Subject: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: voting results
From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 09:07:34 -0000

> This stuff will find its way to the page either late tonight 
> or sometime 
> tomorrow.

When you update the web pages, could you put something in about the offices,
as far as I can tell the current list is:

Administrator: Joel
Officer of Supreme Justice: The Kid
Banker: Joel
Officer of Bean Counting: Joel

I'll probably nominate myself for OBC since it was my proposal, and the OSJ
isn't doing much right now. If anyone else particularly wants to do it, be
my guest. I'll probably still nominate myself anyway, just so that we get an
election on the Ballot rather than just proposals. Everyone enjoys
elections. [[Note: That last sentance was meant as a jibe at the Americans,
rather than a particularly poor innuendo.]]

> On a side note, the end of the semester is nearing for those 
> of us who are 
> students. I for one will be a little busier than normal from 
> now until the 
> week after next; I hope it doesn't bother anyone if I shift 
> from being slow 
> to slower in the meantime.

If needed, the Deputy rule can be used if you are extra busy. I suppose I
should have put something in so that an Officer can nominate a Deputy if e
knows beforehand that e is going to be busy.

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: voting results 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 11:29:10 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
>  
> > This stuff will find its way to the page either late tonight 
> > or sometime 
> > tomorrow.
> 
> When you update the web pages, could you put something in about the offices,
> as far as I can tell the current list is:
> 
> Administrator: Joel
> Officer of Supreme Justice: The Kid
> Banker: Joel
> Officer of Bean Counting: Joel

Ok. I was planning for every officer to have a page or at least a section 
of a page, along with a list of Officers somewhere.

> I'll probably nominate myself for OBC since it was my proposal, and the OSJ
> isn't doing much right now. If anyone else particularly wants to do it, be
> my guest. I'll probably still nominate myself anyway, just so that we get an
> election on the Ballot rather than just proposals. Everyone enjoys
> elections. [[Note: That last sentance was meant as a jibe at the Americans,
> rather than a particularly poor innuendo.]]
> 
> > On a side note, the end of the semester is nearing for those 
> > of us who are 
> > students. I for one will be a little busier than normal from 
> > now until the 
> > week after next; I hope it doesn't bother anyone if I shift 
> > from being slow 
> > to slower in the meantime.
> 
> If needed, the Deputy rule can be used if you are extra busy. I suppose I
> should have put something in so that an Officer can nominate a Deputy if e
> knows beforehand that e is going to be busy.

Yeah, the problem with the deputy rule is that while it prevents things 
from being held up for too long, it doesn't update the appropriate pages. 
:) Maybe that isn't a problem with the rule, but rather a shortcoming of my 
system. One of the things I intend to do over break is to write up actual 
instructions for formatting input to the munge, and maybe make the format 
itself a little more readable, so that officers can report things directly 
as text that the beast can read. Which again reminds me of finishing the 
auto-responder thingy...

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: rule ownership, transposition fix proposal
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:20:37 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Since the rule ownership proposal passed, there are a bunch of rules that 
some players own. If anyone wants to determine who owns which rules, please 
do, it would be appreciated.

Also, I noticed when making the rule updates that in P352/2, "Delete the 
paragraph following the numerical list in rule 273" doesn't refer to an 
existing rule. I suspect that Poulenc meant "237" instead.

So, I submit a proposal to fix that, and another thing I just noticed, 
namely that the comment in R304 refers to a rule that no longer exists, 
creatively entitled "Fix R237 and R304":

<proposal>
1. Strike the paragraph in R327/2 beginning with "Upon".

2. Strike the comment text in R304/0.
<\proposal>

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 21:06:05 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

So, I was thinking back on some things that I had always wanted to try in 
Berserker, but didn't get the chance to because there wasn't enough support 
for it then. One of those things was something that I opposed initially, 
but began to think might be fun after I voted against it: Political Go. 
What is Political Go, you might ask? Well, imagine playing Go (the "game of 
oriental strategy", as Josh's box says), but with more than one other 
person. Moreover, these other players may or may not be friendly, and 
whether your stones can draw liberties from their dragons will depend on 
it. (If you've played Go much, you can imagine how much difference it would 
make if an "ally" switched sides--it could result in the capture of big 
bunches of stones.) Anyway, everyone would get a free stone every turn, and 
more for doing certain things, like making (successful?) proposals and 
such. We could award the winner something or other (a win? points? more 
stones for next time?). I think this could be a lot of fun, assuming enough 
people want to participate in it. So, the most important part: does anyone 
want to do this? If so, I'll get a proposal together for it. (Not right 
away, though. The implementation of this is complex enough that I think 
I'll wait until the semester is over to get it started.) Comments?

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again 
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 21:02:47 CST
From: last chance for a slow dance <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman sez:
>So, I was thinking back on some things that I had always wanted to try in 
>Berserker, but didn't get the chance to because there wasn't enough support 
>for it then. One of those things was something that I opposed initially, 
>but began to think might be fun after I voted against it: Political Go. 
>What is Political Go, you might ask? Well, imagine playing Go (the "game of 
>oriental strategy", as Josh's box says), but with more than one other 
>person. Moreover, these other players may or may not be friendly, and 
>whether your stones can draw liberties from their dragons will depend on 
>it. (If you've played Go much, you can imagine how much difference it would 
>make if an "ally" switched sides--it could result in the capture of big 
>bunches of stones.) Anyway, everyone would get a free stone every turn, and 
>more for doing certain things, like making (successful?) proposals and 
>such. We could award the winner something or other (a win? points? more 
>stones for next time?). I think this could be a lot of fun, assuming enough 
>people want to participate in it. So, the most important part: does anyone 
>want to do this? If so, I'll get a proposal together for it. (Not right 
>away, though. The implementation of this is complex enough that I think 
>I'll wait until the semester is over to get it started.) Comments?

I want a turkey sandwich, please.

Josh

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

Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:29:24 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: go  yes!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I think the go thing would be pretty damned cool. it would certainly make
the game more interesting. I think overall the idea of contained games in
nomic is highly underexploited. I might even be able to help out with the
implementation. in fact, I'm so bored, I think I'll start it now!
(my computer is installing the sims - another great game - but it takes
about 3 hours to decompress everything.

- 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: Re: spoon-discuss: go yes! 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 00:36:40 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Benjamin Bradley:
> I think the go thing would be pretty damned cool. it would certainly make
> the game more interesting. I think overall the idea of contained games in
> nomic is highly underexploited. I might even be able to help out with the
> implementation. in fact, I'm so bored, I think I'll start it now!
> (my computer is installing the sims - another great game - but it takes
> about 3 hours to decompress everything.

I already have a proposal for it, mostly--the proposal from Berserker 
(about two years ago) was a good one, and shouldn't require too many 
modifications. As for the bookkeeping, I was planning to do it really low 
tech--just using a text file, actually. Unless you want something really 
fancy, with tables and stuff (which I don't like--it would never display 
correctly on lynx). And graphics would just be too much work for that.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: go yes! 
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 00:39:29 CST
From: last chance for a slow dance <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman sez:
>fancy, with tables and stuff (which I don't like--it would never display 
>correctly on lynx). And graphics would just be too much work for that.

Yay lynx.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:44:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: go yes! 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, last chance for a slow dance wrote:

> 
> Joel Uckelman sez:
> >fancy, with tables and stuff (which I don't like--it would never display 
> >correctly on lynx). And graphics would just be too much work for that.
> 
> Yay lynx.

Lynx Rulez.

Poulenc

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 14:07:07 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> So, the most important part: does anyone
> want to do this?

Eep. I've never played the normal version of Go, and it looks like the kind
of game that really annoys me. (Like the one the short version of my name
sounds like, which I absolutely loathe.) Making it even more complicated....
<meeps quietly in a corner>

M'cachessilnath The Easily Confuzzled

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 11:12:43 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Chess":
> > So, the most important part: does anyone
> > want to do this?
> 
> Eep. I've never played the normal version of Go, and it looks like the kind
> of game that really annoys me. (Like the one the short version of my name
> sounds like, which I absolutely loathe.) Making it even more complicated....
> <meeps quietly in a corner>
> 
> M'cachessilnath The Easily Confuzzled

I don't much care for chess either. I can confidently say that Go is 
extremely unlike it. Anyway, I'll probably be proposing more than one 
subgame, so if you don't like this one, maybe you'll like a different one. 
(What to do about people who don't want to play Political Go is something 
we should consider--I don't want it to be so important that anyone feels 
compelled to do so.)

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:31:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 
> I don't much care for chess either. I can confidently say that Go is 
> extremely unlike it. Anyway, I'll probably be proposing more than one 
> subgame, so if you don't like this one, maybe you'll like a different
one. 
> (What to do about people who don't want to play Political Go is something 
> we should consider--I don't want it to be so important that anyone feels 
> compelled to do so.)

Stones should be transferable objects so they can be sold.  I, for one,
will be in the market as a buyer.

There should be a game reward for playing Political Go.  Here's an idea:
the number of board-points controlled by a player should be added to a
counter-variable each nweek.  When the counter-variable reaches a preset
value (perhaps the total number of points in the board?) that player
is rewarded with an extra vote from the bank.

That way there is an incentive to participate (one extra vote on one
proposal every few nweeks) for players who participate and do well, and if
you don't want to participate you can always sell your stones and buy
yourself an extra vote with the points from that.

Anybody like this idea?  I'll write it up in a proposal once we see how
the game will take shape.

Poulenc.

Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 14:39:58 +0100
From: zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman wrote:
 people want to participate in it. So, the most important part: does anyone
> want to do this? If so, I'll get a proposal together for it. (Not right
> away, though. The implementation of this is complex enough that I think
> I'll wait until the semester is over to get it started.) Comments?
> 
I have never played go in my life, but it sound extremley intresting, plus nomic
subgames are really cool, i once played in a nomic called unanomic with some
players that Poulenc knows: Kevan, Raven, the twisted one.
It was a subgame oriented nomic, and it was the best I have ever played.
I vote for :)

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

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: oh, no, here it comes again
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:16:14 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Joel Uckelman wrote:
>  people want to participate in it. So, the most important 
> part: does anyone
> > want to do this? If so, I'll get a proposal together for 
> it. (Not right
> > away, though. The implementation of this is complex enough 
> that I think
> > I'll wait until the semester is over to get it started.) Comments?
> > 
> I have never played go in my life, but it sound extremley 
> intresting, plus nomic
> subgames are really cool, i once played in a nomic called 
> unanomic with some
> players that Poulenc knows: Kevan, Raven, the twisted one.
> It was a subgame oriented nomic, and it was the best I have 
> ever played.
> I vote for :)

It's a new game to me too, but I'd be willing to give it a go. I'd ask that
rather having it as an opt-out thing it would be opt-in. What I mean is
rather than everyone being a player, but you can 'sell your stones', it
should be that no-one is a player, but you can buy your way in. For example,
you have to pay x points to join a subgame, and the winner gets all the
points at the end.

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: rule ownership, transposition fix proposal
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:19:43 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Since the rule ownership proposal passed, there are a bunch 
> of rules that 
> some players own. If anyone wants to determine who owns which 
> rules, please 
> do, it would be appreciated.

I'll see what I can come up with

> So, I submit a proposal to fix that, and another thing I just 

You need to send that to the business forum

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: rule ownership, transposition fix proposal
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:59:34 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here's the list of the current rule owners. You should be able to
automatically parse the list and add it all in. Future changes should be
straight forward cos the script that adds the comment at the bottom of the
rules should be able to do it.

The Bank : 42
Joel Uckelman : 21
Poulenc : 12
The Kid : 11
Benjamin : 2
M'cachessilnath : 2
Zagarna : 2

Rule 1/1 : The Game : M'cachessilnath
Rule 2/0 : Names : The Bank
Rule 3/0 : Days and Nweeks : The Bank
Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers : The Bank
Rule 5/0 : Serial Numbers : The Bank
Rule 7/0 : Spivak Pronouns : The Bank
Rule 8/0 : Comments : The Bank
Rule 101/0 : Follow the Rules : The Bank
Rule 102/0 : Rules and The Ruleset : The Bank
Rule 103/0 : State and Rule Changes : The Bank
Rule 104/0 : Self-Reference and Self-Application in Rules : The Bank
Rule 105/0 : Agents : The Bank
Rule 106/0 : Players : The Bank
Rule 107/0 : Forfeit : The Bank
Rule 108/0 : Offices and Officers : The Bank
Rule 109/0 : Recognition of Actions : The Bank
Rule 110/0 : Resignation : The Bank
Rule 111/0 : Nweekly Voting : The Bank
Rule 112/0 : Fora : The Bank
Rule 113/0 : Timing of Events : The Bank
Rule 114/0 : Orders : The Bank
Rule 115/0 : Execution of Orders : The Bank
Rule 116/0 : Permissibility of the Unprohibited : The Bank
Rule 117/1 : Proposals : Joel Uckelman
Rule 118/0 : Eligible Voters : The Bank
Rule 119/0 : Ratio of Passage : The Bank
Rule 120/1 : Motions : Joel Uckelman
Rule 121/3 : Score : Poulenc
Rule 122/0 : Post-Win Reset : The Bank
Rule 123/0 : Impossibility of Further Play : The Bank
Rule 124/0 : Legal Precedent : The Bank
Rule 201/1 : The Ballot : Poulenc
Rule 202/1 : Ballot Issues : Joel Uckelman
Rule 203/1 : The Roster : Poulenc
Rule 204/0 : Name Changes : The Bank
Rule 205/1 : Terms of Office : The Kid
Rule 206/0 : Officer Succession : The Bank
Rule 207/0 : Nweekly Reports : The Bank
Rule 208/0 : The Administrator : The Bank
Rule 210/2 : Motion to Add Players : Joel Uckelman
Rule 211/1 : Winning : The Kid
Rule 212/0 : Legislative Orders : The Bank
Rule 213/0 : Administrative Orders : The Bank
Rule 214/0 : Judicial Orders : The Bank
Rule 215/0 : Motive Orders : The Bank
Rule 216/0 : Private Orders : The Bank
Rule 217/1 : Vacation of Orders : Poulenc
Rule 218/0 : Redesignation of Fora : The Bank
Rule 219/0 : Twilight of the Fora : The Bank
Rule 220/0 : Recognition of Proposals : The Bank
Rule 222/1 : Proposal Status :  Joel Uckelman
Rule 224/0 : One Vote Each : The Bank
Rule 225/1 : Vote Counting : Joel Uckelman
Rule 226/0 : Secret Voting : The Bank
Rule 227/3 : Quorum : The Kid
Rule 228/1 : Recognition of Motions : Joel Uckelman
Rule 229/1 : Adoption of Motions : Joel Uckelman
Rule 230/3 : Unanimous Consent : Joel Uckelman
Rule 231/1 : Proposal Scoring : Joel Uckelman
Rule 234/1 : Requests for Judgment : Joel Uckelman
Rule 235/2 : Recognition of Requests : The Kid
Rule 236/0 : Judge Selection : The Bank
Rule 237/2 : Judgments : Benjamin
Rule 238/1 : Recusal of Judges : The Kid
Rule 301/0 : Rescinding Actions : Joel Uckelman
Rule 302/0 : Subliminal Religious Indoctrination : The Kid
Rule 303/1 : Motion to Amend Trivially : Joel Uckelman
Rule 304/0 : Revisions of Ballot Issues : Poulenc
Rule 305/0 : Required Actions : Poulenc
Rule 306/0 : I Shot the Sheriff : The Kid
Rule 307/1 : Players that are [Away] : Poulenc
Rule 308/0 : Officers that are [Away] : Zagarna
Rule 309/0 : Establishing Quorum : Joel Uckelman
Rule 310/0 : The Officer of Supreme Justice : The Kid
Rule 311/0 : Elective Offices : Joel Uckelman
Rule 312/0 : Elections : Joel Uckelman
Rule 313/0 : Conflicting Legislative Orders : Joel Uckelman
Rule 314/0 : Motion to remove players II : Zagarna
Rule 315/0 : Officers and Gentlemen : The Kid
Rule 316/0 : Objects : Joel Uckelman
Rule 317/0 : The Bank : Poulenc
Rule 318/0 : The Banker : Poulenc
Rule 319/0 : Points Owed : Poulenc
Rule 320/0 : Extra Votes : : Poulenc
Rule 321/0 : The Officer of Bean Counting : The Kid
Rule 322/0 : Salaries for Officers and Judges : Poulenc
Rule 323/0 : Proposal Disbursements : Joel Uckelman
Rule 324/0 : Office of the Tax Collector : Joel Uckelman
Rule 325/0 : Bankruptcy : Joel Uckelman
Rule 326/0 : Who owns the Rules? : The Kid
Rule 327/0 : No place like home : M'cachessilnath
Rule 328/0 : proposal titles : Benjamin

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Nominations 
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 10:46:14 CST
From: last chance for a slow dance <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"Harrison, Andrew" sez:
>I nominate Josh Kortbein for Tax Collector

I refuse, yo, and if elected I will do bad things.

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

Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 19:24:52 +0100
From: zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Nominations
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"Harrison, Andrew" wrote:
> 
> I nominate The Kid for Officer of Bean Counting
> I nominate Poulenc for Banker
> I nominate Remo for Banker
> I nominate Zagarna for Banker
> I nominate Benjamin for Tax Collector
> I nominate Jeff Schroeder for Tax Collector
> I nominate Josh Kortbein for Tax Collector
> 
> I submit a proposal entitled 'How to Nominate' with the following text:
> "Insert the text "by posting eir nomination to a public forum" at the end of
> the last sentence of the first paragraph of Rule 312/0."
> 
> --
> The Kid

please don't vote for me

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

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Another Proposal
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:18:32 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 
> The following is a new proposal entitled "The Price of Nomic"
> 

<snip>

The fee should be paid with the proposal submission, or when it gets
recognised.

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: proposal recognition and stuff
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 15:47:56 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 
> In my capacity as Banker, I hereby set the Adopted Proposal 
> Award at one point, and the Opposed Minority Awards at 20 
> points. As the Tax Collector, I set the Failed Proposal Fine 
> at 20 points. (This will hopefully discourage everyone from 
> allowing proposals to be voted on this week...)
> 
> Also, on a personal note, I make all of my proposals inactive 
> (until I weather the storm that is the semester's end).

Do you have a particular reason for not wanting the ballot to go ahead this
week?

--
The Kid

Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 10:31:42 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Jeff Schroeder <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: proposal recognition
  and stuff
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

At 09:47 AM 12/7/00, you wrote:
> >
> > In my capacity as Banker, I hereby set the Adopted Proposal
> > Award at one point, and the Opposed Minority Awards at 20
> > points. As the Tax Collector, I set the Failed Proposal Fine
> > at 20 points. (This will hopefully discourage everyone from
> > allowing proposals to be voted on this week...)
> >
> > Also, on a personal note, I make all of my proposals inactive
> > (until I weather the storm that is the semester's end).
>
>Do you have a particular reason for not wanting the ballot to go ahead this
>week?
>
>--
>The Kid

If so, I would call this an abuse of powers.

jeff

Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 15:06:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Another Proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 
> The fee should be paid with the proposal submission, or when it gets
> recognised.

I considered that idea but decided there might be less support for it.
Now it seems that there is support for it, so I will change my proposal.

poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Re: proposal recognition and stuff, and stuff. 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 19:11:36 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Dan Waldron:
> [[
> 
> > In my capacity as Banker, I hereby set the Adopted Proposal Award at
> > one point, and the Opposed Minority Awards at 20 points. As the Tax
> > Collector, I set the Failed Proposal Fine at 20 points. (This will
> > hopefully discourage everyone from allowing proposals to be voted on
> > this week...)
> > 
> > Also, on a personal note, I make all of my proposals inactive (until I
> > weather the storm that is the semester's end).
> 
> This is a good way of getting around the craziness of this week.  There
> will still need to be a ballot, as there are several elections running,
> but it will be much simpler and less time-consuming.
> 
> Clearly, the Administrator will be too busy in the next week-or-so to do
> all the nescessary proposal maintenence, so I will follow his example.

Danke.

The situation was made worse by the mechanical failure of the hard drive on my desktop machine--I didn't lose any game stuff, or really anything else important, fortunately, but it certainly set me back a day or so. Must ... finish ... work... (Avid Joel-watchers will note that that was the fourth hard drive I've had suffer mechanical failure since January 1998. It's like the cloud of misfortune from Dilbert is following me around. Speaking of "clouds of misfortune", that sounds like a neat proposal idea.)

> I have a request for Joel for the web page, though.  I think it would be a
> good idea to list the rule-ownership standings with the point standings on
> the page.  Time permitting, of course, could you include this piece of
> pertinent information?

Yes, it's one of the first things I'll do (and one of the easiest) once things settle down, circa 16 December.

> ]]
> 
> I make all my active proposals inactive.
> 
> I purchase one Extra Vote from the Bank, at a cost of 100 points.
> 
> Poulenc
> 
>
 
-- 
J.

Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 19:22:50 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Jeff Schroeder <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Re: proposal
  recognition and stuff, and stuff. 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

At 07:11 PM 12/7/00, Joel wrote:
><snip>
>The situation was made worse by the mechanical failure of the hard drive 
>on my desktop machine--I didn't lose any game stuff, or really anything 
>else important, fortunately, but it certainly set me back a day or so. 
>Must ... finish ... work... (Avid Joel-watchers will note that that was 
>the fourth hard drive I've had suffer mechanical failure since January 
>1998. It's like the cloud of misfortune from Dilbert is following me 
>around. Speaking of "clouds of misfortune", that sounds like a neat 
>proposal idea.)

Damn, what kind of hard drive do you have?  Western Digital?

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Re: proposal recognition and stuff, and stuff. 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 19:24:13 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Jeff Schroeder:
> At 07:11 PM 12/7/00, Joel wrote:
> ><snip>
> >The situation was made worse by the mechanical failure of the hard drive 
> >on my desktop machine--I didn't lose any game stuff, or really anything 
> >else important, fortunately, but it certainly set me back a day or so. 
> >Must ... finish ... work... (Avid Joel-watchers will note that that was 
> >the fourth hard drive I've had suffer mechanical failure since January 
> >1998. It's like the cloud of misfortune from Dilbert is following me 
> >around. Speaking of "clouds of misfortune", that sounds like a neat 
> >proposal idea.)
> 
> 
> Damn, what kind of hard drive do you have?  Western Digital?

HD death count:

2 Seagate
2 Western Digigal

Still going:

1 Western Digital
2 Digital (big, old, SCSI)
1 whatever is in this laptop

-- 
J.

Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 20:23:25 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I picked up my copy of metamagical themas again and was wondering how many
of us were turned on to Nomic by Hofstadter? If there are a sufficient
number of interested people, maybe we could incorporate some of his other
ideas - like analogy-making,etc. ?

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

Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 22:02:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Benjamin Bradley wrote:

> I picked up my copy of metamagical themas again and was wondering how many
> of us were turned on to Nomic by Hofstadter? If there are a sufficient
> number of interested people, maybe we could incorporate some of his other
> ideas - like analogy-making,etc. ?

We could have an analogy-making subgame.  I first encountered nomic
through Metamagical Themas.  It was several years after I first read the
book version that I discovered internet pbem nomic.  Now I'm hooked.

Poulenc

Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:49:37 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

what does pbem stand for?
I've seen it several times but still don't know what it means.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Dan Waldron wrote:

> 
> 
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Benjamin Bradley wrote:
> 
> > I picked up my copy of metamagical themas again and was wondering how many
> > of us were turned on to Nomic by Hofstadter? If there are a sufficient
> > number of interested people, maybe we could incorporate some of his other
> > ideas - like analogy-making,etc. ?
> 
> We could have an analogy-making subgame.  I first encountered nomic
> through Metamagical Themas.  It was several years after I first read the
> book version that I discovered internet pbem nomic.  Now I'm hooked.
> 
> Poulenc
> 
> 

- 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: Re: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh 
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:53:14 CST
From: last chance for a slow dance <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Benjamin Bradley sez:
>what does pbem stand for?

Play
By
E-
Mail

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

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 23:14:20 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Dan Waldron:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Benjamin Bradley wrote:
> 
> > I picked up my copy of metamagical themas again and was wondering how many
> > of us were turned on to Nomic by Hofstadter? If there are a sufficient
> > number of interested people, maybe we could incorporate some of his other
> > ideas - like analogy-making,etc. ?
> 
> We could have an analogy-making subgame.  I first encountered nomic
> through Metamagical Themas.  It was several years after I first read the
> book version that I discovered internet pbem nomic.  Now I'm hooked.
> 
> Poulenc

Hmm. I found out about nomic from Josh, who I believe found out about it only a few days prior when poking around on the web.

Speaking of MT, isn't mediocrity one of the games in it? I've always thought it sounded like an interesting way of determining a winner, giving rise to strategies of intentionally trying to lose certain subgames in order to finish in the middle in the overall game.

Anyway, I've a subgame protocol in mind that would make subgames easy to implement, something similar to the GWIBs for anyone who played in Berserker, though less complicated and loophole-rich.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh 
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 23:22:07 CST
From: last chance for a slow dance <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman sez:
>Speaking of MT, isn't mediocrity one of the games in it? I've always thought i
>t sounded like an interesting way of determining a winner, giving rise to stra
>tegies of intentionally trying to lose certain subgames in order to finish in 
>the middle in the overall game.

Damn it, you've sussed me out.

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

Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 00:24:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: nomic/drh 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 
> Anyway, I've a subgame protocol in mind that would make subgames easy
> to implement, something similar to the GWIBs for anyone who played in
> Berserker, though less complicated and loophole-rich.

I think we could include them with some kind of binding-contract rule.
All the players of the game would have to agree to a contract to abide by
the rules of the game.  Then the game could just take its course.
Probably it would be good to specify in the binding-contract definition
that those rules could not in any way alter anything or change any
requirements of the Berserker rules.

A rule could be made allowing agents to donate points to the prize-pot of
a game without playing, and then for a publicly-funded game a motion could
be made for the bank to donate the required number of points, or it could
be specified in the rules if we want to run a particular game several
times without having to do all the work.

I will get to work on a prototype for contract definitions, then you can
add the game-specific stuff to it if it looks good.  We can use mediocrity
as one of the first games to be covered.

Poulenc

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: proposal: the price of justice
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:05:57 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Disagree with this on two points. Firstly RFJs should be free, and secondly
if there is a fee then it should be the OSJ that sets it, not the Tax
Collector.

--
The Kid

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Waldron [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 07 December 2000 21:00
> To: 'nomic-business'
> Subject: spoon-business: proposal: the price of justice
> 
> 
> 
> The following is a new proposal titled "The price of justice"
> 
> 
> 1. Enact a new rule titled "The price of Justice", text as follows:
> 
> The court fee is a value associated with the game that can 
> only be changed
> as specified by the rules.  Initially the value of the court 
> fee is zero.
> 
> Once per nweek the Tax Collector may change the value of the court fee
> such that it is neither greater than twenty nor less than zero.
> 
> 
> 2. Amend the text of rule 234, "Requests for Judgement", to read as
> follows:
> 
> A Request for Judgment is a Primary Unilateral Motion. An 
> Agent may, at
> any time, initiate judicial proceedings in any matter by 
> making a Request
> for Judgment. That Agent shall be known as the Plaintiff with 
> regard to
> the Request. A Request for Judgment consists of a Statement 
> to be judged,
> and analysis as the Plaintiff deems appropriate. A Request 
> for Judgment is
> dead once a Judgment has been issued on it.
> 
> Upon the creation of a Request for Judgement the creating 
> Agent owes one
> court fee to the bank, due two weeks from the date of creation.
> 
> -------
> 
> Poulenc
> 

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 7
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:13:00 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I believe that Zagarna refused nomination for the Banker. And before we get
into a debate over the fact that he didn't actually use the word 'refuse'
I'll point out that the rules do not specify *how* you refuse a nomination,
just that you can. And I think it's quite clear that Zagarna did not want to
be nominated, and as such refused.

> 
> No Proposals this time, just elections. I believe these are 
> all of the candidates. Just to make things interesting, I 
> made this a butterfly ballot. Try not to leave hanging chads. :)
> 
> Bean Counter:
> The Kid  0
> 
> Banker:
> Poulenc  0
>          0 Remo
> Zagarna  0
> 
> Tax Collector:
> Benjamin 0
>          0 Jeff Schroeder
> 
> -- 
> J.
> 

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Re: proposal recognition and stuff, and stuff
	.
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:15:57 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> I have a request for Joel for the web page, though.  I think 
> it would be a
> good idea to list the rule-ownership standings with the point 
> standings on
> the page.  Time permitting, of course, could you include this piece of
> pertinent information?

Total holdings could be put on the standings page, but who owns which rule
would be better on the rule pages alongside the Rule, eg:

0. R326/0 created by P356/0, 01 Dec 2000 00:00:00
Rule R326/0 owned by The Kid

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 7 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:57:46 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

So, I wasn't sure about that. "Don't vote for me" doesn't have to be the same as "I decline". So, don't vote for Zagarna, and we won't have a problem. :)

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> I believe that Zagarna refused nomination for the Banker. And before we get
> into a debate over the fact that he didn't actually use the word 'refuse'
> I'll point out that the rules do not specify *how* you refuse a nomination,
> just that you can. And I think it's quite clear that Zagarna did not want to
> be nominated, and as such refused.
> 
> > 
> > No Proposals this time, just elections. I believe these are 
> > all of the candidates. Just to make things interesting, I 
> > made this a butterfly ballot. Try not to leave hanging chads. :)
> > 
> > Bean Counter:
> > The Kid  0
> > 
> > Banker:
> > Poulenc  0
> >          0 Remo
> > Zagarna  0
> > 
> > Tax Collector:
> > Benjamin 0
> >          0 Jeff Schroeder
> > 
> > -- 
> > J.
> > 
-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Re: proposal recognition and stuff, and stuff . 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:58:20 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> 
> > I have a request for Joel for the web page, though.  I think 
> > it would be a
> > good idea to list the rule-ownership standings with the point 
> > standings on
> > the page.  Time permitting, of course, could you include this piece of
> > pertinent information?
> 
> Total holdings could be put on the standings page, but who owns which rule
> would be better on the rule pages alongside the Rule, eg:
> 
> 0. R326/0 created by P356/0, 01 Dec 2000 00:00:00
> Rule R326/0 owned by The Kid
> 
> --
> The Kid

I can do both, I think.

-- 
J.

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Re: proposal recognition a
	nd stuff, and stuff . 
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:06:42 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 
> I can do both, I think.
> 

Great, there's one more thing I need you to do: Make my phone work. If
you're unable to do that, then just cover for me till Monday if there are
any RFJ's, cos I don't think I'm gonna be able to get online over the
weekend. ;-(

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: voting...
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:21:17 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I'll count up the votes in the morning. There weren't very many, it shouldn't take long...

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 7 
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 11:38:05 CST
From: last chance for a slow dance <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman sez:
>This was an incredibly close election, every candidate won by a single vote. T
>hat's because only Poulenc voted, though.

Then it wasn't incredibly close. :P

>Back to work...

You're a slacker, you know it.

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

Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 00:50:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 7
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This was an incredibly close election, every candidate won by a single
> vote. That's because only Poulenc voted, though.
> 
> So, the new Officers are:
> 
> Bean Counter: The Kid
> Banker: Poulenc
> Tax Collector: Jeff Schroeder

But we all saw The Kid's public votes for emself, myself, and Benjamin.
That would give us a tie for Tax Collector.  I demand a recount!

Poulenc

Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 01:06:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: reminder
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Just a reminder to Joel and The Kid that you have yet to recognize my
purchase: The Kid to recognize my point transfer and Joel to order me to
transfer myself an extra vote.

Poulenc

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 7
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 09:26:31 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> > This was an incredibly close election, every candidate won 
> by a single
> > vote. That's because only Poulenc voted, though.
> > 
> > So, the new Officers are:
> > 
> > Bean Counter: The Kid
> > Banker: Poulenc
> > Tax Collector: Jeff Schroeder
> 
> But we all saw The Kid's public votes for emself, myself, and 
> Benjamin.
> That would give us a tie for Tax Collector.  I demand a recount!

That's right. And once you've recounted and found it's still a draw, I
beleive that the Administrator has to pick one.

--
The Kid

Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:57:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: reminder
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Right then. Recognised that 100 points are transferred from Poulenc to the
> Bank. I won't say what that leaves averyoe with, cos I'm not sure. Joel, are
> the points on the web pages up to date?

Nobody got any points from voting last round, so the standings should be
correct up to this transfer.  I think the Bank had zero points.

Poulenc

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: reminder
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:55:23 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> > Bank. I won't say what that leaves averyoe with, cos I'm 

Did I really type that? I think I need a screen break...

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 7 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:04:58 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Dan Waldron:
> > This was an incredibly close election, every candidate won by a single
> > vote. That's because only Poulenc voted, though.
> > 
> > So, the new Officers are:
> > 
> > Bean Counter: The Kid
> > Banker: Poulenc
> > Tax Collector: Jeff Schroeder
> 
> But we all saw The Kid's public votes for emself, myself, and Benjamin.
> That would give us a tie for Tax Collector.  I demand a recount!
> 
> Poulenc

Aha. I see now. Well, that means I get to pick. So I'll roll my d2 (i.e., a coin)... Jeff won the flip (tail), so he's Tax Collector.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: RE: spoon-discuss: reminder 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:07:48 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> > Just a reminder to Joel and The Kid that you have yet to recognize my
> > purchase: The Kid to recognize my point transfer and Joel to 
> > order me to
> > transfer myself an extra vote.
> 
> Right then. Recognised that 100 points are transferred from Poulenc to the
> Bank. I won't say what that leaves averyoe with, cos I'm not sure. Joel, are
> the points on the web pages up to date?
> 
> --
> The Kid

They were correct as of the date at the bottom of the Standings page. I don't think anything has changed since then.

-- 
J.

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 19:06:02 EST
Subject: spoon-discuss: [nomic]  Question:  should there be a proposal for my membership on the web page
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: Re: spoon-discuss: [nomic] Question: should t
	here be a proposal for my membership on the web page 
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:56:44 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> It's a Motion, not a Proposal, and yes, it would be on the 
> page if I were caught up. Since The Kid didn't ask for 
> unanimous consent, it will have to go to a vote in four days. 

Oh, my fault. I hadn't read that rule lately and I thought a Motion to Add
was a unanimous motion.

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Discuss' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-discuss: Points so far...
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:53:10 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've just been checking the current status of everyones points, and I've
found that I can't reconcile the current totals. I'm a bit unsure about what
to do about this, so I'll post my thoughts to see what others think. Below
are extracts from the Event Log on the web site as at Sat 02 Dec 2000
00:16:00 UTC. Note I have removed the middle part of the line to avoid
formatting problems with line wrapping. Since the Event Log is the official
nweekly report of the Administrator, and the Standings page is an unofficial
summary, I'm inclined to use the former as the correct one.

Please can all players check the following:
1. Check that all entries from the event log that affect their points are
listed below.
2. Check that there are no other events that they feel should have affected
their points, but were not in the event log.
3. Check that I have correctly totalled the points listed below.

Joel, if there is something stupid that I've missed, please let me know.

These are the totals I've calculated, with the numbers reported on the
'Standings' page in brackets:

Poulenc, 153 (249) [[NB: This is not including your recent vote purchase.]]
Joel Uckelman, 166 (247)
The Kid, 116 (148)
Josh Kortbein, 102 (143)
Zagarna, 65 (108)
Remo, 29 (55)
M'cachessilnath, 42 (42)
Benjamin, 24 (28)
Potter, 9 (18)
Jeff Schroeder, 8 (16)
XnJester, 8 (15)
Ed, 7 (14)
4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything, 0 (0)
God, -5 (-5)

Note I haven't checked that the points listed in the event log were
calculated correctly as I saw no reason to suspect they weren't, so if
anyone is inclined to check that too, please go ahead ;-)

-------- Event Log Extracts Begin --------

2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 3 Points for Proposal 360/0
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 2 Points for Proposal 359/0
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 2 Points for Proposal 356/0
2000-12-01  debited Poulenc -5 Points for Proposal 354/0
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 11 Points for Proposal 352/2
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 12 Points for Proposal 351/0
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 11 Points for Proposal 350/1
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 13 Points for Proposal 348/0
2000-12-01  credited Poulenc 13 Points for Proposal 347/2
2000-12-01  debited Poulenc -5 Points for Proposal 346/3
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 3 Points for Proposal 335/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 4 Points for Proposal 334/1
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 2 Points for Proposal 332/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 2 Points for Proposal 330/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 16 Points for Proposal 326/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 10 Points for Proposal 325/1
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 10 Points for Proposal 324/1
2000-11-11  debited Poulenc -5 Points for Proposal 323/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 18 Points for Proposal 322/1
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 14 Points for Proposal 321/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 20 Points for Proposal 320/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 2 Points for Proposal 319/0
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 2 Points for Proposal 315/2
2000-11-11  debited Poulenc -5 Points for Proposal 312/2
2000-11-11  credited Poulenc 3 Points for Proposal 311/2

2000-12-01  debited Joel Uckelman -5 Points for Proposal 357/0
2000-12-01  credited Joel Uckelman 13 Points for Proposal 355/0
2000-12-01  credited Joel Uckelman 13 Points for Proposal 353/0
2000-12-01  credited Joel Uckelman 3 Points for Proposal 348/0
2000-12-01  credited Joel Uckelman 13 Points for Proposal 345/0
2000-11-21  credited Joel Uckelman 16 Points for Proposal 341/0
2000-11-21  credited Joel Uckelman 16 Points for Proposal 340/1
2000-11-21  credited Joel Uckelman 16 Points for Proposal 336/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 3 Points for Proposal 335/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 10 Points for Proposal 332/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 2 Points for Proposal 330/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 16 Points for Proposal 328/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 3 Points for Proposal 327/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 2 Points for Proposal 325/1
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 3 Points for Proposal 321/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 10 Points for Proposal 319/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 16 Points for Proposal 317/0
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 2 Points for Proposal 315/2
2000-11-11  credited Joel Uckelman 14 Points for Proposal 311/2

2000-12-01  credited The Kid 11 Points for Proposal 356/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 355/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 353/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 2 Points for Proposal 352/2
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 351/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 2 Points for Proposal 350/1
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 17 Points for Proposal 349/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 348/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 347/2
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 345/0
2000-12-01  credited The Kid 15 Points for Proposal 344/0
2000-11-21  credited The Kid 12 Points for Proposal 343/0
2000-11-21  credited The Kid 12 Points for Proposal 338/1
2000-11-21  debited The Kid -5 Points for Proposal 337/1
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 2 Points for Proposal 332/0
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 10 Points for Proposal 330/0
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 327/0
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 2 Points for Proposal 325/1
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 2 Points for Proposal 324/1
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 3 Points for Proposal 321/0
2000-11-11  credited The Kid 10 Points for Proposal 315/2

2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 360/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 359/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 358/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 356/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 355/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 353/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 352/2
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 351/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 350/1
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 349/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 348/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 347/2
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 345/0
2000-12-01  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 344/0
2000-11-21  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 343/0
2000-11-21  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 342/0
2000-11-21  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 341/0
2000-11-21  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 340/1
2000-11-21  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 338/1
2000-11-21  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 336/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 335/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 334/1
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 332/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 330/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 328/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 327/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 325/1
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 324/1
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 322/1
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 3 Points for Proposal 321/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 319/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 318/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 4 Points for Proposal 317/0
2000-11-11  credited Josh Kortbein 2 Points for Proposal 315/2

2000-12-01  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 359/0
2000-12-01  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 356/0
2000-12-01  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 352/2
2000-12-01  credited Zagarna 3 Points for Proposal 347/2
2000-11-21  credited Zagarna 3 Points for Proposal 343/0
2000-11-21  credited Zagarna 12 Points for Proposal 342/0
2000-11-21  credited Zagarna 3 Points for Proposal 338/1
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 12 Points for Proposal 335/0
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 16 Points for Proposal 334/1
2000-11-11  debited Zagarna -5 Points for Proposal 331/0
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 330/0
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 3 Points for Proposal 327/0
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 4 Points for Proposal 326/0
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 325/1
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 324/1
2000-11-11  credited Zagarna 2 Points for Proposal 319/0

2000-11-21  credited Remo 3 Points for Proposal 342/0
2000-11-11  credited Remo 4 Points for Proposal 328/0
2000-11-11  credited Remo 2 Points for Proposal 324/1
2000-11-11  credited Remo 2 Points for Proposal 325/1
2000-11-11  credited Remo 18 Points for Proposal 318/0

2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 11 Points for Proposal 359/0
2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 17 Points for Proposal 358/0
2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 3 Points for Proposal 355/0
2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 3 Points for Proposal 351/0
2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 2 Points for Proposal 350/1
2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 3 Points for Proposal 345/0
2000-12-01  credited M'cachessilnath 3 Points for Proposal 344/0

2000-12-01  credited Benjamin 15 Points for Proposal 360/0
2000-12-01  credited Benjamin 3 Points for Proposal 353/0
2000-12-01  credited Benjamin 2 Points for Proposal 352/2
2000-11-11  debited Benjamin -5 Points for Proposal 329/1
2000-11-11  credited Benjamin 12 Points for Proposal 327/0
2000-11-11  debited Benjamin -5 Points for Proposal 316/1
2000-11-11  credited Benjamin 2 Points for Proposal 315/2

2000-11-11  credited Potter 2 Points for Proposal 330/0
2000-11-11  credited Potter 4 Points for Proposal 326/0
2000-11-11  credited Potter 3 Points for Proposal 311/2

2000-11-11  credited Jeff Schroeder 2 Points for Proposal 319/0
2000-11-11  credited Jeff Schroeder 4 Points for Proposal 317/0
2000-11-11  credited Jeff Schroeder 2 Points for Proposal 315/2

2000-12-01  credited XnJester 2 Points for Proposal 359/0
2000-12-01  credited XnJester 2 Points for Proposal 356/0
2000-12-01  credited XnJester 2 Points for Proposal 350/1
2000-11-11  credited XnJester 3 Points for Proposal 335/0
2000-11-11  credited XnJester 2 Points for Proposal 332/0
2000-11-11  credited XnJester 2 Points for Proposal 319/0
2000-10-12  debited XnJester -5 Points for Proposal 313/0

2000-11-11  credited Ed 2 Points for Proposal 332/0
2000-11-11  credited Ed 2 Points for Proposal 324/1
2000-11-11  credited Ed 3 Points for Proposal 311/2
	 
2000-10-12  debited God -5 Points for Proposal 306/0

-------- Event Log Extracts End --------

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Points so far... 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 09:49:16 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> I've just been checking the current status of everyones points, and I've
> found that I can't reconcile the current totals. I'm a bit unsure about what
> to do about this, so I'll post my thoughts to see what others think. Below
> are extracts from the Event Log on the web site as at Sat 02 Dec 2000
> 00:16:00 UTC. Note I have removed the middle part of the line to avoid
> formatting problems with line wrapping. Since the Event Log is the official
> nweekly report of the Administrator, and the Standings page is an unofficial
> summary, I'm inclined to use the former as the correct one.
> 
> Please can all players check the following:
> 1. Check that all entries from the event log that affect their points are
> listed below.
> 2. Check that there are no other events that they feel should have affected
> their points, but were not in the event log.
> 3. Check that I have correctly totalled the points listed below.
> 
> Joel, if there is something stupid that I've missed, please let me know.
> 
> These are the totals I've calculated, with the numbers reported on the
> 'Standings' page in brackets:
> 
> Poulenc, 153 (249) [[NB: This is not including your recent vote purchase.]]
> Joel Uckelman, 166 (247)
> The Kid, 116 (148)
> Josh Kortbein, 102 (143)
> Zagarna, 65 (108)
> Remo, 29 (55)
> M'cachessilnath, 42 (42)
> Benjamin, 24 (28)
> Potter, 9 (18)
> Jeff Schroeder, 8 (16)
> XnJester, 8 (15)
> Ed, 7 (14)
> 4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything, 0 (0)
> God, -5 (-5)
> 
> 
> Note I haven't checked that the points listed in the event log were
> calculated correctly as I saw no reason to suspect they weren't, so if
> anyone is inclined to check that too, please go ahead ;-)

<snip>

Most of these seem to be off by quite a bit. Hmm. I think the Event Log should be correct; it looks like the Standings generator doesn't add correctly. I'll look into this soon, probably on Saturday or Sunday.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: catching up
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:00:25 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Now that finals are past and I have my computer working again, I can begin 
catching up with game stuff, so expect some updates tomorrow.

Thanks, everyone, for your patience.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: index
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 15:54:50 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

There's a numerical ruleset index at www.nomic.net/~g1/Rules.Numerical.Index.ht
ml now. Links will be added soon...

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: progress report
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 17:05:45 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Messages in my spoon-pending mailbox: 54

Each of these represents something I need to do. Most are motions, score 
inquiries, or suggestions. I'm writing the code to handle motions now; all of 
those will be disposed of quickly once that's done. Next will be the scoring 
situation, followed by the suggestions. (Coding is a nice break from filling 
in forms.)

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: voting summary
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 21:51:28 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

A mostly complete voting summary can now be found under 
Proposals.Voting.html. Votes are listed by the first 4 letters of each 
Player's name. If anyone sees any errors there, they may be due to a bug in 
the script rather than vote miscounting; either way, let me know, so the 
problem can be corrected.

Messages in spoon-pending mailbox: 40

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: progress
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 01:37:09 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Messages in spoon-pending mailbox: 36
What's left:
1. elections and officer related stuff
2. add voting results from last few nweeks
3. correct point totals
4. list rule ownership
5. indices
6. compressed list archives
7. search script

1 and 2 are jobs for tomorrow; 2, 4, and 6 will be easy; expect all but 7 
to be done by week's end.

Is the voting summary for Proposals formatted ok for everyone? Any other 
suggestions while I'm working on this?

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: progress
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 18:55:54 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Messages in spoon-pending: 41

Grr. I thought I'd get something done today, but it's extremely inefficient working on this stuff at any computer besides my own.

Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 04:15:37 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: primary vs secondary motions
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

According to the rules, the only difference between primary and secondary
motions is in how they are numbered. Is this the only difference and can
someone explain how that matters?

- 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: Re: spoon-discuss: primary vs secondary motions 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:26:53 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Benjamin Bradley:
> According to the rules, the only difference between primary and secondary
> motions is in how they are numbered. Is this the only difference and can
> someone explain how that matters?

Yes, this is the only difference. My reasoning for this was that Motions 
which are made often enough are made often enough to have their own 
numbering scheme, while the others could just as well be lumped together. 
So, that would be the "full" explanation, I guess.

-- 
J.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-discuss: progress
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 01:05:07 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

A list of Officers can now be found on the page. Note that it is does not 
yet include the results of voting for anything after nweek 6 (I'm too tired 
to add that right now--I'll do that in the morning). Pages for current 
officers and election voting should appear tomorrow, as well as the results 
from voting for nweeks 7-9. Since I have nothing else to do tomorrow, I 
might even get the scoring problem rectified and add rule ownership.

Messages left in spoon-pending mailbox: 37

BTW, does anyone have a preference for whether I make a categorized ruleset 
or a search script first?

-- 
J.

Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 03:19:34 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: progress
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> BTW, does anyone have a preference for whether I make a categorized ruleset 
> or a search script first?

I'd prefer a categorized ruleset over a search script :)

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