Subject: Ackanomic Discussion Digest V2 #15
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Discussion Digest)
To: acka-discuss-digest

Ackanomic Discussion Digest  Saturday, March 15 1997  Volume 02 : Number 015

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 09:10:33 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin)

Welcome to Ackanomic Sarud.

Niccolo Flychuck

ps-
Cool shirt

On Thu, 13 Mar 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

> There is a new player in Ackanomic.  Everyone take a moment to welcome Jim
> Priz <[email-masked]> to the game.  He has chosen Sarud as his
> Ackanomic name.
> 
> Robert Sevin has been chosen as his mentor.
> 
> In response to the market research question, Sarud Writes:
> 
> "I found out about AckaNomic through Harf, who lives on the same floor as
> me in our college dorm."
> 
> Lets al make him feel welcome!
> 
> snowgod
> Registrar
> 
> 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 02:31:21 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin) 

Welcome Sarud.

I offer you A$5 for 5 pfSarud

Narf

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 00:39:36 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New Observer 

>We have a new Observer in Ackanomic.  Please welcome Robert Sevin's kid
>brother, discoverer of Harf, and discover of Polish.

I may have gotten a little ambitious there....  How about translator of polish?

snowgod

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 08:39:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin)

On Thu, 13 Mar 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

> There is a new player in Ackanomic.  Everyone take a moment to welcome Jim
> Priz <[email-masked]> to the game.  He has chosen Sarud as his
> Ackanomic name.
> 
> Lets al make him feel welcome!
> 

Yeah, yeah, you're welcome. ;)

IB

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 08:41:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin)

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997 [email-masked] wrote:

> Welcome Sarud.
> 
> I offer you A$5 for 5 pfSarud
> 
> Narf
> 

Now that's just selfish!

PFSarud [5 @ A$15]

IB

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 08:43:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New Observer

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

> >We have a new Observer in Ackanomic.  Please welcome Robert Sevin's kid
> >brother, discoverer of Harf, and discover of Polish.
> 
> I may have gotten a little ambitious there....  How about translator of polish?
> 
> snowgod
> 
> 

Does he translate polish into a healthy gleam?

IB

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 11:36:11 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New Observer 

>>We have a new Observer in Ackanomic.  Please welcome Robert Sevin's kid
>>brother, discoverer of Harf, and discover of Polish.
>I may have gotten a little ambitious there....  How about translator of polish?
>
>snowgod

I'm sure he has no objection to the former statement.

Robert Sevin

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 14:12:15 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin)

> There is a new player in Ackanomic.  Everyone take a moment to welcome Jim
> Priz <[email-masked]> to the game.  He has chosen Sarud as his
> Ackanomic name.
	Is he a voting player?

	Welcome to the game, Sarud!

- --Mohammed

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 11:31:50 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin) 

>	Is he a voting player?
>
>	Welcome to the game, Sarud!
>
>--Mohammed

Yes, he is.

snowgod

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 15:50:56 -0500
From: Dan Knapp (A.K.A. TheWiz) <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:Acka: Internomic (SFJ) 

At 11:43 AM on 3/14/97, Phil Ackley wrote:

> There is a new internomicf Statement for judgement, SFJ 6, iniated by
> Agora.  Pumpkin Patch has been selected to judge.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> I submit the following statement for Internomic Judgement:
>
> "A Liaison can not act in Internomic on behalf of eir member Nomic unless
> said action is permitted by the rules of the member Nomic."

  It doesn't matter, since it doesn't say "expressly permitted".

- -Red Barn

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 12:18:06 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:Acka: Internomic (SFJ) 

>
>  It doesn't matter, since it doesn't say "expressly permitted".
>
>-Red Barn

Hehehe, good point :) Of course, we may have to admit that agoran buzzwords
are different than our own.  GOood thing it doesn't say anything about the
liason being ZZimsy.

snowgod
wasting bandwidth once again

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 12:22:29 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Postal Code? 

>To:   Ackanomians
>From: mr cwm
>
>By this message I unambiguously cast votes on the following proposals, as
>indicated, and wonder aloud if the Postal Code change making all this
>unnecessary has kicked in yet.

I'm not sure about that, but i am beginning to agree with you that the
postal code needs repealed. I thnk it is just creating hassles, where it
should be simplifying things.  I feel that the game is harder to follow now
than before.

Of course, that's just me... I'm a dinosaur used to doing things like "we
did in the olden days".  Anyone else have any ideas about the postal code?

snowgod

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 16:29:38 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin) 

In a message dated 97-03-14 08:43:26 EST, idiot boy spewed:

> Now that's just selfish!
>  
>  PFSarud [5 @ A$15]

Here we go again, Mr. Inflation....

I offer $A25 to Sarud for 5 pfBond Sarud

Narf

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 15:39:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code?

> Of course, that's just me... I'm a dinosaur used to doing things like "we
> did in the olden days".  Anyone else have any ideas about the postal code?
	I love it!  Long live the Postal Code!
	Note that the postal code didn't cause this public votes thing, 
but it *did* go a good ways toward solving it.  My public action proposal 
is what caused the problem (*bow*).

- --Mohammed
thank you, thank you

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 16:55:01 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Internomic (SFJ)

Red Barn wrote:

> > There is a new internomicf Statement for judgement, SFJ 6, iniated
> by
> > Agora.  Pumpkin Patch has been selected to judge.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > I submit the following statement for Internomic Judgement:
> >
> > "A Liaison can not act in Internomic on behalf of eir member Nomic
> unless
> > said action is permitted by the rules of the member Nomic."
> 
>   It doesn't matter, since it doesn't say "expressly permitted".
> 
I wouldn't be so hasty.  Indeed, I'm not sure I even see the point of
Red Barn's comment.  Does this have to do with a particular event in
Internomic of which I am not aware?

In any case, I note that every relevant part of the Internomic rules
says that it is the _member Nomic_ that performs actions.  There is only

one reference to the liaison's role, which says that all business to be
conducted with a member Nomic shall be conducted with its liaison (214).

There is actually no stipulation that the liaison has any power
whatsoever to be more than a conduit of information between a member
Nomic and the rest of Internomic.  The liaison is not himself a member
of Internomic.  If the SFJ were true, then it would imply that the
liaison is permitted to act in Internomic under certain circumstances.
It now becomes a matter of pure interpretation.

I could claim that the ability to act in Internomic is bound up as part
of being a "member" of Internomic.  Under that interpretation the SFJ
must be false, because there are, in fact, _no_ circumstances under
which a liaison is permitted to act in Internomic, on his Nomic's behaf
or otherwise, regardless of his Nomic's rules.

Alternatively, I could claim that the Internomic rules do not restrict
non-members from performing unspecified actions that do not alter the
essentials of the game state (c.f. R114, R216, R323).  Under this
interpretation, the liaison _can_ act in Internomic, although not in
any very useful way.  It is a matter for more interpretation whether
any such action could be construed to be "on the behaf of" the member
Nomic, but Internomic rules put no restriction on such behavior, so
the SFJ could conceivably be true based on such an interpretation.

I would have to say that the SFJ is probably not worded appropriately
to address what I would guess is the actual issue.  I think that the
answer to the "real" question is that the liaison can only act in
internomic as permitted or directed to by the rules of his Nomic.
However, I think that this is very dangerous, as it is open to
difficult-to-detect errors.  I think that the Internomic rules ought
to be set up so that the Liaison really does act on the member Nomic's
behaf, so that Internomic can be sure that whatever the Liaison reports
as his Nomic's action really is its action, at least for the purposes
of Internomic.

ThinMan
should have been a lawyer.
or maybe not.
sorry for rambling.
and wasting bandwidth.
and writing sentence fragments.
in my .sig.
:-)

P.S. snowgod: if you think any of this would be of interest to
Internomic-at-large, then feel free to repost such segments as you see
fit to the Internomic list.  TM (shbal.omn.etc..)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 16:56:41 -0500
From: Dan Knapp (A.K.A. TheWiz) <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:Acka: Postal Code? 

> Of course, that's just me... I'm a dinosaur used to doing things like "we
> did in the olden days".  Anyone else have any ideas about the postal code?

  Well, it's been having the result of making me one *very* confused camper
when I want to perform some sort of action...

- -Red Barn

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 17:09:58 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code?

Since I asked about it a week or so ago, and including the replies already
posted to this very message, I think I've seen 5 who oppose the Postal
Code (including myself) and only one who supports it.  I was planning on
proposing a repeal, myself, but it's the end of the quarter and I've
entered a mad grading frenzy, and am unlikely to be able to do the
research to repeal it right.  Anyone else who wants to try should feel
free.  You have my vote.

- -mr cwm

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

>>To:   Ackanomians
>>From: mr cwm
>>
>>By this message I unambiguously cast votes on the following proposals, as
>>indicated, and wonder aloud if the Postal Code change making all this
>>unnecessary has kicked in yet.
>
>I'm not sure about that, but i am beginning to agree with you that the
>postal code needs repealed. I thnk it is just creating hassles, where it
>should be simplifying things.  I feel that the game is harder to follow now
>than before.
>
>Of course, that's just me... I'm a dinosaur used to doing things like "we
>did in the olden days".  Anyone else have any ideas about the postal code?
>
>snowgod
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 14:11:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code?

Yes, Mohammed, not only is it your Public Action proposal which is
responsible for the voting mess, but it is specifically that catch-all
paragraph which is responsible. The very one which I pointed out and
objected to at the time because of potential unforeseen side-effects,
just like this. (Though apparently it wasn't *entirely* unforeseen
... grrrrr.)

breadbox

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 17:12:13 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code?

I'm not convinced the Public Votes thing was so awful.  It was kind of a
waste of bandwidth, but a game with Public Voting isn't necessarily a
*worse* game, just a *different* one.  Maybe without the Postal Code patch
(which I must admit I suggested) we'd have all decided we actually *liked*
Public Voting.

- -mr cwm

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Jason Orendorff wrote:

>> Of course, that's just me... I'm a dinosaur used to doing things like "we
>> did in the olden days".  Anyone else have any ideas about the postal code?
>	I love it!  Long live the Postal Code!
>	Note that the postal code didn't cause this public votes thing, 
>but it *did* go a good ways toward solving it.  My public action proposal 
>is what caused the problem (*bow*).
>
>--Mohammed
>thank you, thank you
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 17:16:29 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New PLayer (Mentor: Robert Sevin)

You guys ought to get together and go in for some old-fashioned
price-fixing and collusion :)

- -mr cwm

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997 [email-masked] wrote:

>In a message dated 97-03-14 08:43:26 EST, idiot boy spewed:
>
>> Now that's just selfish!
>>  
>>  PFSarud [5 @ A$15]
>
>Here we go again, Mr. Inflation....
>
>I offer $A25 to Sarud for 5 pfBond Sarud
>
>Narf
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 16:25:16 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code?

> I'm not convinced the Public Votes thing was so awful.
	I agree, actually.  If I thought it was so bad I would have 
retracted the proposal when I noticed the problem.  Everyone seems to be 
taking it pretty well, though, and it is nice to see how all the 
proposals are doing ahead of time.
	All the same I'll be glad when it's back to normal.

- --Mohammed

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 16:27:50 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:Acka: Postal Code?

>   Well, it's been having the result of making me one *very* confused camper
> when I want to perform some sort of action...
	it's insanely simple; if you want to make an action, write to 
ackanomic@wilma.

- --Mohammed
yeesh

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 17:28:18 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code? 

In a message dated 97-03-14 17:16:26 EST, you write:

>  Maybe without the Postal Code patch
>  (which I must admit I suggested) we'd have all decided we actually *liked*
>  Public Voting.

Ya know... I was starting to think the same thing.  Public Voting DOES have a
certain flair to it.

The only real problem with it (as I see it) is it favors players with daily
email access... because we can wait until the last minute, knowing the vote
count, and then send our votes.  Players that log in every 2-3 days don't
have that advantage.

Narf

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:06:39 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: Cheap Political Favors 

I look at the 17 cheap political favors I have left and decide to keep
handing them out, this time to anyone who will vote yes on prop's 1797 or
1799.

Narf

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:19:23 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:Acka: Postal Code?

On Fri, 14 Mar 1997, Mohammed wrote:

>>   Well, it's been having the result of making me one *very* confused camper
>> when I want to perform some sort of action...
>	it's insanely simple; if you want to make an action, write to 
>ackanomic@wilma.
>
>--Mohammed
>yeesh
>

Except entity trades, right?  They certainly seem like actions, since they
affect the game state.  Unless it's simpler than I thought, but then, if
it was so simple, you'd think I'd realize it.  How about "It's so
complicated, you can't see how simple it is."?

- -mr cwm

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:49:43 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code Change 102

> Ideas for more changes:
> - making proposal retractions allowed on acka-research
	I think this is a good idea.  Requiring the Promoter (Tabulator?) 
to subscribe to research isn't that bad.

- --Mohammed

------------------------------

End of Ackanomic Discussion Digest V2 #15
*****************************************