr. Olson's entry into our soon-to-be-named game, this is just a reminder: You need to vote whether or not to allow Lee into the game. (Of course I would hope everyone will vote yes; given that Lee is such an agreeable sort, who could vote against him?) Matt Kuhns mjkuhns@iastate.edu * * * * * * * * "C'mon, you fuckers think that just 'cause a guy reads comics he can't start some shit? I'll fuckin' take all a' you on!" -Brodie, "Mallrats" ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:56:42 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Nomic: Options As you may or may not have caught in a recent Joel message, Rich Peters, whose turn falls after Palacek's, has not been responding to email, and it's not clear whether or not he has actually been reading it and is aware of what's going on. We need to begin considering, as a group, what we might want to do if Rich is in fact not in contact with the game. Joel and I have discussed this at length, and basically the ideas we have are: o Force us to skip Rich's turn via a call for judgment Sort of cheaty but possible with the way the judicial system works, what with the judgments-have-rule-force clause. o Force us to remove Rich from the game via a call for judgment More cheaty because the rules specifically say that self-removal is the only way to remove a player. But still possible with the way the judicial system works. o Consider Rich's absence an action that renders the game unplayable, and end the game (starting right back where we left off, but without Rich, or at least starting after his turn) Technically, if Rich is not actually "playing," then us being stuck on his turn freezes the game on his turn forever, because there's no legal way to remove him from the game which doesn't involve him removing himself. Because Rich could hypothetically begin turnlike activities at any point, though, we can't say with 100% certainty that his turn will never start, unless he's like dead or something. I think such a decision calls for a healthy dose of pragmatism. More rules-friendly options are scarce since the rules-friendly ones all involve passing proposals, which we are not currently able to do. I've probably misrepresented Joel by saying "ideas we have", but if he cares he'll correct me. Or further explain why he thinks the various options above are morally un-culpable, etc. blah blah blah yackety yack. Josh -- Karma police arrest this man He talks in maths, he buzzes like a fridge He`s like a detuned radio ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 02:13:42 -0700 From: Mueller Subject: Re: Nomic: Please vote on Lee >As votes have been kind of slow on the subject of Mr. Olson's entry into >our soon-to-be-named game, this is just a reminder: > >You need to vote whether or not to allow Lee into the game. (Of course I >would hope everyone will vote yes; given that Lee is such an agreeable >sort, who could vote against him?) Yes Tom Mueller (another new player) mueller4@sonic.net ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:47:52 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Options At 12:56 AM 9/10/98 -0500, you wrote: >As you may or may not have caught in a recent Joel message, >Rich Peters, whose turn falls after Palacek's, has not been >responding to email, and it's not clear whether or not he >has actually been reading it and is aware of what's going on. > >We need to begin considering, as a group, what we might want to >do if Rich is in fact not in contact with the game. Joel and I have >discussed this at length, and basically the ideas we have are: > >o Force us to skip Rich's turn via a call for judgment > >Sort of cheaty but possible with the way the judicial system works, >what with the judgments-have-rule-force clause. > >o Force us to remove Rich from the game via a call for judgment > >More cheaty because the rules specifically say that self-removal >is the only way to remove a player. But still possible with the >way the judicial system works. Of course, I would be compelled to appeal either of these decisions on principle, and I would hope that any judge would not consider such a gross violation of the rules. >o Consider Rich's absence an action that renders the game unplayable, > and end the game (starting right back where we left off, but without > Rich, or at least starting after his turn) > >Technically, if Rich is not actually "playing," then us being stuck >on his turn freezes the game on his turn forever, because there's >no legal way to remove him from the game which doesn't involve him >removing himself. Because Rich could hypothetically begin turnlike >activities at any point, though, we can't say with 100% certainty >that his turn will never start, unless he's like dead or something. >I think such a decision calls for a healthy dose of pragmatism. This option seems weak in its conclusion. If Rich is not actually "playing", and therefore not a Player, then we don't have to worry about all of this and it would now be Schroeder's turn. By virtue that a Player must consent to representation in the game as per the definition of Player, if we wait a reasonable amount of time after asking for that consent, then we could possibly conclude that Rich does not qualify as a player. This situation, to me, is the least questionable mehtod of attack. >More rules-friendly options are scarce since the rules-friendly ones >all involve passing proposals, which we are not currently able to do. > >I've probably misrepresented Joel by saying "ideas we have", but >if he cares he'll correct me. Or further explain why he thinks >the various options above are morally un-culpable, etc. blah blah >blah yackety yack. > >Josh Finally, we may not need recourse to the legal system to handle this. I tried calling Rich last evening, and I'll try again tonight if he hasn't returned my call. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:05:44 CDT From: Nicholas C Osborn Subject: Nomic: name I wish to repeal my previous three submissions in favor of what I believe to be a true hum-dinger. The English phonetic spelling follows: "nomic thanatou" This translates to "nomic of death" or "death's nomic." I feel a connection back to the roots of the game would serve us well; plus,x it makes us sound like we know what we're doing. I'm just starting to learn Greek, but I know this is accurate. Nomic is not an actual Greek word; it's just based on "nomos." When written in Greek, the above name would look something like the following: "vouik 0avatou" I desire my submission to be in the actual Greek characters. If anyone would like to know what this would be, let me know. I don't have time to spell it out. ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:48:43 CDT From: caerdwyn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: Please vote on Lee > As votes have been kind of slow on the subject of Mr. Olson's entry into > our soon-to-be-named game, this is just a reminder: > > You need to vote whether or not to allow Lee into the game. (Of course I > would hope everyone will vote yes; given that Lee is such an agreeable > sort, who could vote against him?) > > > Matt Kuhns > mjkuhns@iastate.edu > * * * * * * * * > "C'mon, you fuckers think that just 'cause a guy reads comics > he can't start some shit? I'll fuckin' take all a' you on!" > -Brodie, "Mallrats" Hear, Hear! Lee Olson's the shit, I vote to allow his entry into the game on the grounds that he always where his cowboy boots and hat when posting to the group. Yeeeeeha! --- Life used to suck But now I'm better Haar caerdwyn@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:44:39 CDT From: caerdwyn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: randomness and Judge selection > The dice server I use for Judge selection has produced lots of high and low > numbers and few in between. I'm not sure if this is indicitive of > non-randomness or just "bad luck" as Ben put it - - Mike and I discussed > this at length last week. If no one has any objections, I could start using > dice to select Judges. I'd like some input on this: should we stick with > the current method, or shoud I reach for the dice pouch next time? > > J. Uckelman > uckelman@iastate.edu Pull out the old dice bag, better yet, pair up the names on the list of eligible judges and flip a coin, top player heads, bottom tails. Then place the 'winner's' name in a second list, and repeat step one. A few iterations should give a fine random selection. --- Life used to suck But now I'm better Haar caerdwyn@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:46:49 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: name Nicholas C Osborn writes: >I wish to repeal my previous three submissions in favor of what I believe >to be a true hum-dinger. The English phonetic spelling follows: Is this allowed? :) There were no provisions made for repeal of submissions, so if you've hit your five you can't submit any more. :) >"nomic thanatou" > >This translates to "nomic of death" or "death's nomic." I feel a >connection back to the roots of the game would serve us well; plus,x it >makes us sound like we know what we're doing. I'm just starting to learn >Greek, but I know this is accurate. Nomic is not an actual Greek >word; it's just based on "nomos." When written in Greek, the above name >would look something like the following: > >"vouik 0avatou" Something like nu omega ? iota kappa theta alpha nu alpha tau omega ? Are the u's upsilons? Josh -- I read in the proof sheets of Hardy on Ramanujan: "As someone said, each of the positive integers was one of his personal friends." My reaction was, "I wonder who said that; I wish I had." In the next proof­sheets I read, "It was Littlewood who said..." - J.E. Littlewood ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:41:00 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Options Joel D Uckelman writes: >Of course, I would be compelled to appeal either of these decisions on >principle, and I would hope that any judge would not consider such a gross >violation of the rules. I don't think you're completely justified in doing so unless you can provide any alternative plans, which you're satisfied with. If you can find no other alternatives and we're forced to stick to principles, the game will not go on. >This option seems weak in its conclusion. If Rich is not actually >"playing", and therefore not a Player, then we don't have to worry about >all of this and it would now be Schroeder's turn. By virtue that a Player >must consent to representation in the game as per the definition of Player, >if we wait a reasonable amount of time after asking for that consent, then >we could possibly conclude that Rich does not qualify as a player. This >situation, to me, is the least questionable mehtod of attack. If we arrive at Sunday and we haven't heard from Rich I'd say that's far more than enough time. Of course, as you say, no amount of time is actually "long enough." Slippery slope, slipperly slope. Isn't the game-signon the process in which "consent" is obtained? Afterward, I don't recall anything that says a player must reaffirm his or her consent, so we're not necessarily justified in asking for his consent to representation again, since he's already given it. Josh -- Don`t just read it; fight it! Ask your own questions, look for your own example s, discover your own proofs. Is the hypothesis necessary? Is the converse true? What happens in the classical special case? What about the degenerate cases? Where does the proof use the hypothesis? - Paul Halmos ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 14:14:07 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: name At 11:46 AM 9/10/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Nicholas C Osborn writes: >>I wish to repeal my previous three submissions in favor of what I believe >>to be a true hum-dinger. The English phonetic spelling follows: > >Is this allowed? :) There were no provisions made for repeal of submissions, >so if you've hit your five you can't submit any more. :) Well, in the interest of selecting the best name, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to submit the 5 (or less) that you want rather than be forced to stick with the first 5 you send in, so long as you specify that you're doing this. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 15:13:58 -0500 From: Thomas J Plagge Subject: Re: Nomic: Please vote on Lee >Hear, Hear! Lee Olson's the shit, I vote to allow his entry into the game >on the grounds that he always where his cowboy boots and hat when posting >to the group. Yeeeeeha! > >Haar >caerdwyn@iastate.edu I don't know Mr. Olson personally, and I'm sure he is in fact the shit, but I'm tempted to vote against him on the grounds that his supporter here is obviously a fugitive, on the run from the Grammar Police. :) But, I sup-pooose. Add one more to the "yes" column. ----- -tom "That morning in Miami when the President got me on the phone, I said: 'Judy, he wants me to run for Vice President.' And Judy said: 'Can you get out of it?'" -Spiro T. Agnew ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 15:28:53 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: naming is almost over The name suggestion period will be over in approximately 37 minutes. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 16:08:33 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: suggestion period is over That's it. No more suggestions. I'll send the ballot out to the list as soon as I return from quiz bowl practice. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 19:19:18 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Names Ballot Below is the list of names submitted within the allowable period. For your ballot to be considered valid, you must assign a unique integer in the range [0,200] (the square brackets mean inclusive) to each name. If you screw up by using the same number twice or don't assign a number to each choice, your ballot will be invalid. The moral here: be careful. Recheck your ballot before you send it to me, as I wouldn't want to be forced to disqualify it. Also, this is a _48_ hour voting period, unlike our normal 36 hour ones. If you have any questions or think I made a mistake in these instructions or on the list, please let me know ASAP so it can be rectified. *************************************************************************** Fuckweasal Nomic 2000 we threw gasoline on the fire and now we have stumps for arms and no eyebrows (0x02) Nick Nomic ErgoNomic The People's Popular Nomic Front ASCII 0x07 Nomic The Nomic Formerly Known as Nomic Nomic Popular People's Front McNomic NomicPro Gold '98 Jeane Kirkpatrick Bob Shitferret Nomic 3000 Haar's Loophole Playground Nomic People's Front THE PENTAVERATE B.L.O., Division of Games and Recreation det(Pleasure Matrix) LANPOYS Stankopoly Fun With Fire Nomic II: Urban Harvest Uckelman for President Assgoblin Nomic 4000 Pander Pandernomic Harf! That Dumb Game N Lapmojo 11 Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. Berserker Nomic nomic thantatou **************************************************************************** ****** J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 21:46:52 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: name > > Nicholas C Osborn writes: > >I wish to repeal my previous three submissions in favor of what I believe > >to be a true hum-dinger. The English phonetic spelling follows: > > Is this allowed? :) There were no provisions made for repeal of submissions, > so if you've hit your five you can't submit any more. :) > > >"nomic thanatou" > > > >This translates to "nomic of death" or "death's nomic." I feel a > >connection back to the roots of the game would serve us well; plus,x it > >makes us sound like we know what we're doing. I'm just starting to learn > >Greek, but I know this is accurate. Nomic is not an actual Greek > >word; it's just based on "nomos." When written in Greek, the above name > >would look something like the following: > > > >"vouik 0avatou" > > Something like > > nu > omega > ? > iota > kappa > > theta > alpha > nu > alpha > tau > omega > ? > > Are the u's upsilons? > > > Josh > > -- > I read in the proof sheets of Hardy on Ramanujan: "As someone said, each of > the positive integers was one of his personal friends." My reaction was, "I > wonder who said that; I wish I had." In the next proof­sheets I read, "It was > Littlewood who said..." > - J.E. Littlewood > Thanks, Josh. The first "u" is a mu, the second an upsilon. n ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 23:07:30 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: name nosborn@iastate.edu writes: >Thanks, Josh. The first "u" is a mu, the second an upsilon. > >n [Digression follows] Mu? Then what makes a [m] sound in Greek? I thought it was mu, but I don't really know my Greek alphabet that well. Josh -- The mechanics of writing can be taught, the basic rules and tools and guidelines, but as in any art, all the rest comes from doing and doing and doing. The most important part of the process is learning to trust one's own vision, to work hard at developing one's own style and voice, and then having the confidence to follow where it goes. - Mary McGarry Morris ________________________________________ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 23:25:35 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: yet another Ballot Fix "nomic thantatou" should read instead, "nomic thanatou". I regret any inconvenience this may have caused to those of us who read Greek. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 07:32:01 -0500 (CDT) From: "Santos L. Halper" Subject: Re: Nomic: Names Ballot 160 >Fuckweasel Nomic 2000 188 >we threw gasoline on the fire and now we have stumps for arms and no eyebrows 0 >(0x02) 1 >Nick Nomic 75 >ErgoNomic 8 >The People's Popular Nomic Front 3 >ASCII 0x07 Nomic 28 >The Nomic Formerly Known as Nomic 4 >Nomic Popular People's Front 5 >McNomic 10 >NomicPro Gold '98 162 >Jeane Kirkpatrick 40 >Bob 110 >Shitferret Nomic 3000 180 >Haar's Loophole Playground 7 >Nomic People's Front 2 >THE PENTAVERATE 92 >B.L.O., Division of Games and Recreation 116 >det(Pleasure Matrix) 6 >LANPOYS 9 >Stankopoly 25 >Fun With Fire 64 >Nomic II: Urban Harvest 80 >Uckelman for President 13 >Assgoblin Nomic 4000 111 >Pander 198 >Pandernomic 150 >Harf! 197 >That Dumb Game 182 >N 200 >Lapmojo 11 199 >Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. 146 >Berserker Nomic 118 >nomic thantatou Note: Joel, aren't you glad YOU were deemed vote tabulator? What a fucking pain in the arse! beN byrNe --------- "Why am I so fond of inactivity?" -Evan Wyse Looking for unique quotes? Visit http://www.byrneweb.com/BUQ ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 10:23:42 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: name > > nosborn@iastate.edu writes: > >Thanks, Josh. The first "u" is a mu, the second an upsilon. > > > >n > > [Digression follows] > > Mu? Then what makes a [m] sound in Greek? I thought it was mu, > but I don't really know my Greek alphabet that well. > > > > Josh > > -- > The mechanics of writing can be taught, the basic > rules and tools and guidelines, but as in any art, > all the rest comes from doing and doing and doing. > The most important part of the process is learning > to trust one's own vision, to work hard at developing > one's own style and voice, and then having the > confidence to follow where it goes. > > - Mary McGarry Morris > Mu does make the "m" sound. It's just that "u" has the closest appearance to mu. That's why I used "u" in place of mu. n ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 10:30:32 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Ballot Fix There should be 34 names on your ballots. If you've finished assigning scores and have not assigned 34 of them, you've made a mistake. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 12:07:55 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Names Ballot "Santos L. Halper" writes: >Note: Joel, aren't you glad YOU were deemed vote tabulator? What a fucking >pain in the arse! Thanks for contaminating the voting process, Santos. Josh -- "Since using my Fernandes Sustainer, I have become the life and soul of any and every party. Guys look at me anxiously from corners of the room, while fawning bimbettes seek my opinions on the fetishings of music's inherent and delineated meanings." - Robert Fripp ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 12:05:17 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: name nosborn@iastate.edu writes: >Mu does make the "m" sound. It's just that "u" has the closest appearance >to mu. That's why I used "u" in place of mu. > >n My question arose from the fact that I thought one of the 'u's you said was a mu was in a place which did not in fact have an [m] sound in the phrase "nomic thanatous". Was I mistaken? Josh -- This paper contains much that is new and much that is true. Unfortunately, that which is true is not new and that which is new is not true. - Anonymous Referee's report ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 13:48:46 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Crisis averted, our game is saved at the zero hour... I was finally able to contact Rich and thus have confirmed that he is indeed not playing. Since Tom Plagge's turn must be skipped the first time before he becomes a full-flegged player, it is now Jeff Schroeder's turn. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 16:29:34 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Problem with N If N wins as a name, Jeff Schroeder may win the game. It just happens that N (or n) is used as a variable in several rules (viz. the def. of majority, winning conditions). If N is defined as the name of the game, then it may become impossible to count votes. Does anyone else see this as the case? J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 16:47:19 CDT From: "Abyss of ..." Subject: Nomic: N Who the hell is going to vote for N? Except maybe Jeff, now. It's a dumb name and it wouldn't matter anyway because 'N' is completely different from 'n'. Plus, you can have two different things with the same name. It wouldn't be a problem if another Joel Uckelman joined the game, at least no game problem. Damon __________ The very stone one kicks with one's boot will outlast Shakespeare. -- Virginia Woolf ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 16:54:14 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: N At 04:47 PM 9/11/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Who the hell is going to vote for N? Except maybe Jeff, now. It's a dumb >name and it wouldn't matter anyway because 'N' is completely different >from 'n'. Plus, you can have two different things with the same name. It >wouldn't be a problem if another Joel Uckelman joined the game, at least >no game problem. > >Damon > I disagree on all counts. Rule 001 holds all case permutations of N to be identical. Also, I think we'd have a problem if anyone with the same surname as an existing player tried to join the game. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 17:41:13 CDT From: "Abyss of ..." Subject: Nomic: Not on all counts Joel, You still never addressed the popularity argument against this situation ever occurring. It is not clear that you disagree on all counts. Anyway, rule 001 says, "Nomic shall refer to the specific instance of a Nomic game which possesses the body of rules containing this definition, unless it is made clear, whether explicitly or via the context, that Nomic refers to something else." In my opinion it is made clear via context that the name of the game and the variable are in fact different entities used for different things. The sentence implies common sense be used in determining this: "is made clear." I disagree with Mr. Uckelman on all counts also; and I add a completely unnecessary, "Your Mom!" Damon __________ The very stone one kicks with one's boot will outlast Shakespeare. -- Virginia Woolf ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:02:12 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: name > > nosborn@iastate.edu writes: > >Mu does make the "m" sound. It's just that "u" has the closest appearance > >to mu. That's why I used "u" in place of mu. > > > >n > > My question arose from the fact that I thought one of the 'u's you > said was a mu was in a place which did not in fact have an [m] sound > in the phrase "nomic thanatous". Was I mistaken? > > > > > Josh > > -- > This paper contains much that is new and much that is true. Unfortunately, > that which is true is not new and that which is new is not true. > - Anonymous Referee's report > I don't know what I originally posted, but the closest-proximity-to actual-Greek version should have read "vouik 0avatou". The first "u" is mu, the second upsilon. n ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:13:52 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N Poppycock! Bull! That's ridiculus! You might have a point. Somebody please give this some thought. We should be able to withdraw our ballots and revote if necessary. Nick Osborn > If N wins as a name, Jeff Schroeder may win the game. It just happens that > N (or n) is used as a variable in several rules (viz. the def. of majority, > winning conditions). If N is defined as the name of the game, then it may > become impossible to count votes. Does anyone else see this as the case? > > J. Uckelman > uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 23:58:54 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N Joel D Uckelman writes: >If N wins as a name, Jeff Schroeder may win the game. It just happens that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ No offense to Jeff, but I don't remember Jeff being real big on Kafka, etc. I recall the spiel for "N" talking about, "well, Kafka would dig it," or something like that. Are you sure someone else didn't propose this name? If Jeff is in fact into Kafka, then I'll put my foot in my mouth just as soon as I can find my nail clippers. Josh thinks somebody is tripping, maybe it's me -- "I've just had seventeen straight whiskeys, I think that's a record." -Dylan Thomas ________________________________________ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 23:55:13 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Not on all counts "Abyss of ..." writes: >Anyway, rule 001 says, "Nomic shall refer to the specific instance of a >Nomic game which possesses the body of rules containing this definition, >unless it is made clear, whether explicitly or via the context, that >Nomic refers to something else." > >In my opinion it is made clear via context that the name of the game and >the variable are in fact different entities used for different things. >The sentence implies common sense be used in determining this: "is made >clear." To emphasize Damon's point, note the following rule text: For a given r, an r-majority shall be defined as a function from the positive integers to the positive integers, whose value for an argument N is the smallest integer m such that m is greater than or equal to r multiplied by N. A simple majority shall be defined as an (N+1)/(2N)-majority. Convention in a mathematical or semi-mathematical contex such as the one in this rule (and don't argue with me about whether or not it's mathematical or semi-mathematical, because it is, I help write it to be that way) is that if a variable name is introduced "informally," i.e. in a fashion similar to that above, "an argument N," what is actually meant is E N [1] or "there exists an N." Note that above since an r-majority is defined as r: Z+ -> Z+, "an argument N" means that N is in Z+, so we can be more specific, and say we actually mean E N in Z+ Now: why the fuck do you, the dear reader, care? Because a variable introduced in this fashion has a certain scope, governed by the scoping rules for "E". In effect variables quantified existentially are "dummy" variables for any subformula within the scope of the quantifier, which do not contain their own quantifiers quantifying the same variable name again. This should remind the dear reader of integration, in certain situations. Thus, in closing: 'N's which appear in the manner Joel suggested might be harmful should not be and are not a problem. [2] Josh [1]: Note that the "E" is really written backwards. [2]: Unless you WANT to be a fuckhead if, say, you are forced to issue a judgment on this point. -- "I've just had seventeen straight whiskeys, I think that's a record." -Dylan Thomas ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:25:54 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Crisis averted, our game is saved at the zero hour... Joel D Uckelman writes: >(1) 1. Ax(Tx -> Px) Assumption >(1) 2. Tr -> Pr 1, A instantiation >(3) 3. ~Pr Assumption >(1,3) 4. ~Tr 2,3 modus tolens > >(note: the A's are supposed to be inverted as universal quantifiers, but I >can't do that by e-mail). > >For those not versed in predicate logic, the above argument runs thusly: I didn't send this to anyone but you, so unless you copied it (which I don't think you did) I'm the only one to see your reply. However, I'm sending this to the list because I think something important has come up. READ THIS CAREFULLY. >For any x such that x has a turn, x must be a player. If Rich has a turn, >then he must be a player. Rich is not a player. Therefore, Rich cannot have >a turn. > >Does that address your concern? I think you're probalby questioning the >truthfulness of assumption 1. Rules 201/1 and 202/1 imply (at least to me) >that turns are solely the province of Players, that turns exist only due to >their corresponding Player, and would cease to be upon the non-existance of >said player. I claim that if you see that in the rules, then you're seeing too much. At most you should be able to say that 201, 202 => that turns' beginnings require players. It's the ceasing that I'm questioning. 201 says each player shall take "one whole turn." This implies that there are deviant turns, which are bad. Rule 201/1, mutable Order of Play Players shall alternate alphabetical order by surname, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted. All Players begin with zero points. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 0. Initial Mutable Rule, 11 March 1998 1. Altered by Administrative Review, 21 July 1998 ______________________________________________________________________ Rule 202/1, mutable Parts of a Turn and Proposal Scoring One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) subtracting 291 from the ordinal number of the proposal, multiplying the result by the fraction of favorable votes it received, rounded to the nearest integer, and adding the resulting value to the Player's score. Note the under-emphasized (heh heh) portions. I posit that by moving on to the next turn, after Rich's turn had officially started, we or somebody did at least one of the following: skipped or passed a turn, Rich's omitted the first part to Rich's turn omitted the second part to Rich's turn It's arguable that we didn't do the first, as we had at least begun the turn. The second two are IMO just plain true, since we started Rich's turn, and when we moved on to the next turn, neither (1) or (2) in 202 had occurred. Thus, I'll call for judgment on the following statement: Former player Rich Peters did not complete a whole turn, as described in rule 202, and thus rule 201 was violated. I exclude Joel Uckelman, Jill Wittrock, and Jeff Schroeder from the pool. Joel because I'd like this statement to be judged TRUE, Jill because I'd like the judge to be responsive, and Jeff because it's putatively his turn now, and we don't want any funny business with Jeff being determined the one who broke the rules, by taking the next turn. Sorry, Jeff. :) If the judgment is TRUE, we must then determine who broke the rule. If it wasn't Rich then things get hazy. Josh -- Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. - William of Occam ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:31:19 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N At 11:58 PM 9/11/98 -0500, you wrote: >Joel D Uckelman writes: >>If N wins as a name, Jeff Schroeder may win the game. It just happens that > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >No offense to Jeff, but I don't remember Jeff being real big on >Kafka, etc. I recall the spiel for "N" talking about, "well, Kafka >would dig it," or something like that. Are you sure someone else >didn't propose this name? > >If Jeff is in fact into Kafka, then I'll put my foot in my mouth >just as soon as I can find my nail clippers. > >Josh >thinks somebody is tripping, maybe it's me The origin of the name (it was Ben's) and it being Jeff's turn are unrelated. If the name N would prevent votes from being counted through redefining of the majority function, Jeff would win the game (not the naming contest) as it is currently his turn. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:30:09 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N Josh Kortbein writes: > >Joel D Uckelman writes: >>If N wins as a name, Jeff Schroeder may win the game. It just happens that > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >No offense to Jeff, but I don't remember Jeff being real big on >Kafka, etc. I recall the spiel for "N" talking about, "well, Kafka >would dig it," or something like that. Are you sure someone else >didn't propose this name? > >If Jeff is in fact into Kafka, then I'll put my foot in my mouth >just as soon as I can find my nail clippers. > >Josh >thinks somebody is tripping, maybe it's me I now think this was one of Ben's names. See the list of proposed names: That Dumb Game N Lapmojo 11 Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. Joel apparently lists them in the order they were submitted, as the first of these and the last three are all Ben's. Furthermore, all of my names came first, as per the submission order. So if Joel's claims about N were even tenable, it would be Ben who would win, probably, not Jeff. Josh -- Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. - William of Occam ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:46:17 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N Joel D Uckelman writes: >The origin of the name (it was Ben's) and it being Jeff's turn are >unrelated. If the name N would prevent votes from being counted through >redefining of the majority function, Jeff would win the game (not the >naming contest) as it is currently his turn. Silly me, I was thinking that the impossibility-of-further-play condition was nice enough to grant the winnership to the person who caused the problem. The person unable to complete a turn is not necessarily that person. If this all fell apart, I would consider Ben to be at the root of the problem. Clearly this is tendentious as, if we were allowed to trace things back, we could just as well trace them back to Peter Suber. Irrelevant anyway since Joel's tripping, but interesting. Josh -- I read in the proof sheets of Hardy on Ramanujan: "As someone said, each of the positive integers was one of his personal friends." My reaction was, "I wonder who said that; I wish I had." In the next proof­sheets I read, "It was Littlewood who said..." - J.E. Littlewood ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:52:23 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N At 12:30 AM 9/12/98 -0500, you wrote: >Josh Kortbein writes: >> >>Joel D Uckelman writes: >>>If N wins as a name, Jeff Schroeder may win the game. It just happens that >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >>No offense to Jeff, but I don't remember Jeff being real big on >>Kafka, etc. I recall the spiel for "N" talking about, "well, Kafka >>would dig it," or something like that. Are you sure someone else >>didn't propose this name? >> >>If Jeff is in fact into Kafka, then I'll put my foot in my mouth >>just as soon as I can find my nail clippers. >> >>Josh >>thinks somebody is tripping, maybe it's me > >I now think this was one of Ben's names. See the list of >proposed names: > > That Dumb Game > N > Lapmojo 11 > Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. > >Joel apparently lists them in the order they were submitted, as >the first of these and the last three are all Ben's. Furthermore, >all of my names came first, as per the submission order. > >So if Joel's claims about N were even tenable, it would be Ben who >would win, probably, not Jeff. > >Josh You are failing to see my point. Ben could not win the game due to contradiction if N is selected, as it is not currently his turn. If N won, I wouldn't be able to deliver a decision as to the passage/failure of the next proposal, thus Schroeder would win due to contradiction because it would become impossible for his turn to end. If there is something glaringly wrong in my reasoning, please point it out, for I am oblivious to it. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 01:02:36 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: judge selection Matt Kuhns has been assigned to RFJ 26: Former player Rich Peters did not complete a whole turn, as described in rule 202, and thus rule 201 was violated. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 01:04:10 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N Joel D Uckelman writes: >contradiction if N is selected, as it is not currently his turn. If N won, >I wouldn't be able to deliver a decision as to the passage/failure of the ... and of course, you mean, "If N won, and if I weren't able to...", because you would be able to, unless you have some sort of brilliant reason why not. Josh -- Professional music critics rarely possess any aptitude for mathematics. Hence, they like to compare musical processes unintelligible to them with the equally darksome methods of mathematical thinking. - Nicholas Slonimsky ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 01:02:49 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Problem with N Joel D Uckelman writes: >You are failing to see my point. Ben could not win the game due to >contradiction if N is selected, as it is not currently his turn. If N won, >I wouldn't be able to deliver a decision as to the passage/failure of the >next proposal, thus Schroeder would win due to contradiction because it >would become impossible for his turn to end. If there is something >glaringly wrong in my reasoning, please point it out, for I am oblivious to >it. NB: Majordomo does not always send messages to the list in chronological order with respect to sending time. Check the dates and I think you'll find that I send that message before you had even explained that Jeff would indeed be the winner - or at least, before that message had arrived at the list. Sheesh. Josh -- If you wind up with a boring, miserable life because you listened to your mom, your dad, your teacher, your priest or some guy on TV telling you how to do your shit, then YOU DESERVE IT. - Zappa ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 02:13:22 -0500 From: Matthew J Kuhns Subject: Nomic: Judgment #26 Statement: >Former player Rich Peters did not complete a whole turn, as described >in rule 202, and thus rule 201 was violated. Judgment: FALSE Comments: Former player Rich Peters did not complete a whole turn, but more importantly did not ever begin a turn at all. As Osborn pointed out, Rule 202 describes a turn as "two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) subtracting 291 from the ordinal number of the proposal, multiplying the result by the fraction of favorable votes it received, rounded to the nearest integer, and adding the resulting value to the Player's score. While it has been our custom to assume a turn as beginning immediately following the completion of the previous turn, this is stated nowhere in the rules, nor is it stated that it must always be someone's turn. Therefore, no turn was skipped, passed or partially omitted, and rule 201 was not violated. OFF THE RECORD: Another disaster averted... but this area is still hazy and just a little unstable. Something for future proposals to address, I hope. Matt Kuhns mjkuhns@iastate.edu * * * * * * * * "C'mon, you fuckers think that just 'cause a guy reads comics he can't start some shit? I'll fuckin' take all a' you on!" -Brodie, "Mallrats" ________________________________________ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 20:42:23 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Name results Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye. The results are in: we are now playing Berserker Nomic. (Olaf: Skerlnik.) Congratulations to Matt Kuhns for creating the winning name. Below are the final name standings: 1151 Berserker Nomic 1028 Pandernomic 984 N 886 Nomic II: Urban Harvest 848 nomic thantatou 792 we threw gasoline on the fire and now we have stumps for arms and no eyebrows 761 Nomic People's Front 743 THE PENTAVERATE 735 B.L.O., Division of Games and Recreation 721 Fuckweasal Nomic 2000 656 That Dumb Game 654 ErgoNomic 620 The People's Popular Nomic Front 590 det(Pleasure Matrix) 583 Lapmojo 11 564 Jeane Kirkpatrick 560 Nomic Popular People's Front 551 Fun With Fire 531 Pander 521 Assgoblin Nomic 4000 485 The Nomic Formerly Known as Nomic 482 Stankopoly 467 Thanks for the anal rape, USWest. 392 Harf! 363 (0x02) 363 ASCII 0x07 Nomic 363 NomicPro Gold '98 338 Shitferret Nomic 3000 311 LANPOYS 276 Uckelman for President 251 Haar's Loophole Playground 234 Bob 226 McNomic 46 Nick Nomic J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 00:47:37 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Fwd: RFJ 27 >X-envelope-info: >X-Sender: mueller4@sonic.net >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) >Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 23:00:35 -0400 >To: uckelman@iastate.edu >From: Mueller >Subject: Re: Nomic: Name results > >At 08:42 PM 9/12/98 -0500, you wrote: >>Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye. The results are in: we are now playing Berserker >>Nomic. (Olaf: Skerlnik.) Congratulations to Matt Kuhns for creating the >>winning name. Below are the final name standings: >> >>1151 Berserker Nomic >>1028 Pandernomic >> 984 N >> 886 Nomic II: Urban Harvest > >I'm not sure if I post publicly or to you, so if its you, here is my RFJ >(not including this stuff before the colon): > >I name Matt Kuhns as not to judge this RFJ because it is his suggested game >name that is being called into question. > >Rule 313 says (among other things): > >>Any player has the right protest an elected name on >>grounds that it is profane or vulgar within 48 hours >>of its passage. > >The American Heritage dictionary describes profane as being: > >>Showing contempt or irreverance towards God or sacred >>things; blasphemous. > >Under Rule 313 I protest the name Berserker Nomic. If I show that it is >profane or vulgar this RFJ should be successful. I choose to try for >profane. Something is profane if it shows either contempt OR irreverance >towards either God OR sacred >things. Not wanting to involve myself in a theological debate on Nomic's >status as a God. I decide to demonstrate that Nomic is a sacred thing, and >that the name Berserker Nomic shows contempt for this sacred thing. > >Contempt (from the same source) is: > >>Open disrespect or willful disobedience of the >>authority of a court of law or a legislative body. > >Sacred is: > >>Worthy of respect; venerable. > >Note that this interpretation is consistent: both definitions speak of >disrespect. I ask, among a group defined by a common participation in a >rule game which requires respect of the rules to be played, what is most >venerable? The game and rules themseles. Moreover, what is a Nomic but a >legislative body? > >How does the name Berserker Nomic disrespect a legislative body? By >drawing on a word like berserk which is defined (in the same source as >above) as: > >>Destructivey or frenetically violent; deranged. > >If a nomic describes itself thusly it does two things: >(1) It calls into question (by reference) the respect for the rules which >is necessary to play the game when it mentions violent derangment (a state >clearly not conducive to care and respect for delicate rule systems) >or >(2) It indicates a dangerous predatory bent. What can a nomic game hope to >be frenetically violent against but other nomics. This is a much more >egregious disrespect of other nomics, other legislative bodies. (Not to >mention the fact that pragmatically speaking, this name might lead other >nomics to distrust us.) > >By this reasoning, I believe that whoever judges this RFJ will see that >agreement with this RFJ is required. > >Tom Mueller >mueller4@sonic.net > J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 00:57:18 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: RFJ 27 judge assignment Nick Osborn has been assigned to judge RFJ 27: The name "Berserker Nomic" is vulgar or profane under Rule 313/0. [This is my reconstruction of the statement from the RFJ. It's probably pointless to dismiss this on grounds that there was no clearly defined statement, as this is obviously the claim, and if it were dismissed, T. Mueller would just submit this claim again anyway. -- J.U.] J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:00:00 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: page updates As soon as the name is settled, I plan to do all of the page updates from the last several days. I appologize for any inconvenience or confusion this may have caused, as the page is now 3 days out of date. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:01:17 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: page updates Joel D Uckelman writes: >As soon as the name is settled, I plan to do all of the page updates from >the last several days. I appologize for any inconvenience or confusion this >may have caused, as the page is now 3 days out of date. We're very disappointed in you! Josh :) -- Jon like pictures. Pretty pictures make Jon happy. Ugly Greek letters make Jon very angry. ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:22:23 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Fwd: RFJ 27 A response: At 12:47 AM 9/13/98 -0500, Tom Mueller wrote: >>The American Heritage dictionary describes profane as being: >> >>>Showing contempt or irreverance towards God or sacred >>>things; blasphemous. >> >>Under Rule 313 I protest the name Berserker Nomic. If I show that it is >>profane or vulgar this RFJ should be successful. I choose to try for >>profane. Something is profane if it shows either contempt OR irreverance >>towards either God OR sacred >>things. Not wanting to involve myself in a theological debate on Nomic's >>status as a God. I decide to demonstrate that Nomic is a sacred thing, and >>that the name Berserker Nomic shows contempt for this sacred thing. My dictionary, Webster's Collegiate, 10th Ed., gives no indication in any of its definitions that profane has any denotation specifically toward sacred things. In any case, both "profane" and "vulgar" are meant as "obscene" in this case, i.e. taboo in polite usage. >>Contempt (from the same source) is: >> >>>Open disrespect or willful disobedience of the >>>authority of a court of law or a legislative body. >> >>Sacred is: >> >>>Worthy of respect; venerable. I take issue with your use of "sacred" here. The definition you use is 2b by my dictionary, i.e. not the most common usage. "Sacred" generally implies connections to one or more dieties; it's meaning is more at "holy." >>Note that this interpretation is consistent: both definitions speak of >>disrespect. I ask, among a group defined by a common participation in a >>rule game which requires respect of the rules to be played, what is most >>venerable? The game and rules themseles. Moreover, what is a Nomic but a >>legislative body? >> >>How does the name Berserker Nomic disrespect a legislative body? By >>drawing on a word like berserk which is defined (in the same source as >>above) as: >> >>>Destructivey or frenetically violent; deranged. >> "Berserker" is distinct in two senses from "berserk": 1. It is the title of a song in the movie _Clerks_, which has very little to do with your def. 2. It is an epithet applied to Viking warriors. Both senses were considered when submitting this name, and 1 was more strongly appealed to than 2 in this case, although I have no objections to 2. Neither of these could be said to be profane or vulgar under a more reasonable definition. >>If a nomic describes itself thusly it does two things: >>(1) It calls into question (by reference) the respect for the rules which >>is necessary to play the game when it mentions violent derangment (a state >>clearly not conducive to care and respect for delicate rule systems) Violent bursts of action do tend to characterize the game play thus far, and I'd venture to say that we all have to be a little deranged (in relation to the "normal" person) to enjoy this game anyway. No argument there -- that fits pretty well. >>(2) It indicates a dangerous predatory bent. What can a nomic game hope to >>be frenetically violent against but other nomics. This is a much more >>egregious disrespect of other nomics, other legislative bodies. (Not to >>mention the fact that pragmatically speaking, this name might lead other >>nomics to distrust us.) I don't see how our name could prevent us from bein a peace-loving nomic. Of course, I may be wrong in saying that we're a peaceful nomic in the first place, but I digress. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:40:19 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Fwd: RFJ 27 Joel D Uckelman writes: >A response: ... and some agreement with it. >My dictionary, Webster's Collegiate, 10th Ed., gives no indication in any >of its definitions that profane has any denotation specifically toward >sacred things. In any case, both "profane" and "vulgar" are meant as >"obscene" in this case, i.e. taboo in polite usage. Merriam-Webster online supports your first statement. "profane" is limited largely to things theological. Main Entry: 2profane Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English prophane, from Middle French, from Latin profanus, from pro- before + fanum temple -- more at PRO-, FEAST Date: 15th century 1 : not concerned with religion or religious purposes : SECULAR 2 : not holy because unconsecrated, impure, or defiled : UNSANCTIFIED 3 : serving to debase or defile what is holy : IRREVERENT 4 a : not being among the initiated b : not possessing esoteric or expert knowledge > >>>Contempt (from the same source) is: >>> >>>>Open disrespect or willful disobedience of the >>>>authority of a court of law or a legislative body. >>> >>>Sacred is: >>> >>>>Worthy of respect; venerable. > >I take issue with your use of "sacred" here. The definition you use is 2b >by my dictionary, i.e. not the most common usage. "Sacred" generally >implies connections to one or more dieties; it's meaning is more at "holy." ... which meaning would be the one required to match up with "profane." Looks like Mr. Mueller is using one word in one sense, then one in another, both of which senses were chosen out of convenience. >I don't see how our name could prevent us from bein a peace-loving nomic. >Of course, I may be wrong in saying that we're a peaceful nomic in the >first place, but I digress. As there's not really a way defined in our Nomic to gauge other Nomics' attitudes or intents, it doesn't really seem useful to try and characterize our own. Perhaps it's interesting, but it serves no game purpose. Josh all of the sudden suspicious about majordomo collapsing whitespace, and wanting to see five lines above here when this post comes back -- Prosecutors will be violated. ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:51:43 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Fwd: RFJ 27 Josh Kortbein writes: >our own. Perhaps it's interesting, but it serves no game purpose. > > > > > >Josh >all of the sudden suspicious about majordomo collapsing whitespace, >and wanting to see five lines above here when this post comes back > >-- >Prosecutors will be violated. Hmmm. I didn't, but they were present because they showed up when I replied. Josh because of this, has lost all faith in the laws of science -- Poets do not go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. I am not, as will be seen, in any sense attacking logic: I only say that this danger does lie in logic, not in imagination. - G.K. Chesterton ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 09:49:28 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: new player proposal I propose that Andy "Ed" Proeschold be added to our game. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 11:36:05 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: new player proposal Joel D Uckelman writes: >I propose that Andy "Ed" Proeschold be added to our game. It's a good thing you said "Ed" or I would have voted no on account of the suspicious name! Josh -- "A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila." - Mitch Ratliffe, _Technology Review_ April, 1992 ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 12:43:19 CDT From: Nicholas C Osborn Subject: Nomic: Judgement 27 Claim: The name "Berserker Nomic" is vulgar or profane under Rule 313/0. Verdict: False Comments: Mueller himself makes no claim of "Berserker Nomic" being vulgat, so that is not worth comment. I must admit that I have rarely been witness to a more twisted pile of "dictionary logic." Mueller's argument takes "profane" out of context, uses words from its definition out of context, continuing so until he can finally twist it into what he wants it to mean, disrespectful of accepted connotation or even rational denotation. The intent of including the word "profane" in Rule 313/0 could have been equally accomplished by the word "obscene." This is the appropriate conotation of "profane." As Mueller makes no arguement as to the obscenity of "Berserker Nomic," his claim is false. A personal note: Mueller, I extend my condolances and congradulations, whichever you prefer. I consider it quite honorable that one of your name submissions garnered second place. And to think, if this judgement had gone in your favor, it would have won. Better luck next time. ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 12:51:55 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: new player proposal Let Ed play. He's a nice boy and has a good constitution. > I propose that Andy "Ed" Proeschold be added to our game. > > J. Uckelman > uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 13:02:33 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Voting Another reminder: THERE IS NO NEED TO SEND VOTES TO THE LIST. Unless you think it exceptionally important that everyone else immediately know how you voted, that is. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 13:22:11 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Voting Joel D Uckelman writes: >Another reminder: THERE IS NO NEED TO SEND VOTES TO THE LIST. Unless you >think it exceptionally important that everyone else immediately know how >you voted, that is. ... which is not to say that there is a need to not send votes to the list. Except the need to avoid the wrath of a dozen-odd incensed Nomic nerds. Josh -- "When I have a little money I buy music; if any is left I buy food and clothing." - Erasmus, slightly paraphrased ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:14:09 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: page redesign The new page is up. As always, please point out any mistakes, broken links, etc. Also, did anyone find having game news on the front page in any way useful? If not, I won't continue to post it there. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:14:13 CDT From: caerdwyn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: new player proposal > I propose that Andy "Ed" Proeschold be added to our game. > > J. Uckelman > uckelman@iastate.edu In a barely obscured attempt to empanel an Oldtimer Harwood voting block (with the prior addition of Lee Olsen) I vote aye to allow Ed's entrance into the game. -- Life used to suck But now I'm better Haar caerdwyn@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 16:09:17 CDT From: Andrew D Proescholdt Subject: Nomic: new player name misspelling Just so everyone knows, my last name is spelled Proescholdt, not Proeschold as it has been seen on this list. And another thing, if you haven't voted for (or against I geuss) me yet, do so soon. I don't want to go around to people's places and try to look menacing to get them to send a piece of email. Andrew "Ed" Proescholdt ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 16:34:32 -0500 From: Michael S Jensen Subject: Nomic: protest Already having witnessed the failing of this attempt once, I will give it another shot, from another angle. As joel pointed out, berserker is an epithet applied to viking warriors. Myself having descended from said warriors, I am mortally offended that my fellow colleagues would adopt as a name for a game I am playing a derogatory racial slur. If you racist bastards don't take it back right now I'll sue your ass. Anyway, I'm sure we would all agree that racial slurs are vulgar by their very nature. Hence, it is clear that this name is vulgar and obscene (although not necessarily profane). Therefore, I call for judgement: "The name "Berserker Nomic" is vulgar and should be chucked" ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 17:36:37 -0400 From: Mueller Subject: Re: Nomic: Judgement 27 At 12:43 9/13/98 CDT, Osborn wrote: >I must admit that I have rarely been witness to a more twisted pile of >"dictionary logic." Mueller's argument takes "profane" out of context, >uses words from its definition out of context, continuing so until he can >finally twist it into what he wants it to mean, disrespectful of accepted >connotation or even rational denotation. I didn't really think that would work, but I wanted to try. >A personal note: > >Mueller, I extend my condolances and congradulations, whichever you >prefer. I consider it quite honorable that one of your name submissions >garnered second place. And to think, if this judgement had gone in your >favor, it would have won. Better luck next time. I accept both the condolances and congradulations. :) I remember that even I gave Berserker a high vote, but when I saw it at the top, I wondered why and tried to change it. Can't win them all. :) Tom Mueller mueller4@sonic.net ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 17:02:41 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: RFJ 28 judge selection Nick Osborn has been selected as a judge for RFJ 28: The name "Berserker Nomic" is vulgar and should be chucked". J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 17:14:28 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: new player Lee Olson has been added to the game as a new player. Voting continues on Andy "Ed" Proescholdt... J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 17:57:39 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: Judgement 27 Mueller, thanks for being such a sport. It makes the game a lot more fun. Glad to have you in the ranks. Osborn > At 12:43 9/13/98 CDT, Osborn wrote: > >I must admit that I have rarely been witness to a more twisted pile of > >"dictionary logic." Mueller's argument takes "profane" out of context, > >uses words from its definition out of context, continuing so until he can > >finally twist it into what he wants it to mean, disrespectful of accepted > >connotation or even rational denotation. > > I didn't really think that would work, but I wanted to try. > > >A personal note: > > > >Mueller, I extend my condolances and congradulations, whichever you > >prefer. I consider it quite honorable that one of your name submissions > >garnered second place. And to think, if this judgement had gone in your > >favor, it would have won. Better luck next time. > > I accept both the condolances and congradulations. :) > > I remember that even I gave Berserker a high vote, but when I saw it at the > top, I wondered why and tried to change it. > > Can't win them all. :) > > Tom Mueller > mueller4@sonic.net ________________________________________ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 21:35:30 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: RFJ 28 judge selection Claim: The name "Berserker Nomic" is vulgar and should be chuck Verdict: False Comments: According to Rule 220/0, "Judgments have the force of rules until they are overturned or no longer apply." The previous judgement stated that "Berserker Nomic" is not vulgar. This can only be overturned by an appeal. ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 00:12:03 -0500 From: Michael S Jensen Subject: Re: Nomic: RFJ 28 judge selection Claim: > >The name "Berserker Nomic" is vulgar and should be chuck This is not the statement I presented for judjement. Obviously the game shouldn't be "chuck." I'm not even sure what that means. I do know a few people named Chuck, but they spell it with a capitol C. Are you maybe referring to trail cowboy food, as in "yippee-aye-eh, comin getcher grub at the chuck wagon" somehow suggesting that the chuck wagon is so named because chuck is what is served out of it? I must admit I am a little confused. Be that as it may, I must congratulate you on making a timely judgement and not waiting the full 72 hrs as Joel suggested so that any appeals would fall out of the 48 hour limit. That's all. Think I'll get me some chuck. > > >Verdict: > >False > > >Comments: > >According to Rule 220/0, "Judgments have the force of rules until they are >overturned or no longer apply." The previous judgement stated that >"Berserker Nomic" is not vulgar. This can only be overturned by an >appeal. > ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 21:41:56 CDT From: Jeff N Schroeder Subject: Nomic: proposal 314 Ok, here's my proposal at last. The trading of points from one Player (referred herafter as the Trader) to a second Player (referred as the Tradee) shall be allowed under the following circumstances: a) The total number of points transferred from the Trader to the Tradee must be a positive integer value. b) The Trader must maintain a non-negative point total following the point trade. example: if NB = number of points held by the Trader before the trade if NA = number of points held by the Trader after the trade where (NB - NA) >= 0 once the trade has been completed. c) The Tradee must not obtain a number of points through any trade where their new total number of points would be equal to or exceeding those necessary to be declared a Winner. d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. e) Upon notification of the point trade any Player who sees fit to protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 hours to disallow the trade. ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 21:57:48 -0500 (CDT) From: "Santos L. Halper" Subject: Re: Nomic: new player proposal >I propose that Andy "Ed" Proeschold be added to our game. Isn't there a "T" on the end of his last name? beN byrNe --------- "Why am I so fond of inactivity?" -Evan Wyse Looking for unique quotes? Visit http://www.byrneweb.com/BUQ ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:13:18 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: new player proposal At 09:57 PM 9/14/98 -0500, you wrote: >>I propose that Andy "Ed" Proeschold be added to our game. > Isn't there a "T" on the end of his last name? > > >beN byrNe Yes, there is. I screwed up, but Ed promptly corrected me. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:27:52 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: Thoughts on trading At 09:41 PM 9/14/98 -0500, you wrote: >Ok, here's my proposal at last. > >The trading of points from one Player (referred herafter as the Trader) to a >second Player (referred as the Tradee) shall be allowed under the following >circumstances: > a) The total number of points transferred from the Trader to the > Tradee must be a positive integer value. > b) The Trader must maintain a non-negative point total following the > point trade. > example: if NB = number of points held by the Trader before the trade > if NA = number of points held by the Trader after the trade > where (NB - NA) >= 0 once the trade has been completed. > c) The Tradee must not obtain a number of points through any trade > where their new total number of points would be equal to or exceeding > those necessary to be declared a Winner. > d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient > to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. > e) Upon notification of the point trade any Player who sees fit to > protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 > hours to disallow the trade. 1. Defining the Trader and Tradee seems superflous so long as restriction b is present. I also see no reason why there couldn't be multiple parties engaged in a single trade. 2. Do you plan to keep the example in b in the propsal, or is it just there as an example now, to be discarded before a vote is taken? 3. What grounds would there be for protesting a trade? Why is section e necessary? 4. You may want to include something to indicate that all parties in a trade are willing. 5. The mechanism in d to make trades official seems to me to be too weak -- if only one party to a trade has to email the list to make it official, confusion could result. I suggest that all parties involved should have to confirm it, either on the list, or by emailing me that confirmation. I prefer the latter, because it means that (at least) one less message is sent to the list for every trade. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:31:18 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: rule 313/0 self-repeal Rule 313/0 repealed itself at 19:19 this evening. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:33:06 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: More thoughts on trading Specifying exactly when the trade takes place might also be a good idea. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:54:03 -0500 From: Adam E Haar Subject: Nomic: Prop 314 I would second all of Joel's submissions for amendment Adam Haar "I have not yet begun to hold this court in contempt" -Susan MacDougal, prior to her first 18 month term of incarceration for Contempt of Court. ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 22:52:26 -0500 From: Adam E Haar Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 At 09:41 PM 9/14/98 -0500, you wrote: >Ok, here's my proposal at last. > >The trading of points from one Player (referred herafter as the Trader) to a >second Player (referred as the Tradee) shall be allowed under the following >circumstances: > a) The total number of points transferred from the Trader to the > Tradee must be a positive integer value. > b) The Trader must maintain a non-negative point total following the > point trade. > example: if NB = number of points held by the Trader before the trade > if NA = number of points held by the Trader after the trade > where (NB - NA) >= 0 once the trade has been completed. > c) The Tradee must not obtain a number of points through any trade > where their new total number of points would be equal to or exceeding > those necessary to be declared a Winner. > d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient > to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. > e) Upon notification of the point trade any Player who sees fit to > protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 > hours to disallow the trade. > Ok, first amendment that should be made is to require agreement of the Trader and Tradee of the trade. Second clause C, must not should be altered to may not Adam Haar "I have not yet begun to hold this court in contempt" -Susan MacDougal, prior to her first 18 month term of incarceration for Contempt of Court. ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 23:14:49 -0500 From: Andrew J Palecek Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 What exactly is the inteded benifit of this proposal? The most obvious would be such that two people who would have enough points to win as it where, could give points to the other to achieve victory. Although this may be prevented by the majority right to overturn it and provision c. The only other use that i can see as of now is to bribe other players to vote for their proposals, which may be interesting, if tedious with provisions d and difficult with provision e. At 09:41 PM 9/14/98 CDT, you wrote: >Ok, here's my proposal at last. > >The trading of points from one Player (referred herafter as the Trader) to a >second Player (referred as the Tradee) shall be allowed under the following >circumstances: > a) The total number of points transferred from the Trader to the > Tradee must be a positive integer value. > b) The Trader must maintain a non-negative point total following the > point trade. > example: if NB = number of points held by the Trader before the trade > if NA = number of points held by the Trader after the trade > where (NB - NA) >= 0 once the trade has been completed. > c) The Tradee must not obtain a number of points through any trade > where their new total number of points would be equal to or exceeding > those necessary to be declared a Winner. > d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient > to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. > e) Upon notification of the point trade any Player who sees fit to > protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 > hours to disallow the trade. > ________________________________________ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 23:46:35 -0500 From: Matthew J Kuhns Subject: Nomic: Benefits of Trade >What exactly is the inteded benifit of this proposal? I wondered that myself, at first. Of course, basic economic theory will teach that trading works out much better than trying to meet all of one's needs by oneself, but it's not quite the same thing here. Trading points would make for a more interesting game. In the long run, it lays the groundwork for other proposals, such as gambling or a stock market, which would rely on the exchange of points. The proposal would have some immediate results, too. For example, you could buy votes! This game could use an element of corruption, I think. I'd like to take this opportunity to throw out a suggestion. This proposal would have much more immediate appeal if more players had points to trade. To this end, perhaps Jeff could include a clause granting every player ten points or so, or allow them to run a debit of points up to -10. Matt Kuhns mjkuhns@iastate.edu * * * * * * * * "C'mon, you fuckers think that just 'cause a guy reads comics he can't start some shit? I'll fuckin' take all a' you on!" -Brodie, "Mallrats" ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:02:28 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Benefits of Trade >I'd like to take this opportunity to throw out a suggestion. This proposal >would have much more immediate appeal if more players had points to trade. >To this end, perhaps Jeff could include a clause granting every player ten >points or so, or allow them to run a debit of points up to -10. > > >Matt Kuhns Note that giving everyone 10 points wouldn't even give three of our players positive scores. :) J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:28:57 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: Benefits of Trade Matthew J Kuhns writes: >>What exactly is the inteded benifit of this proposal? > >I wondered that myself, at first. Of course, basic economic theory will >teach that trading works out much better than trying to meet all of one's >needs by oneself, but it's not quite the same thing here. > >Trading points would make for a more interesting game. In the long run, it >lays the groundwork for other proposals, such as gambling or a stock >market, which would rely on the exchange of points. > >The proposal would have some immediate results, too. For example, you could >buy votes! This game could use an element of corruption, I think. > >I'd like to take this opportunity to throw out a suggestion. This proposal >would have much more immediate appeal if more players had points to trade. >To this end, perhaps Jeff could include a clause granting every player ten >points or so, or allow them to run a debit of points up to -10. Why not just start us of where we are? After people use up their free points, under your system, they'd be back where they started, and would be forced to earn points either by passing rules, or by "selling" their votes. Then players who are more successful in passing proposals would be the only ones to create new points which could be traded. That seems to me to be a big incentive toward striving for proposal passage. Given that, why not just have people start striving right away? Those who have to wait until their turns to propose will get their taste eventually. Josh -- "Fuck you," whispers Slothrop. It's the only spell he knows, and a pretty good all-purpose one at that. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:33:56 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 Andrew J Palecek writes: >What exactly is the inteded benifit of this proposal? > >The most obvious would be such that two people who would have enough points >to win as it where, could give points to the other to achieve victory. >Although this may be prevented by the majority right to overturn it and >provision c. The only other use that i can see as of now is to bribe other >players to vote for their proposals, which may be interesting, if tedious >with provisions d and difficult with provision e. Vote-buying seems to be the primary reason right now, and one sufficient to pass the proposal. Consider, though, that vote-buying really ought to have another rule, governing the "contract" made between a buyer and a voter. As is, a voter may agree to vote for the buyer's proposal in exchange for 10 points, and then not vote appropriately. If the trade is made more than 48 hours before the vote, the buyer has no out. If the trade is made after the vote, the buyer can protest, but the voter suffers nothing, and the votes for the buyer's proposal are compromised in some possibly meaningful way. Note that this also creates some sort of foundation for a future economy. Josh -- "We are starting a movement in the state legislatures...to forbid the installation of clinics that dispense contraceptives." - Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 01:42:16 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 At 12:33 AM 9/15/98 -0500, Kortbein wrote: >Consider, though, that vote-buying really ought to have another rule, >governing the "contract" made between a buyer and a voter. As is, >a voter may agree to vote for the buyer's proposal in exchange for >10 points, and then not vote appropriately. If the trade is made more >than 48 hours before the vote, the buyer has no out. If the trade is >made after the vote, the buyer can protest, but the voter suffers >nothing, and the votes for the buyer's proposal are compromised in >some possibly meaningful way. As we currently have no regulations concerning contracts, I see no reason why players would be required to follow through on bribes. Although a player failing to do so would draw the ire of the proposer and the mistrust of other players, neither our rules nor Jeff's proposal would grant any legal recourse (nor should it, in the case of bribes). J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 01:56:05 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 Joel D Uckelman writes: >At 12:33 AM 9/15/98 -0500, Kortbein wrote: >>Consider, though, that vote-buying really ought to have another rule, >>governing the "contract" made between a buyer and a voter. As is, >>a voter may agree to vote for the buyer's proposal in exchange for >>10 points, and then not vote appropriately. If the trade is made more >>than 48 hours before the vote, the buyer has no out. If the trade is >>made after the vote, the buyer can protest, but the voter suffers >>nothing, and the votes for the buyer's proposal are compromised in >>some possibly meaningful way. > >As we currently have no regulations concerning contracts, I see no reason >why players would be required to follow through on bribes. Although a >player failing to do so would draw the ire of the proposer and the mistrust >of other players, neither our rules nor Jeff's proposal would grant any >legal recourse (nor should it, in the case of bribes). Didn't I just say that? What I mean is, for the vote-buying process to be nicer, we would like (or at least I would like) additional legislation. Josh -- "The best students always are flunking. Every good teacher knows that." -Robert Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 08:38:48 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 At 01:56 AM 9/15/98 -0500, you wrote: >Joel D Uckelman writes: >>At 12:33 AM 9/15/98 -0500, Kortbein wrote: >>>Consider, though, that vote-buying really ought to have another rule, >>>governing the "contract" made between a buyer and a voter. As is, >>>a voter may agree to vote for the buyer's proposal in exchange for >>>10 points, and then not vote appropriately. If the trade is made more >>>than 48 hours before the vote, the buyer has no out. If the trade is >>>made after the vote, the buyer can protest, but the voter suffers >>>nothing, and the votes for the buyer's proposal are compromised in >>>some possibly meaningful way. >> >>As we currently have no regulations concerning contracts, I see no reason >>why players would be required to follow through on bribes. Although a >>player failing to do so would draw the ire of the proposer and the mistrust >>of other players, neither our rules nor Jeff's proposal would grant any >>legal recourse (nor should it, in the case of bribes). > >Didn't I just say that? > >What I mean is, for the vote-buying process to be nicer, we would >like (or at least I would like) additional legislation. > > >Josh Why should vote-buying be "nicer"? I like the element of trust that would have to exist for it to work now. A prohibition on bribing Judges would be nice though... J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:26:25 CDT From: Josh Kortbein Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 Joel D Uckelman writes: >Why should vote-buying be "nicer"? I like the element of trust that would >have to exist for it to work now. A prohibition on bribing Judges would be >nice though... If this is to help found an economic system, I'd like to skip past the barter-and-ambush-later-to-get-your-money-back type deal thing. Que? Shto? Josh -- How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought independent of experience, is so admirably adapted to the objects of reality? - Albert Einstein ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:21:54 CDT From: Jeff N Schroeder Subject: Nomic: Proposal 314 I talked with Kuhns in depth last night as to the benefits of the proposal, and, as several have stated, this proposal would create a currency system for future game expansion. The buying of votes is another interesting aspect of the game. The idea of a gambling system that has been suggested will need some sort of point transfer mechanism in addition to this proposal, but the basic idea of trading points will be at the center of a currency system for the game. In regards to Joel's question as to multiple parties engaged in a single trade, how do you think points should be divided between the different parties? I personally think it would be easier in that case to have each person in the party declare their trade with a different individual in the second party. >2. Do you plan to keep the example in b in the propsal, or is it just there >as an example now, to be discarded before a vote is taken? Do you think it's necessary in the final proposal? >3. What grounds would there be for protesting a trade? Why is section e >necessary? I put this in as a safeguard against anything in the future that may happen to jeopardise the gameplay. I feel that if a deal were to take place that somehow would end the game (or other misfortune for the majority) there would be a mechanism built in for a protest. See the updated proposal coming in soon... ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:36:24 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: proposal 314 At 04:26 PM 9/15/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Joel D Uckelman writes: >>Why should vote-buying be "nicer"? I like the element of trust that would >>have to exist for it to work now. A prohibition on bribing Judges would be >>nice though... > >If this is to help found an economic system, I'd like to skip past >the barter-and-ambush-later-to-get-your-money-back type deal thing. Que? >Shto? > >Josh I doubt that such tactics have long-term benefits -- rogues generally meet bad ends once their actions become known. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:41:42 CDT From: Jeff N Schroeder Subject: Nomic: Proposal 314 revision I am debating on limiting the bribing of judges, opinions? ----- The transfer of points from one Player (referred herafter as the Trader) to a second Player (referred to as the Tradee) shall be allowed under the following circumstances: a) The total number of points transferred from the Trader to the Tradee must be a positive integer value. b) The Trader and Tradee must both agree to the trade. b) The Trader must maintain a non-negative point total following the point trade. c) The Tradee may not obtain a number of points through any trade where their new total number of points would be equal to or exceeding those necessary to be declared a Winner. d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. e) The Trader and Tradee must both consent to the trade. Upon notification of the point trade as in part d) by one, the other must show his consent as a second message posted to the mailing list. f) Upon confirmation of the point trade any Player who sees fit to protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 hours to disallow the trade. g) The trade will not be completed until the 48 hour protest time has ended. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:43:25 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Proposal 314 At 04:21 PM 9/15/98 -0500, you wrote: >I talked with Kuhns in depth last night as to the benefits of the >proposal, and, as several have stated, this proposal would create a >currency system for future game expansion. The buying of votes is >another interesting aspect of the game. The idea of a gambling system >that has been suggested will need some sort of point transfer mechanism >in addition to this proposal, but the basic idea of trading points will >be at the center of a currency system for the game. > >In regards to Joel's question as to multiple parties engaged in a single >trade, how do you think points should be divided between the different >parties? I personally think it would be easier in that case to have each >person in the party declare their trade with a different individual in >the second party. Well, so long as everyone involved in a trade gives consent, there should be no need to specify an upper limit on the number of parties involved. Ensuring that each trade involves _at least_ two players could be important, though. >>2. Do you plan to keep the example in b in the propsal, or is it just there >>as an example now, to be discarded before a vote is taken? > >Do you think it's necessary in the final proposal? No, I think the point is quite clear without it. >>3. What grounds would there be for protesting a trade? Why is section e >>necessary? > >I put this in as a safeguard against anything in the future that may >happen to jeopardise the gameplay. I feel that if a deal were to take >place that somehow would end the game (or other misfortune for the >majority) there would be a mechanism built in for a protest. There is a mehcanism built in for protest -- the legal system we have now. With or without this provision, players would be able to protest illegal point trades, since they have the right to protest anything illegal already. Thus, I see no reason to state it again here. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 17:43:03 CDT From: Jeff N Schroeder Subject: Re: Nomic: Proposal 314 >>>3. What grounds would there be for protesting a trade? Why is section e >>>necessary? >> >>I put this in as a safeguard against anything in the future that may >>happen to jeopardise the gameplay. I feel that if a deal were to take >>place that somehow would end the game (or other misfortune for the >>majority) there would be a mechanism built in for a protest. > >There is a mehcanism built in for protest -- the legal system we have now. >With or without this provision, players would be able to protest illegal >point trades, since they have the right to protest anything illegal >already. Thus, I see no reason to state it again here. This is here for a legal point trade, something not covered by the legal system. It's mostly for future expansion of more rules governing other aspects of a possible game economy. Jeff ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 17:45:48 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Re: Nomic: Proposal 314 revision At 04:41 PM 9/15/98 -0500, you wrote: >I am debating on limiting the bribing of judges, opinions? If we are concerned with receiving good judgments, we should prohibit bribing of Judges. > d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient > to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. > e) The Trader and Tradee must both consent to the trade. Upon > notification of the point trade as in part d) by one, the other must > show his consent as a second message posted to the mailing list. Again, you could cut the number of messages sent to the list about trades in half if the confirmations were sent to me and then I sent out a single message about it to the list. > f) Upon confirmation of the point trade any Player who sees fit to > protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 > hours to disallow the trade. I presume that this case would apply to legal trades, as illegal trades could be handled through our judiciary system. That said, it has yet to be shown why an otherwise _legal_ point trade should be disallowed. On the basis of this alone, I hesitate to support this proposal. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 17:50:07 -0500 From: Joel D Uckelman Subject: Nomic: 2 b's or not 2 b's? Please note that Jeff's proposal now has 2 section b's. Hopefully this too will be corrected. J. Uckelman uckelman@iastate.edu ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:04:30 CDT From: Jeff N Schroeder Subject: Nomic: too many bees Please ignore the first b as it was already in e The transfer of points from one Player (referred herafter as the Trader) to a second Player (referred to as the Tradee) shall be allowed under the following circumstances: a) The total number of points transferred from the Trader to the Tradee must be a positive integer value. b) The Trader must maintain a non-negative point total following the point trade. c) The Tradee may not obtain a number of points through any trade where their new total number of points would be equal to or exceeding those necessary to be declared a Winner. d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or Tradee. e) The Trader and Tradee must both consent to the trade. Upon notification of the point trade as in part d) by one, the other must show his consent as a second message posted to the mailing list. f) Upon confirmation of the point trade any Player who sees fit to protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 hours to disallow the trade. g) The trade will not be completed until the 48 hour protest time has ended. ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:00:35 CDT From: Jeff N Schroeder Subject: Re: Nomic: Proposal 314 revision >At 04:41 PM 9/15/98 -0500, you wrote: >>I am debating on limiting the bribing of judges, opinions? > >If we are concerned with receiving good judgments, we should prohibit >bribing of Judges. > >> d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient >> to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or >Tradee. > e) The Trader and Tradee must both consent to the trade. Upon >> notification of the point trade as in part d) by one, the other must >> show his consent as a second message posted to the mailing list. > >Again, you could cut the number of messages sent to the list about trades >in half if the confirmations were sent to me and then I sent out a single >message about it to the list. You would send out a message that the confirmation was received and give the time that it would end anyway (I would assume), so it really doesn't save any messages on the list that I can see. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? >> f) Upon confirmation of the point trade any Player who sees fit to >> protest the trade may call for a simple majority vote within 48 >> hours to disallow the trade. > >I presume that this case would apply to legal trades, as illegal trades >could be handled through our judiciary system. That said, it has yet to be >shown why an otherwise _legal_ point trade should be disallowed. On the >basis of this alone, I hesitate to support this proposal. As I just stated in my last mailing, it is indeed for legal point trades that would be disallowed by a majority of Players. Don't you agree that it is good practice to leave an out for something that the majority (possibly 2/3) of the players in the game may see as distructive, however legal it may be. I have no examples of this yet, but for later expansion of the game it may come up. I don't understand why you would vote down the entire proposal as a result of your protest of the existance of this safeguard (as I see it). Does anyone else agree with Joel's POV? jeff ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:48:48 CDT From: Nicholas C Osborn Subject: Nomic: current proposal This proposal needs to be more specific about when point trades occur. I would suggest basing it on the time that the second confirmation message is sent. I presume these would be sent to Joel, so he would inform us of the time. If you want to tag on 48 hours, add it on to the above time. On another note, this whole thing could be a lot easier if we had a bulletin board. I'm sure most of you know what a bulletin board is; if you don't, ask someone else. I think it would be a great boon to our game. If anyone sees any problem with this, please share. Also, if anyone could help in developing this, let someone else know. N ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:57:48 CDT From: Nicholas C Osborn Subject: Nomic: New Players Ed needs one more vote before he can play. Also, I am sponsoring Dakota Bailey, avatar@iastate.edu, as a new player. Vote for him. Vote early and vote often. Why don't you vote right now? N ________________________________________ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 19:03:11 CDT From: nosborn@iastate.edu Subject: Re: Nomic: Proposal 314 revision > >At 04:41 PM 9/15/98 -0500, you wrote: > >>I am debating on limiting the bribing of judges, opinions? > > > >If we are concerned with receiving good judgments, we should prohibit > >bribing of Judges. > > > >> d) All Players must be notified of all point trades. It is sufficient > >> to post a message upon the mailing list by either the Trader or > >Tradee. > e) The Trader and Tradee must both consent to the trade. Upon > >> notification of the point trade as in part d) by one, the other must > >> show his consent as a second message posted to the mailing list. > > > >Again, you could cut the number of messages sent to the list about trades > >in half if the confirmations were sent to me and then I sent out a single > >message about it to the list. > > You would send out a message that the confirmation was received and give > the time that it would end anyway (I would assume), so it really doesn't > save any messages on the list that I can see. Does anyone else have an > opinion on this? > > >> f) Upon confirmation of the point trade any Player who sees fit to > >> protest the trade