From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Date: 7 Jan 2001 02:35:00 -0000

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: proposal recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 22:06:42 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I upgraded some things on the server earlier today, and accidentally (Does 
this ever happen on purpose?!) broke the list. So, this is what I sent 
earlier:

The following Proposals are recognized:

P361/1, Paper-Rock-Scissors, by Joel Uckelman
P362/1, Political Go, by Joel Uckelman
P374/0, Contests, by Joel Uckelman

Ballots soon to follow...

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 10
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 22:13:17 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are up for consideration:

P364/0, Loans, Poulenc
P365/1, The Price of Nomic, Poulenc
P366/0, How to Nominate, The Kid
P367/0, Win condition fix, Poulenc
P368/0, rescinding actions fix, Poulenc
P369/0, The price of justice, Poulenc
P370/0, Binding Contracts, Poulenc
P371/1, UC and Motion Fix, Joel Uckelman
P372/0, challenge/response games, Benjamin
P373/0, Similarity game, Benjamin
P374/0, Contests, Joel Uckelman

I meant to call a quorum vote for this nweek, but didn't catch it in time. 
I'll do that for next nweek. Hopefully 5 people will vote anyway!

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 20:33:36 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P361/1, Paper-Rock-Scissors, by Joel Uckelman
P362/1, Political Go, by Joel Uckelman
P374/0, Contests, by Joel Uckelman

Ballots soon to follow...

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 20:38:56 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P361/1, Paper-Rock-Scissors, by Joel Uckelman
P362/1, Political Go, by Joel Uckelman
P374/0, Contests, by Joel Uckelman

Ballots soon to follow...

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 20:44:04 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P361/1, Paper-Rock-Scissors, by Joel Uckelman
P362/1, Political Go, by Joel Uckelman
P374/0, Contests, by Joel Uckelman

Ballots soon to follow...

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: testing, ignore
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:23:43 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Test to see if XnJester receives this message.

-- 
J.

Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 16:31:34 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Matthew G Potter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: premature withdrawl
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I withdraw myself from the game.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results, etc.
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:43:20 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposals:

P364/0 failed (4-4-0-3)
P365/1 failed (1-7-0-3)
P366/0 failed (3-4-1-3)
P367/0 failed (4-4-0-3)
P368/0 failed (4-4-0-3)
P369/0 failed (1-7-0-3)
P370/0 passed (5-3-0-3)
P371/1 passed (4-3-0-4)
P372/0 passed (5-3-0-3)
P373/0 passed (5-3-0-3)
P374/0 passed (5-3-0-3)

NB: Poulenc's P367 would have passed had he not voted against it himself. :)

Scoring:

+24	Benjamin
+23	Joel Uckelman
+14	Josh Kortbein
+12	Jeff Schroeder
+9	The Kid
-11	Poulenc

Motions:

Due to the passage of P371, Motions 6-8 also passed. Which means the Feyd 
is (finally!) a Player. Everyone say hi to Feyd.

-- 
J.

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 21:38:29 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: similarity challenge
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I think I'm going to do an easy one to start with - as time progresses, we
will get more weird and obscure (I hope).
The Similarity Challenge for the week is:
Poirot, Rumpole, Holmes.

I should remind you that answers sholud be sent privately (eg.g via e-mail
to me).

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:39:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Banker's Nweekly Report
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here follows the Banker's Nweekly Report, nweek 11.
_____
Nweek: 11
Outstanding debts: none

Official Salary: 5
Judicial Salary: 5
Adopted Proposal Award: 5
Opposed Minority Award: 5

bank property:
100 points
5 extra votes

debts from nweek 10 voting, due the end of nweek 12.
> Proposals:
> 			   
> P364/0 failed (4-4-0-3) Poulenc -5
> P365/1 failed (1-7-0-3) Poulenc -5
> P366/0 failed (3-4-1-3) The Kid -5 
> P367/0 failed (4-4-0-3) Poulenc -5
> P368/0 failed (4-4-0-3) Poulenc -5
> P369/0 failed (1-7-0-3) Poulenc -5
> P370/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Poulenc +5 Joel U. +5 Josh K. +5 The Kid +5
> P371/1 passed (4-3-0-4) Joel +5 Josh +5 Poulenc +5 The Kid +5
> P372/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Benjamin +5 Jeff +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5
> P373/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Benjamin +5 Jeff +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5
> P374/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Joel +5 Jeff +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5

new debts from nweek 10 salaries:

Joel Uckelman, Administrator +5
Poulenc, Banker +5
The Kid, Bean Counter, OSJ +5
Jeff Schroeder, Tax Collector, +5

Bankrupcy information:
Total bank debts: 125
Total point holdings plus debts owed the bank: 130

The Bank is not bankrupt.
_____

Poulenc

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:49:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Banker's Nweekly Report (revised)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The previous post was incorrect.  Here follows the correct version of the 
Banker's Nweekly Report, nweek 11.  [[The previous version had the wrong
Failed Proposal Fine]]
_____
Nweek: 11
Outstanding debts: none

Official Salary: 5
Judicial Salary: 5
Adopted Proposal Award: 5
Opposed Minority Award: 5

Failed Proposal Fine: 20 points [[yikes!]]

bank property:
100 points
5 extra votes

debts from nweek 10 voting, due the end of nweek 12:

> P364/0 failed (4-4-0-3) Poulenc -20
> P365/1 failed (1-7-0-3) Poulenc -20
> P366/0 failed (3-4-1-3) The Kid -20
> P367/0 failed (4-4-0-3) Poulenc -20
> P368/0 failed (4-4-0-3) Poulenc -20
> P369/0 failed (1-7-0-3) Poulenc -20
> P370/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Poulenc +5 Joel +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5
> P371/1 passed (4-3-0-4) Joel +5 Josh +5 Poulenc +5 The Kid +5
> P372/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Benjamin +5 Jeff +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5
> P373/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Benjamin +5 Jeff +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5
> P374/0 passed (5-3-0-3) Joel +5 Jeff +5 Josh +5 The Kid +5

new debts from nweek 10 salaries, due the end of nweek 12:

Joel Uckelman, Administrator +5
Poulenc, Banker +5
The Kid, Bean Counter, OSJ +5
Jeff Schroeder, Tax Collector, +5

Bankrupcy information:
Total bank debts: 125
Total point holdings plus debts owed the bank: 220

The Bank is not bankrupt.
_____

Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Banker's Nweekly Report (revised) 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:23:12 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

In response to the Banker's Report, I offer the following Proposal, 
entitled "A Resolution for Point Amnesty", with the following text:

Whereas, the Failed Proposal Fine and Adopted Proposal and Opposed Minority 
Awards in effect during voting for nweek 10 were set several nweeks prior, 
and

Whereas, these were set in order to discourage further activity only until 
the Adminstrator was able to catch up with eir duties, and

Whereas, the Administrator is now mostly caught up, and

Whereas, the Failed Proposal Fine and Opposed Minority Award are 
exorbitantly high, and the Adopted Proposal Award shamefully low given 
now-normal conditions, and

Whereas, everyone forgot that these were still in effect, and

Whereas, the Bank itself was not well looked-after during this period, nor 
were the duties of the Banker discharged in a timely fashion, and

Whereas, the first version of the Banker's Nweekly Report for this nweek 
seems a more equitable solution, and

Whereas, it would be too much work to properly rectify the situation, 

Therefore, be it resolved that:

1. Scores and the Bank's holdings are to be calculated based on the 
Banker's first (erroneous) Report, not the second.

2. Debts incurred by the Bank in the form of Salaries prior to Nweek 10 are 
hereby forgiven, and the Officers and former Officers are no longer owed 
them.

3. Fines incurred by Officers due to bankruptcy of the Bank, the point 
transfers for which have yet to made, are hereby forgiven.

Be it further resolved that the Banker should consider altering the Failed 
Proposal Fine and Adopted Proposal and Opposed Minority Awards sometime 
during the current nweek.

-- 
J.

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:52:02 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Jeff Schroeder <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Re: spoon-discuss: Award values 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I set the Failed Proposal Fine to '0' for this nweek.  Everyone go ahead 
and try to get their proposals passed now!  Is their a default Failed 
Proposal Fine?  I can't find one in the rules.

I've been looking in the rules for other duties of the tax collector and 
haven't found anything else I can do.  Can anyone clarify the statement 
that I am supposed to "recover from Agents debts owed the Bank."  Currently 
are there any debts that are not paid?

jeff

At 01:26 AM 1/12/01, you wrote:
> > > Treasurer, could I ask you to set the penalty to something 
> reasonable?
> > > The bank is now quite wealthy and I am not.
> >
> > Tax Collector, you mean? We don't have a Treasurer.
> >
>
>Yeah. That's what I mean.
>
>I'm not sure I like the proposal.  I know it would let me off the hook for
>my personal bankrupcy but I'm still not happy with it.  I think there is
>another problem that we have overlooked.  This is that there are not, at
>present time, enough points in the system to make it work.  I think we
>need to add enough points to the game that the Bank has some margin of
>error before becoming bankrupt.
>
>I can't remember if you have ordered me to transfer myself an extra vote
>yet.  I paid lots of points for that vote.  I think I'd like to have it in
>two nweeks time when my motion for repayment comes up.  I remember I put
>the Admin into that to add a delay so the banker couldn't get an extra
>vote without an appropriate waiting period.  Ack!
>
>Poulenc

Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Re: spoon-discuss: Award values 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:19:33 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Dan Waldron:
> > > Treasurer, could I ask you to set the penalty to something reasonable?   
>  
> > > The bank is now quite wealthy and I am not.                          
> > 
> > Tax Collector, you mean? We don't have a Treasurer.
> > 
> 
> Yeah. That's what I mean.
> 
> I'm not sure I like the proposal.  I know it would let me off the hook for
> my personal bankrupcy but I'm still not happy with it.  I think there is
> another problem that we have overlooked.  This is that there are not, at
> present time, enough points in the system to make it work.  I think we
> need to add enough points to the game that the Bank has some margin of
> error before becoming bankrupt.

Point taken. (no pun intended) How much of a cushion do you think we should 
have?
 
> I can't remember if you have ordered me to transfer myself an extra vote
> yet.  I paid lots of points for that vote.  I think I'd like to have it in
> two nweeks time when my motion for repayment comes up.  I remember I put
> the Admin into that to add a delay so the banker couldn't get an extra
> vote without an appropriate waiting period.  Ack!
> 
> Poulenc

Doh. I knew I forgot about something. I believe that's still in my message 
queue.

So, I'll recognize Poulenc's purchase of an Extra Vote.

-- 
J.

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 07:51:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop: c/rg and similarity fix
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

This should take care of compliance with the rule about Contests.
It also makes the list oat least three items in length.

<proposal title="C/RG-Contest fix">
Revise R336:"challenge/response games" as follows:

1. Add the following indented text at the beginning of the rule:
	A Challenge/Response Game (C/RG) is a Contest, governed by R338,
	unless otherwise noted here.
	These are the Contest Rules for Challenge/Response Games:
2. Change all instances of 'admin title' to 'Contestmaster title'
   Change all instances of 'Administrator' or 'Admin' to 'Contestmaster'
3. Change the last phrase of the rule from 'in public fora' to 'in any
public forum'.
4. To the end of the rule, append the following indented statements:
	Players do not need to publicly consent to inclusion in a C/RG (as
	per R338/Contests) to become Contestants of the Game, they only need
	to submit an answer to the Contestmaster as per the Contest Rules.
	The Prize for the C/RG is the points awarded to the winner of the
	Challenge.
</proposal>

<proposal title="Similarity Game fix">
Revise R337:"Three of these things belong together" as follows:

1. Replace all instances of 'Administrator' or 'Admin' with
'Contestmaster'
2. Directly under 'The Challenge will take the following form:', change 
	'The S.O. will describe a list of items.' to
	'The S.O. will publish a list containing at least three distinct
	items.'
</proposal>

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:52:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Tax Collector Fix 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Tax Collector Fix"
___

[[
> I've been looking in the rules for other duties of the tax collector and 
> haven't found anything else I can do.  Can anyone clarify the statement 
> that I am supposed to "recover from Agents debts owed the Bank."  Currently 
> are there any debts that are not paid?
> 
> jeff

To force a repayment the debt needs to be overdue.  Then a motion can be
made that, if it passes, requires the debtor to pay up.  However, I
specified the Banker to do this, not the Tax Collector.

   Rule 317/0 : The Bank

     The Bank is an agent, but not an eligible voter.

     If a debt owed the Bank is overdue the Bank may submit a Motion for
     Repayment of that debt, at the discretion of the Banker.

     A Bank Motion is a motion that, once submitted, becomes a Ballot
     Item on the next nweekly voting. A Bank Motion should describe one
     or more actions to be performed by the Bank. If it passes, a Motive
     Order is issued for the Bank to perform those actions.

The second paragraph _should_ specify the Tax collector, not the Banker.
]]

Amend the second paragraph of rule 317 to read as follows:

If a debt owed the bank is overdue the Tax Collector shall, within a
reasonable length of time, submit a motion for repayment of that debt on
behalf of the bank.

______

Poulenc

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:01:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Further debts
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following debts were not included in the Nweekly report but should
have been:

Salaries from nweek 8, due at the end of nweek 10:
Joel Uckelman, Administrator +5
Poulenc, Banker +5
The Kid, OBC, OSJ +5
Jeff Schroeder, Tax Collector +5

Salaries from nweek 9, due at the end of nweek 11:
Joel Uckelman, Administrator +5
Poulenc, Banker +5
The Kid, OBC, OSJ +5
Jeff Schroeder, Tax Collector +5

The Bank transfers:

10 points to Joel Uckelman
10 points to Poulenc
10 points to The Kid
10 points to Jeff Schroeder

This satisfies the above debts

point holdings: 60

Poulenc.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: bunch o' recognitions
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 15:35:17 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

These Props are recognized:

P375/0, A Resolution for Point Amnesty, by Joel Uckelman
P376/0, C/RG-Contest fix, by Benjamin
P377/0, Tax Collector Fix, by Poulenc

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: oops, missed one
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 15:47:06 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Prop is also recognized:

P378/0, Similarity Game fix, by Benjamin

-- 
J.

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Nomic Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Poetry Competiton c/rg
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 18:36:05 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Enact a rule entitled 'The Curse of Verse' with the following text:

The Poetry Contest is an instance of a challenge/response game with the
following attributes:
game name: The Poetry Contest
contestmaster title:  A Nomic's Poet Laureate
duration: until repealed
repetitive: yes, at discretion of current contestmaster
entry fee: 2

When they feel like it, the Poet Laureate should post a Challenge to any
public forum.

Limits and guidelines:
The Challenge will take the following form:
The Poet Laurate will set a topic, and optionally a length, a style and/or a
title, for the other players to write a poem on.

Judging:
This is entirely up to the personal tastes of the current Poet Laureate;
bribes, threats and other forms of coercion are entirely permissable so long
as they break neither the other rules of this Nomic or the laws of the land
in the country of residence of either participant in said form of coercion.

first Admin:
The first Admin of the game is M'cachessilnath.

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Nomic Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: NomicHome
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 21:09:04 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Enact a Rule entitled "Home Alone" with the following text:

A NomicHome is a particular instance of Place as defined by the relevant
rule. Every Player in A Nomic automatically owns a NomicHome.

A NomicHome has the following properties, changable by the owner:

Location: initially NomicTown
Name: initially <PlayerName>'s Home
Description: initially 'A boring house'
Contents: initially just the Player who is the owner of the NomicHome
Value: initially 0 points

All properties except Contents of a NomicHome can be assigned arbitary
values, and the NomicHomes can be bought and sold in the same manner as any
Object. Contents can only be modified by adding an Object elsewhere
acquired, adding a Player with eir consent or removing an Object or Player
already present.

To assign a new value to one or more properties of their NomicHome, a Player
must post such modifications to any public forum, and these will be treated
as a two-day unanimous consent motion [to allow for changes insulting anyone
to be barred].

Anyone who quotes more than a sentance (or 10 words; minimum 4 words) of
another Player's NomicHome description in their NomicHome description must
pay that Player a fine of half the value of their NomicHome nweekly until
they have submitted a modification to rectify the matter.
[if you want the description, buy the home from the player!]

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:51:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Motion of non confidence
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Motions of non confidence"

_____

Enact a new rule entitled "Motions of non confidence" and with text as
follows:

A Motion of non confidence is a secondary approvable motion used to evict
an elected officer who loses the support of the voters.  Upon submission,
the submitter must specify the elected office to be targeted.  A Motion of
non confidence may not be subject to unanimous consent and requires a
passage ratio of two-thirds.

Upon the adotion of the motion of non confidence the term of the targeted
office is set to expire at the end of the current nweek.
_____

Poulenc

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:32:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Motion of non confidence (fwd)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[Drat.  That's what I get for not reading the ruleset first.  Here it
goes again.  This brings the existing rule into line with the electoral
system.]]

I rescind my attempt to create a new proposal entitled "Motions of non
confidence."

The following is a new proposal entitled "Officers and Gentlemen Fix"

_____
Amend rule 315 by changing it to read as follows:

A Motion of non confidence is a secondary approvable motion used to evict
an elected officer who loses the support of the voters.  The motion must
specify the elected office to be targeted.  A Motion of non confidence may
not be subject to unanimous consent and requires a passage ratio of
two-thirds.

Upon the adotion of the motion of non confidence the term of the targeted
office is set to expire at the end of the current nweek.
_____

Poulenc

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:13:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal - Motion of non confidance
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[Okay, one last time]]

I rescind my previous attempt to create a proposal.

The following is a new proposal entitled "Motions of no confidance"

_____

Amend rule 315 by changing its title to "Motions of no confidance" and by
replacing its text with the following two paragraphs:

A Motion of non confidence is a secondary approvable motion used to evict
an elected officer who loses the support of the voters.  The motion must
specify the elected office to be targeted.  A Motion of non confidence may
not be subject to unanimous consent and requires a passage ratio of
two-thirds.

Upon the adotion of the motion of non confidence the term of the targeted
office is set to expire at the end of the current nweek.

_____

Poulenc

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:55:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal-Political Parties
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[When I set out to write this I wasn't sure it would work out.  Now that
I am done I find it is pleasnatly twisted.  Wasn't there a discussion
about this sort of thing on the nomic board a while ago?]]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Parties"

-------
1. Enact a new rule entitled "Parties", text as follows:

A Party is a type of object consisting of a name, a serial number, a set
of rules, and a set of member agents.  Any agent may create a party at any
time by announcing eir intent to the Administrator who shall recognize eir
action and assign a serial number, the party creator must also determine
an initial set of rules and name for the new party. A newly created party
has no members, and a party which is found to have no members continuously
for a period of one nweek ceases to exist.

2. Enact a new rule entitled "Party Membership", text as follows:

The requirements for membership of a party shall be defined by the rules
of that party.  No agent may become a member of a party without eir
consent.

The members of a Party must abide by the rules of that Party, with the
proviso that no agent may be required to abide by a set of rules of which
e has been uninformed.  The rules of this game take precedence over the
rules of all Parties, but they do not exempt the members of a party from a
punishment for failing to comply with the rules of that party.

3. Party Privacy

The rules and membership list shall be maintained by the members of that
party.  They must be available to all members of that party, but are not
required to be available to non-members; all members must be apprised of
any change in the rules or party membership.  If the otherwise privately
kept rules or membership of a party is the subjct of a CFJ, and the judge
of that CFJ is not a member of that party, then they shall be made
available to em, but e shall not further distribute them without consent
from a member of the party.

-------

Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: P363, P375 revisions 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 00:33:17 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I am revising P363 to the following, making it active, and giving it the 
title "Cleanup":

1. Strike the paragraph in R237/2 beginning with "Upon". 

2. Strike the comment text in R304/0. 

----
Just to remind everyone what this does, 1 removes the requirement for the 
Admin to pay Judges (the Banker should do that), and 2 removes a comment 
from R304 that refers to a Rule that doesn't exist anymore.

----
Replace the final paragraph of P375 with the following:

4. 500 Points shall be created in the possession of the Bank, so as to 
provide sufficient reserves for operation.

-- 
J.

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Bean Counting Report
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 09:28:42 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here's the current state of affairs. Note that debts from this nweeks voting
are not included as they are just debts. No points have as yet been
transferred as far as I know.

Points
======
1 Dec 2000:
	Joel Uckelman, 166
	Poulenc, 153
	The Kid, 116
	Josh Kortbein, 102
	Zagarna, 65
	M'cachessilnath, 42
	Remo, 29
	Benjamin, 24
	Potter, 9
	Jeff Schroeder, 8
	XnJester, 8
	Ed, 7
	4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything, 0
	God, -5

13 Dec 2000:
	Poulenc transferred 100 points to Bank

12 Jan 2001:
	The Bank transferred:
		10 points to Joel Uckelman
		10 points to Poulenc
		10 points to The Kid
		10 points to Jeff Schroeder

15 Jan 2001:
	Joel Uckelman, 176
	The Kid, 126
	Josh Kortbein, 102
	Zagarna, 65
	Poulenc, 63
	M'cachessilnath, 42
	Remo, 29
	Benjamin, 24
	Jeff Schroeder, 18
	Potter, <withdrawn>
	XnJester, 8
	Ed, 7
	4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything, 0
	God, -5

Extra Votes
===========
Poulenc: 1

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 16:58:46 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:
P363/1, Cleanup, Joel Uckelman
P375/1, A Resolution for Point Amnesty, Joel Uckelman
P379/0, Poetry Competition c/rg, M'cachessilnath
P380/0, NomicHome, M'cachessilnath
P381/0, Motions of no confidance, Poulenc
P382/0, Parties, Poulenc

The following Proposals are activated:
P363/1

-- 
J.

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 19:47:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal-Political Parties (revised)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[Okay fixed the problem (ack!) and added another security bit at the end
that, while maybe not nescessary, might make it easier to judge any CFJs
that arise.]]

The following is the revised version of my proposal "Parties", number 382

-------
1. Enact a new rule entitled "Parties", text as follows:

A Party is a type of object consisting of a name, a serial number, a set
of rules, and a set of member agents.  Any agent may create a party at any
time by announcing eir intent to the Administrator who shall recognize eir
action and assign a serial number, the party creator must also determine
an initial set of rules and name for the new party. A newly created party
has no members, and a party which is found to have no members continuously
for a period of one nweek ceases to exist.

2. Enact a new rule entitled "Party Membership", text as follows:

The requirements for membership of a party shall be defined by the rules
of that party.  No agent may become a member of a party without eir
consent.

The members of a Party must abide by the rules of that Party, with the
proviso that no agent may be required to abide by a set of rules of which
e has been uninformed.  The rules of this game take precedence over the
rules of all Parties, but they do not exempt the members of a party from a
punishment for failing to comply with the rules of that party.

3. Enact a new rule entitled "Party Privacy", with text as follows:

The rules and membership list shall be maintained by the members of that
party.  They must be available to all members of that party, but are not
required to be available to non-members; all members must be apprised of
any change in the rules or party membership.  If the otherwise privately
kept rules or membership of a party is the subjct of a CFJ, and the judge
of that CFJ is not a member of that party, then they shall be made
available to em, but e shall not further distribute them without consent
from a member of the party.

4. Enact a new rune entitled "Party Security", with text as follows:

In no case may an agent be bound by a set of rules of which e is
uninformed.  In no case may an agent become a member of a party without
eir express written consent, although said consent does not nescessarily
have to be posted to the Public forum.  Party rules may not take
precedence over the rules of this game, although this does not
nescessarily exempt a player for penalties from failing to abide by the
rules of a party of which e is a member.  Party rules may not redefine
terms used in the rules of this game.

-------

Poulenc

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:46:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Contract
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[I need money so I am going to sell my soul for points.  If multiple
people are interested I can create more of these]]

I hereby create the following contract:

Activation condition: when signed by Poulenc and one agent, other agent,
referred to here as the Buyer.

The Buyer agrees to owe a debt of 15 points to Poulenc, and to specify a
proposal and a direction of vote for that proposal to Poulenc by the end
of the second-last day voting this nweek.

Poulenc aggrees that e will allow eir vote on the specified proposal this
nweek to be guided by the Buyer's specified direction.  If Poulenc is
required to vote in a particular way on that proposal by one or more other
contract simmilar to this one then e shall vote in the direction indicated
by the majority of contracts, or default to abstain in the case of a tie.

Poulenc

[[I think this has to be recognized by the OBC]]

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:50:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  Extra Vote fix
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Extra Vote fix"
______
amend rule 320 by changing both instances of "100" in the rule text to
"50"
______

Poulenc

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:08:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  Motion to Add or Remove Points.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Motions to Create or Destroy
Points"

1. Enact a new rule entitled "The Motion to Create points", with text
as follows:

The Motion to Create Points is a Unilateral Secondary motion that may be
submitted only by the Administrator.  It should specify a number of points
to be created.  The Motion to Create Points does not take affect until the
Banker and the Tax Collector both publicly announce eir consent.  Once
created, the Motion to Create Points may not be revised, but may be
withdrawn by its owner or the Administrator.  When the Motion to Create
Points takes effect, a numer of points equal to the specified number shall
be created, owned by the Bank.

2. Enact a new rule entitled "The Motion to Destroy Points", with text as
follows:

The Motion to Destroy Points is a Unilateral Secondary motion that may be
submitted only by the Administrator.  It should specify a number of points
to be destroyed.  The Motion to Destroy Points does not take affect until
the Banker and the Tax Collector both publicly announce eir consent.  
Once created, the Motion to Destroy Points may not be revised, but may be
withdrawn by its owner or the Administrator.  When the Motion to Create
Points takes effect, a number of points owned by the bank equal to the
specified number are destroyed, provided that the bank owns at least that
many points.  If the bank owns fewer points than the specified number then
the Motion has no effect.
______

Poulenc

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:18:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Negative Voting
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Foully voting AGAINST every
single proposal on every ballot really drives me up the wall you will know
if youre the one im talking to i really think something ought to be done
about this blatant misuse of democratic principles and this is a holy
crusade to restore truth and honor and justice and liberty to the world of
nomic and anyone who stands against shall have to suffer the wrath of
uuuuh me."

Enact a new rule, titled "Against negative voting" with text as follows:

If, on a ballot containing at least five proposals, an agent is found to
vote against at least three and for no proposals then that agent shall owe
a debt of 20 points to the first agent to point out eir breach of good
conduct within three nweeks of the offence.

_____

Poulenc

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:16:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Mediocraty
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Create a new proposal entitled "Mediocraty" with text as follows:
_______

Enact a new rule entitled "C/RG: Mediocraty" with text as follows:

The Mediocraty game is an instance of a Challenge/Response game with the
following attributes:

game name:  Mediocraty sub-game
admin title: the Supremely Mediocre
duration: until repealed
repetetive: when finished
entry fee: 2

The initial S.M should specify what limits are being used for the game
set. The limits may contrain quantities that include those described below
or others.  The bracketed number following each quantity is recommended as
the minimum for that quantity.  However these quantities are only
guidelines and do not determine compliance.  In some cases a maximum will
also be listed here.

The limits may include: 

(x) The level of mediocraty game to be played (min. 1)
(y) The number of players required for the C/R game to start (min 3) 
(z) The number of level n-1 sub-games to play as part of each level n
game.

The S.M is encouraged to be creative and come up with other limits that
may apply to Mediocraty games.

A level n game of mediocraty sub-game consists of z n-1 sub games, unless
n=1 in which case it consists of z individual challenges.

The challenge shall use the following form:  The S.M shall post to the
public forum a message announcing the sub-game and asking players to
submit their quantities.  Players then have three days to respond with
their quantites by private email.

A valid entry specifies one quantity.

At the conclusion of a level n Mediocraty sub-game the winner is
determined.  If n is greater than 1 the winner is the participant who won
the most mediocre number of level n-1 sub-games during that level n game;
that is whose number of level n-1 wins is exceeded by as many participants
as it exceeds.  The winner of a level 1 sub-game is the player whose
specified quantity is the most mediocre.

Prizes shall not be awarded for individual challenges making up a larger
mediocraty game.  Instead, at the conclusion of the game announced by the
first S.M of the game the entire collection of all entry fees
collected for the individual challenges that made up that game
shall be paid to the winner.  This is an exception to rule 336.

_______

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Thugs, Dice, and Randomness
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:51:14 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

This is a new Proposal entitled "The Thug and Its Uses":

Create a new Rule entitled "The Thug and Its Uses", with the following text:

There exists an entity known as the Thug. The Thug may be used only by its 
employer, and only once per nweek, to reverse a single vote case by a 
Voter, such that "yes" vote becomes a "no" vote, and any other vote (or 
lack thereof) remains unchanged. To use the Thug, its employer shall, when 
casting eir Ballot, indicate at which Voter and Ballot Issue the Thug is 
directed.

Within a reasonable period following the conclusion of each voting period 
in which the Thug has been used, the Bean Counter shall randomly select the 
Thug's new employer from among those Players who voted during the previous 
nweek.

----
This is a new Proposal entitled "Randomness and Dice":

Create a new Rule, numbered 9, entitled "Randomness and Dice", with the 
following text:

Whenever a Player is called upon to make a random determination, it shall 
be made among all the possible choices with equal probability, or as close 
to equal probability as is reasonably achievable.

The probabilities of a die falling on each of its faces are considered to 
be roughly equal for Game purposes, baring any tampering with or obvious 
deformities of the die.

Dice rolls may be specified in the form xdy, where x is the number of dice, 
and y is the number of faces on each die. Coins are considered to be 
two-sided dice. [[Examples: 3d6 is three six-sided dice, 1d20 is one 
twenty-sided die.]] A combination of dice or the mathematical manipulation 
of the results of a die may be substituted for a unavailable die so long as 
the same probability distribution is preserved. [[Example: the roll of a d6 
divided by 2 may be used instead of a d3.]]

----
-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Prop recognition, round II
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:58:52 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Props are recognized:

P382/1, Parties, by Poulenc
P383/0, Extra Vote fix, by Poulenc
P384/0, Motion to Add or Remove Points, by Poulenc
P385/0, Negative Voting, by Poulenc
P385/0, Mediocraty, by Poulenc
P386/0, The Thug and Its Uses, by Joel Uckelman
P387/0, Randomness and Dice, by Joel Uckelman

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: I second that.
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 23:20:57 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Man, what a flurry of activity today...

It occurs to me that Poulenc's "Motions to Create or Destroy Points" 
Proposal, P384, needs a mechanism that allows Motions to be seconded. So, 
here is a Proposal to do create such a mechanism, (and also change the 
oft-amended Rule 230 to reflect seconding and make consent even more 
flexible).

So, I submit the following Proposal, entitled "I Second That":

1. Create a new Rule entitled "Consent by Seconding", with the following 
text:

"An Approvable Motion requiring P seconds in N days is granted consent upon 
receiving seconds by P unique eligible voters other than the Motion's owner 
within N days of its recognition. No Motion may be granted consent in this 
way unless explicitly allowed by the Rules.

Any Approvable Motion requiring seconds for which the required number of 
seconds is left unspecified is considered to require one second. Any 
Approvable Motion requiring seconds for which the required period within 
which the seconds must occur is left unspecified is considered to to have a 
period of three days.

An eligible voter may second an Motion requiring seconding by publicly 
indicating e is doing so."

2. Strike the word "unanimous" from Rules 120 and 229.

3. Change the title of Rule 230 to "Tacit Consent" and Amend Rule 230 to 
read:

"An Agent introducing an Approvable Motion may request consent at the time 
of its introduction, or until such time as the granting of consent could 
still occur prior to the nweek's voting, unless the Rules explicitly 
prohibit it.

N-day P-consent on a Motion is granted if no more than P eligible voters 
object to the Motion within N days of its recognition. The appropriate 
level of consent is considered to have been requested automatically for any 
Approvable Motion which may be adopted only by that level of consent or 
greater.

N-day unanimous consent is equivalent to N-day 0-consent. Any Approvable 
Motion for which the required level of consent for adoption by consent is 
left unspecified is considered to require unanimous consent.  Any 
Approvable Motion for which the required period without objection for 
adoption by consent is left unspecified is considered to have a period of 
three days."

-- 
J.

Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 01:03:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proposal: Mediocraty 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[
> 
> Mediocrity is spelled "Mediocrity". :)

That's what I get for writing proposals when I'm tired.
]]

I revise P385 by replacing all instances of "Mediocraty" (case
nonspecific) with "Mediocrity"

Poulenc.

Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 01:13:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Negative Voting
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[
Sorry, this is not a legal Proposal, since its title exceeds the maximum 
length for names, as established in Rule 2/0. Keep it at 255 characters or 
less, please. :)

-- 
J.

Drat, foiled again.  Okay I'll fix it.

Poulenc
]]

The following is a new proposal.  The title of the proposal is the first
255 characters of "Foully voting AGAINST every single proposal on every
ballot really drives me up the wall you will know if youre the one im
talking to i really think something ought to be done about this blatant
misuse of democratic principles and this is a holy crusade to restore
truth and honor and justice and liberty to the world of nomic and anyone
who stands against shall have to suffer the wrath of uuuuh me So there
:-P."

Enact a new rule, titled "Against negative voting" with text as follows:

If, on a ballot containing at least five proposals, an agent is found to
vote against at least three and for no proposals then that agent shall owe
a debt of 20 points to the first agent to point out eir breach of good
conduct within three nweeks of the offence.

_____

Poulenc

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Contract
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:03:43 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> > 
> > [[I need money so I am going to sell my soul for points.  
> If multiple
> > people are interested I can create more of these]]
> > 
> > I hereby create the following contract:
> > 
> > Activation condition: when signed by Poulenc and one agent, 
> > other agent,
> > referred to here as the Buyer.
> > 
> > The Buyer agrees to owe a debt of 15 points to Poulenc, and 
> > to specify a
> > proposal and a direction of vote for that proposal to Poulenc 
> > by the end
> > of the second-last day voting this nweek.
> > 
> > Poulenc aggrees that e will allow eir vote on the specified 
> > proposal this
> > nweek to be guided by the Buyer's specified direction.  If 
> Poulenc is
> > required to vote in a particular way on that proposal by one 
> > or more other
> > contract simmilar to this one then e shall vote in the 
> > direction indicated
> > by the majority of contracts, or default to abstain in the 
> > case of a tie.
> > 
> > Poulenc
> > 
> > [[I think this has to be recognized by the OBC]]
> > 
> 
> Does it? Hang on, let me just check the rules to see what I'm 
> supposed to
> do...

Ok, the above is recognised at Contract Offer #100.
BTW Poulenc, you start by saying the contract is between you and one other
agent, yet you end by saying what you'll do if there are more than one.
Which is it?

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Prop recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 16:42:24 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Props are recognized:

P385/1, Mediocrity, by Poulenc
P388/0, I Second That, by Joel Uckelman
P389/0, Foully voting AGAINST every single proposal on every ballot really 
drives me up the wall you will know if youre the one im talking to i really 
think something ought to be done about this blatant misuse of democratic 
principles and this is a holy crusade t, by Poulenc

Oh man is that last title going to look nice in the index... :)

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 11
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 18:36:15 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are up for voting:

P363/1, Cleanup, Joel Uckelman
P375/1, A Resolution for Point Amnesty, Joel Uckelman
P376/0, C/RG-Contest fix, Benjamin
P377/0, Tax Collector Fix, Poulenc
P378/0, Similarity Game fix, Benjamin
P379/0, Poetry Competition c/rg, M'cachessilnath
P380/0, NomicHome, M'cachessilnath
P381/0, Motions of no confidance, Poulenc
P382/1, Parties, Poulenc
P383/0, Extra Vote fix, Poulenc
P384/0, Motions to Create or Destroy Points, Poulenc
P385/1, Mediocrity, Poulenc
P386/0, The Thug and Its Uses, Joel Uckelman
P387/0, Randomness and Dice, Joel Uckelman
P388/0, I Second That, Joel Uckelman
P389/0, Foully voting AGAINST every single proposal on every ballot really 
drives me up the wall you will know if youre the one im talking to i really 
think something ought to be done about this blatant misuse of democratic 
principles and this is a holy crusade t, Poulenc

Also, I just noticed that The KId's term as Officer of Supreme Justice ends 
this week (ends of terms are listed on the Current Officers page now). As 
per R205/1, The Kid is automatically nominated and elected since no other 
nominations were received. [[Note: now that I have something to remind me, 
I'll begin to announce things like this in a more timely fashion.]]

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 11 
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 18:40:40 CST
From: Josh <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman sez:
>The following Proposals are up for voting:
>
>P363/1, Cleanup, Joel Uckelman
>P375/1, A Resolution for Point Amnesty, Joel Uckelman
>P376/0, C/RG-Contest fix, Benjamin
>P377/0, Tax Collector Fix, Poulenc
>P378/0, Similarity Game fix, Benjamin
>P379/0, Poetry Competition c/rg, M'cachessilnath
>P380/0, NomicHome, M'cachessilnath
>P381/0, Motions of no confidance, Poulenc
>P382/1, Parties, Poulenc
>P383/0, Extra Vote fix, Poulenc
>P384/0, Motions to Create or Destroy Points, Poulenc
>P385/1, Mediocrity, Poulenc
>P386/0, The Thug and Its Uses, Joel Uckelman
>P387/0, Randomness and Dice, Joel Uckelman
>P388/0, I Second That, Joel Uckelman
>P389/0, Foully voting AGAINST every single proposal on every ballot really 
>drives me up the wall you will know if youre the one im talking to i really 
>think something ought to be done about this blatant misuse of democratic 
>principles and this is a holy crusade t, Poulenc

I vote no on every proposal. That I am voting publicly serves as
observation that I have performed this horrible horrible act, and
thus if Poulenc's proposal P389 passes, I am the first person
to have observed so, and thus if I am to owe anyone twenty
points, it will be me owing them to myself.

It is forbidden to forbid, yo.

Josh

-- 
josh blog: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~kortbein/blog/

Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:42:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Awards for this week
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[egads thats a lot of proposals.  I mustn't se these too high or the
bank will go bankrupt.  I also have to set them high enough so that I
won't get shut down by my debts next week.]]

The following are the new values for the various properties that can be
set by the banker:

Official Salary: 5
Judicial Salary: 5
Adopted Proposal Award: 6
Opposed Minority Award: 0

Poulenc

Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:52:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: RE: Contract
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I sign contract offer 100.  Anyone interested?

Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: 2 motions
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 21:04:29 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

First, I just received an email from 4T2 telling me that he decided not to 
play, so we should probably nix him. Thus, I submit a Motion to Remove 
4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything. [[This comes from R314.]]

Secondly, the title the Motion to Remove Rule is a little odd---"Motion to 
remove players II"---the "II" refers to the fact that the Prop which 
created it was the second one to be submitted on that subject. Thus, I 
submit a Motion to Trivially Amend the title of R314 to "Motion to Remove 
Players".

-- 
J.

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 22:03:57 +0100
From: zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: buisness nomic list <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: 2 motions
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman wrote:
> 
> First, I just received an email from 4T2 telling me that he decided not to
> play, so we should probably nix him. Thus, I submit a Motion to Remove
> 4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything. [[This comes from R314.]]
> 
> Secondly, the title the Motion to Remove Rule is a little odd---"Motion to
> remove players II"---the "II" refers to the fact that the Prop which
> created it was the second one to be submitted on that subject. Thus, I
> submit a Motion to Trivially Amend the title of R314 to "Motion to Remove
> Players".
> 
> --
> J.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 22:07:59 +0100
From: zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: buisness nomic list <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: 2 motions
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

sorry for the mistell

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 11
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 16:54:56 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Sorry about the delay---voting ended while I was in Chicago...

P363/1 passed (4-1-0-6).
P375/1 failed (2-2-0-7).
P376/0 passed (3-2-0-6).
P377/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P378/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P379/0 passed (3-1-1-6).
P380/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P381/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P382/1 failed (1-3-1-6).
P383/0 failed (0-5-0-6).
P384/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P385/1 passed (4-1-0-6).
P386/0 passed (3-2-0-6).
P387/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P388/0 passed (4-1-0-6).
P389/0 failed (0-5-0-6).

I broke the munge when I made some changes last week, so individual voting 
info will be published after repairs are made...

Also, the following Motions are recognized:

11/0, Motion to Remove 4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything
12/0, Motion to Trivially Amend Rule 314

-- 
J.

Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:08:30 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 11
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> P385/1 passed (4-1-0-6).

Since Proposal 385/1 contained three sentences quoted from the ISO/EEC
14882, Standard for the C++ Programming language, I, the Humble Disciple,
have Preached to the Unbelievers.  I demand my Enlightenment (and my
points).

The quote was this:

"The limits may contrain quantities that include those described below
or others.  The bracketed number following each quantity is recommended as
the minimum for that quantity.  However these quantities are only
guidelines and do not determine compliance."

Poulenc.

Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:15:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 11
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oops.  I have to post this to the bus list don't I.

OK.  I, the Humble Disciple, hereby claim to have preached to the
unbelievers.  Gimme my points.  See below.

Poulenc.

On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Dan Waldron wrote:

> 
> 
> > P385/1 passed (4-1-0-6).
> 
> Since Proposal 385/1 contained three sentences quoted from the ISO/EEC
> 14882, Standard for the C++ Programming language, I, the Humble Disciple,
> have Preached to the Unbelievers.  I demand my Enlightenment (and my
> points).
> 
> The quote was this:
> 
> 
> "The limits may contrain quantities that include those described below
> or others.  The bracketed number following each quantity is recommended as
> the minimum for that quantity.  However these quantities are only
> guidelines and do not determine compliance."
> 
> Poulenc.
> 
> 

Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:27:54 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: similarity challenge winner
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The winner of this week's similarity challenge winner is Dan Waldron.
Thanks to Joel, Jeff and Dan for playing!

It feels like we should have some facility for publishing the responses -
Dan's was quite impressive, spanning almost a whole page!

The effects of the game (which I don't think have happened yet) are as
follows:
Joel, Dan, and Jeff each tronsfer two points to me (as the contestmaster)
and I then transfer three points back to Dan. Dan is the contestmaster for
the similarity game for the next week.

Thoughts for the first week of the similarity game:
Although Dan was by far the most thorough, he also submitted first,. If we
ever have a really easy challenge, then whoever checks their e-mail most
often will probably win, since there is no set time for the challenge to
be posted. 

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 18:50:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop: liconsing
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

should have thoguht of this a long time ago...

<proposal title="Licensing: Instances">
create a new rule with the title 'Licensing: Instances' with the following
text:

Whenever an instance of an instantiable item is created, the creator of
the instance owes the licensing fee(s) to the owner(s) of the
rule(s) defining the instantiable item.

If no licensing fee is defined for an instantiable item, it is assumed to
be zero.

Definition: An instantiable item is something of which instances can be
made.

[[The plurals are necessary for multiple inheritance, both linear and
parallel:
If C is an instance of B and all B's are instances of A's, then the
creator of C owes fees to both the owners of (the rules defining) B and A.
Also, if C is an instance of both B and A, then C owes to B and A as
above.]]

{{Note: Already-created instances are exempt, right? Rules can't have
retroactive effects, right? }}
</proposal>

<proposal title="licensing fee for C/RG's">
The licensing fee for Challenge/Response Games is 10 points.
</proposal>

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 19:06:46 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop: dependency
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal title="Dependency of Propositions">
create a rule with the title 'Dependency of Propositions' and the
following text:

if a (child) proposition is dependent on one or more other
(parent) propositions, that means: the dependent proposition cannot pass
(have effects) unless all of the propositions on which it depends also
pass. If a dependent proposition passes, but any of its parents' fail, the
text of the proposition is erased before it takes effect.

This rule applies only to child/parent propositions on the same ballot.
</proposal>

Is this the best way to handle this? It sounds kind of awkward as I read
it over, but I can't think of dhow to change it...

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:41:56 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Sorry for being so tardy on this...

The following Proposals are recognized:

P390/0, Licensing: Instances, by Benjamin
P391/0, licensing fee for C/RG's, by Benjamin
P392/0, Dependency of Propositions, by Benjamin

-- 
J.

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 21:27:41 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Jeff Schroeder <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Award values 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I set the Failed Proposal Fine to '8' for this nweek.

jeff

Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:49:03 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: dependency rev
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[ I think this takes care of negativity, recursivity, and effects.
It resolves the effects problem by simply withdrawing the proposal-
that way, no points are changed at all. ]]

replace the P392 with the following:

<proposal revise action=revise title="Dependency of Propositions">
create a rule with the title 'Dependency of Propositions' and the
following text:

This rule applies only to child/parent propositions on the same ballot.

If a (subsidiary) proposition is dependent on one or more other
(primary) propositions, and any of the (primary) propositions fail
(either as defined by the rules, or because it <u>fails by
dependence</u>),
then the (subsidiary) proposition <u>fails by dependence</u>.

If a (subsidiary) proposition is negatively dependent on one or
more other (primary) propositions, and any of those (primary)
propositions pass, then the (subsidiary) proposition <u>fails by
dependence</u>.

If a proposition <u>fails by dependence</u>, then it is considered
"withdrawn" and "dead".

This rule superceedes R120:Motions, if the two conflict.

</proposal>

Can I put HTML in a proposal like that?

Does this revision satisfy everyone?

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 00:18:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: dependency rev
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oops - in proposal 392 change the phrase 'child/parent propositions' to
'subsidiary/primary propositions' (in the first sentance of the proposed
rule text).

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: nominations
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:40:43 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Nominations are open for the Offices of Bean Counter and Banker.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: revision recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 23:48:37 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following revisions are recognized:

P392/1
P392/2

both by Benjamin.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 12
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 23:49:48 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Props are up for consideration:

P390/0, Licensing: Instances, by Benjamin
P391/0, licensing fee for C/RG's, by Benjamin
P392/2, Dependency of Propositions, by Benjamin

(I'll have those on the page sometime before noon tomorrow.)

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot revision, nweek 12
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:55:58 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I incorrectly reported that P375/1 failed last time. Since only 4 votes 
were received for that Proposal, it didn't meet quorum, and should have 
been held over for voting this nweek. So, you can vote on it now if you 
want.

P375/1, A Resolution for Point Amnesty, by Joel Uckelman
P390/0, Licensing: Instances, by Benjamin
P391/0, licensing fee for C/RG's, by Benjamin
P392/2, Dependency of Propositions, by Benjamin

-- 
J.

Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 17:04:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Banker's Nweekly Report, nweek 12
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Banker's Report at the start of Nweek 12

Official Salary: 5
Judicial Salary: 5
Adopted Proposal Award: 5
Opposed Minority Award: 0

Failed proposal fine: 0

Summary of debts due the end of nweek 12
Poulenc, -60 +15
The Kid, -20 +30
Joel Uckelman, +20
Josh Kortbein, +20
Jeff Schroeder, +20

Summary of debts due the end of nweek 13
Poulenc, +25
The Kid, +5
Jeff Schroeder +5
M'cachessilnath +10
Benjamin +10
Joel Uckelman +25

Specific new debts due the end of week 13:

P363/1 passed (4-1-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P375/1 failed (2-2-0-7). 
P376/0 passed (3-2-0-6). Benjamin +5
P377/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P378/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Benjamin +5
P379/0 passed (3-1-1-6). M'cachessilnath +5
P380/0 passed (4-1-0-6). M'cachessilnath +5
P381/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P382/1 failed (1-3-1-6). 
P383/0 failed (0-5-0-6).
P384/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P385/1 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P386/0 passed (3-2-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P387/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P388/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P389/0 failed (0-5-0-6).

Joel Uckelman +5
Poulenc +5
The Kid +5
Jeff Schroeder +5

bank property:
60 points
4 extra votes

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 12
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:51:37 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Only two Players voted (Benjamin and me), leaving us three short of the 
quorum of five. So, all proposals are held over for next week.

P375/1 held (2-0-0-9)
P390/0 held (2-0-0-9)
P391/0 held (1-1-0-9)
P392/2 held (2-0-0-9)

So whoever votes next time can be sure that their votes will do something, 
I'm declaring next nweek's voting to be a Quorum Vote.

-- 
J.

Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 02:29:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Banker's Nweekly Report, nweek 13
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Banker's Report at the start of Nweek 13

Official Salary: 5
Judicial Salary: 5
Adopted Proposal Award: 5
Opposed Minority Award: 0

Failed proposal fine: 8

Summary of overdue debts due the end of nweek 12
Poulenc, -60 +15
The Kid, -20 +30
Joel Uckelman, +20
Josh Kortbein, +20
Jeff Schroeder, +20

Summary of debts due the end of nweek 13
Poulenc, +25
The Kid, +5
Jeff Schroeder +5
M'cachessilnath +10
Benjamin +10
Joel Uckelman +25

debts due at the end of week 14:
Administrator(13) Joel Uckelman +5 
Banker(13) Poulenc +5   
OBC(13) The Kid +5
TaxC(13) Jeff Schroeder +5

debts due the end of week 13:
P363/1 passed (4-1-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P375/1 failed (2-2-0-7). 
P376/0 passed (3-2-0-6). Benjamin +5
P377/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P378/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Benjamin +5
P379/0 passed (3-1-1-6). M'cachessilnath +5
P380/0 passed (4-1-0-6). M'cachessilnath +5
P381/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P382/1 failed (1-3-1-6). 
P383/0 failed (0-5-0-6).
P384/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P385/1 passed (4-1-0-6). Poulenc +5
P386/0 passed (3-2-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P387/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P388/0 passed (4-1-0-6). Joel Uckelman +5
P389/0 failed (0-5-0-6).

Administrator(12) Joel Uckelman +5
Banker(12) Poulenc +5
OBC(12) The Kid +5
TaxC(12) Jeff Schroeder +5

bank property:
60 points
4 extra votes

Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 03:17:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Bank Actions
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

To satisfy outstanding debts, the bank transfers 45 points to poulenc.
This satisfies:  Salaries and proposal debt to Poulenc from nweek 10 and
11, plus salaries Banker(13), Banker(14); and P377/0, P381/0, P384/0,
P385/1.  This will leave the bank with 15 points.

The bank is experienceing a shortage of funds so nobody else will get
paid until the bank gets some more points, unless they want to force the
issue with a motion for payment.

The Tax collector should start collecting the overdue debts that were due
at the end of nweek 12 sometime soon.

Joel, I think the bank could use a few hundred more points.  I would
support any motion that increased the reserve I have to work with here.
That would mean that I can pay people what they desrve as well.

Poulenc

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: Bank Actions
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:57:22 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Recognised transfer of 45 points from bank to Poulenc.

Sorry that I've not been particularly involved lately, but things are
getting particularly busy at work and I've had a few subtle 'you spend too
much time on the web' comments from my manager ;-(

Isn't there a way to create new points for the bank? This new way of
handling points doesn't seem to be working properly. When points gets
awarded or deducted by the rules, this should happen automatically, not wait
for each player to 'action' it.

--
The Kid

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Waldron [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 30 January 2001 08:18
> To: 'nomic-business'
> Subject: spoon-business: Bank Actions
> 
> 
> 
> To satisfy outstanding debts, the bank transfers 45 points to poulenc.
> This satisfies:  Salaries and proposal debt to Poulenc from 
> nweek 10 and
> 11, plus salaries Banker(13), Banker(14); and P377/0, P381/0, P384/0,
> P385/1.  This will leave the bank with 15 points.
> 
> The bank is experienceing a shortage of funds so nobody else will get
> paid until the bank gets some more points, unless they want 
> to force the
> issue with a motion for payment.
> 
> The Tax collector should start collecting the overdue debts 
> that were due
> at the end of nweek 12 sometime soon.
> 
> Joel, I think the bank could use a few hundred more points.  I would
> support any motion that increased the reserve I have to work 
> with here.
> That would mean that I can pay people what they desrve as well.
> 
> Poulenc
> 

To: [email-masked]
From: Jeff Schroeder <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Bank Actions 
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:34:33 CST6DST
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Sorrry to write so late, I am currently 
moving to Boston and am writing this 
on a hotel webTV thing.  Iwould  not 
recommend it.

I did not realize that I had to actually 
restate the Bankers point totals inorder 
to complete the transfers of points 
between the bank/Player.  All 
outstanding debts owed to the Bank 
are ordered transferred.  Hopefully this 
will work

If anyone needs a roommate in Boston, 
let me know!  Iwill get a real computer 
on Monday.

jeff

> Quoth Dan Waldron:
> > > > To satisfy outstanding debts, 
the bank transfers 45 points to 
poulenc. > > This satisfies: Salaries 
and proposal debt to Poulenc from 
nweek 10 and > > 11, plus salaries 
Banker(13), Banker(14); and P377/0, 
P381/0, P384/0, > > P385/1. This will 
leave the bank with 15 points. > > > > 
The bank is experienceing a shortage 
of funds so nobody else will get > > 
paid until the bank gets some more 
points, unless they want to force the > 
> issue with a motion for payment. > > 
> > The Tax collector should start 
collecting the overdue
debts that were due > > at the end of 
nweek 12 sometime soon. > > > > 
Joel, I think the bank could use a few 
hundred more points. I would > > 
support any motion that increased the 
reserve I have to work with here. > > 
That would mean that I can pay people 
what they desrve as well. > > > > 
Poulenc > > Hmmm. Yeah, I agree that 
the Bank needs more funds as it 
currently stands. > As it is, our 
economy is sort of odd. The Bank is the 
only "employer", yet > no one "buys" 
much from the Bank. In such a 
situation, the Bank can't help
> but become impoverished---unless it 
has mint powers, which our Bank does. 
> So, to keep afloat, the Bank will take 
the inflationary step of issuing > more 
Points. Our current Rules and the 
traditional size relation among the > 
Awards forces us into a position of 
continually devaluing our currency. On 
> the other hand, we have an absolute 
goal, in the sense that the condition > 
for winning is not relative to the total 
quantity of Points in circulation, > 
which somewhat mitigates inflation. I'm 
not sure what to make of this---I'm > 
no economist---but because of the win 
condition,
there aren't any > real-world 
analogues. > > -- > J. > >