Subject: acka-research-digest V2 #176
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest   Wednesday, November 19 1997   Volume 02 : Number 176

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 08:02:19 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

On Tue, 18 Nov 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Results of Proposal 2361
> 
> 13/17 votes: Quorum achieved
> 10/14 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
>     YES:
> Niccolo Flychuck    (MetaMorph)
> Rex Mundi
> Slakko              (SPAM)
> Fortunato           (SPAM)
> mr cwm              (SPAM)
> Balsamic Dragon     (SPAM)
> Alfvaen             (MetaMorph)
> Karma               (Harf)
> SPAM Unity Vote
> Tammany                                 [Alfvaen bribed Tammany A$5]
> 
>     NO:
> Malenkai            (Vulcan)
> ThinMan             (Vulcan)
> Vynd                (Vulcan)
> /dev/joe            (Vulcan)

Hang on.  Isn't this everyone in Vulcan?  What about their Unity Vote?
Not that it would change the acceptance, but just for the record books.
Is it this common to get two sides organising unity votes?

Yours,
Slakko
- --
Duncan C. Richer -- aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother -- Now Really Lost!
Queens' College  -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory --  Cambridge University
"... and entirely motivated by hormones.  Works for me!"   --  Freakazoid!
http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/27/Index.html <-- Imperial Nomic Game 27

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 00:05:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

> Hang on.  Isn't this everyone in Vulcan?  What about their Unity
> Vote?  Not that it would change the acceptance, but just for the
> record books.  Is it this common to get two sides organising unity
> votes?

Yes. Unity votes only count for YESes. No.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 07:41:26 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

> Results of Proposal 2361
> 
> 13/17 votes: Quorum achieved
> 10/14 YES votes: Proposal accepted

> Tammany                                 [Alfvaen bribed Tammany A$5]

Isn't the minimum tammany bribe $A25?  I saw this on a previous
proposal as well.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 04:44:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

>> Results of Proposal 2361
>> 
>> 13/17 votes: Quorum achieved
>> 10/14 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
>> Tammany                                 [Alfvaen bribed Tammany A$5]
> 
> Isn't the minimum tammany bribe $A25?  I saw this on a previous
> proposal as well.

Mohammed (I believe) changed the range to A$5-$100 in the Tammany reform.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:12:08 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2381

> Proposal 2381
> Fixing the Double Crash Loophole
> Malenkai (Randy Hall)
> 
> This is a Modest proposal.
> 
> {{[it always seemed dishonorable to exploit this ... :-)]}}

Yes, although I was sorely tempted to stick "zazpi" in one of my guesses
here...:-)

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--Godley & Creme:The Party
Current Book--Dave Duncan:Future Indefinite
But do our best adventures have to end?

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 09:17:23 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

> Results of Proposal 2361
> 
> 13/17 votes: Quorum achieved
> 10/14 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
>     YES:
> Niccolo Flychuck    (MetaMorph)
> Rex Mundi
> Slakko              (SPAM)
> Fortunato           (SPAM)
> mr cwm              (SPAM)
> Balsamic Dragon     (SPAM)
> Alfvaen             (MetaMorph)
> Karma               (Harf)
> SPAM Unity Vote
> Tammany                                 [Alfvaen bribed Tammany A$5]
> 

Hurrah for the SPAM Unity Vote!

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 08:29:30 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

> > The Orange Menace was once thought to exist deep in the Wilds of
> > Ackanomic.  However, it was recently discovered that this so-called
> > Menace was simply a rumour started by the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
> > (retired), who, quite justly, had aroused the ire of the Pumpkin Patch
> > Nomic on the behalf of the oppressed citizens of Ackanomic during the
> > reign of the Evil Overlords.

I would like to reiterate that the rumor of the Orange Menace, if indeed it
was just a rumor, was not started by the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
(retired), though it may have been the act of a single retired overlord
independently.

It was also not the Retired Overlords who aroused the ire of Pumpkin Patch,
but rather some the members of the Rebellion who were already secretly in
the Pumpkin Patch, such as Mr. Lunatic Fringe, who spread lies throughout
the Patch about nonexistent "oppression" on the part of the Retired
Overlords.

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 09:40:27 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

/dev/joe wrote:

> I would like to reiterate that the rumor of the Orange Menace, if
> indeed it
> was just a rumor, was not started by the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
> (retired), though it may have been the act of a single retired
> overlord
> independently.
> 
> It was also not the Retired Overlords who aroused the ire of Pumpkin
> Patch,
> but rather some the members of the Rebellion who were already secretly
> in
> the Pumpkin Patch, such as Mr. Lunatic Fringe, who spread lies
> throughout
> the Patch about nonexistent "oppression" on the part of the Retired
> Overlords.
> 
Hear, hear!

ThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 14:53:12 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:

> It was also not the Retired Overlords who aroused the ire of Pumpkin Patch,
> but rather some the members of the Rebellion who were already secretly in
> the Pumpkin Patch, such as Mr. Lunatic Fringe, who spread lies throughout
> the Patch about nonexistent "oppression" on the part of the Retired
> Overlords.
> 

You would deny the sacred Truth of our Ruleset?  What would happen if
others were to repudiate the Ruleset and turn to more heresy?  Why, the
land of Acka would collapse in an instant!  You talk of lies and
mis-truths in a vain attempt to eliminate our impression of you as a
source of danger.  Well, I tell you it will not work.

Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired), your time is past!

Long live the Rebellion!

Long live the SPAM Unity Vote!

Yours,
Slakko

- --
Duncan C. Richer -- aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother -- Now Really Lost!
Queens' College  -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory --  Cambridge University
"... and entirely motivated by hormones.  Works for me!"   --  Freakazoid!
http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/27/Index.html <-- Imperial Nomic Game 27

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 14:55:03 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Balsamic Dragon wrote:

> Hurrah for the SPAM Unity Vote!

Well, I'm hoping for at least four more over the coming few days :-)
A fine time to be in a Political Party, don't you think?

Yours,
Slakko
- --
Duncan C. Richer -- aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother -- Now Really Lost!
Queens' College  -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory --  Cambridge University
"... and entirely motivated by hormones.  Works for me!"   --  Freakazoid!
http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/27/Index.html <-- Imperial Nomic Game 27

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:31:26 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, breadbox wrote:

>Yes. Unity votes only count for YESes. No.

Ack(a)!  I assume this was snuck through while I was on vacation?  That'll
teach me to go and get married.

- -mr cwm

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 11:18:38 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

> >Yes. Unity votes only count for YESes. No.
> 
> Ack(a)!  I assume this was snuck through while I was on vacation?
> That'll
> teach me to go and get married.
> 
This went through in the wake of the Underworld strike, and has thus
been in the rules for some time.  I am not convinced that it was a
good idea then, nor that it is a good idea now, but it _is_ the
current rule.

ThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 12:44:48 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2361 accepted

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> > Results of Proposal 2361
> > 
> > 13/17 votes: Quorum achieved
> > 10/14 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
> > Tammany                                 [Alfvaen bribed Tammany A$5]
> 
> Isn't the minimum tammany bribe $A25?  I saw this on a previous
> proposal as well.
> 
> Malenkai
> 

I successfuly changed it to $A5 a LOOONG time ago, last spring I think.

                                     - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:25:23 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2363 rejected

breadbox wrote:

> Results of Proposal 2363
> 
> 12/17 votes: Quorum achieved
> 6/13 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
I assume that this was too fast of a cut & paste job.  The numbers
appear correct, but 6/13 is certainly not sufficient for proposal
acceptance.

ThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:27:48 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2363 rejected

And now that I look more carefully, I see that the subject line
correctly said "rejected."  Only the text of the message said
"accepted."

ThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:40:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2363 rejected

>> Results of Proposal 2363
>> 
>> 12/17 votes: Quorum achieved
>> 6/13 YES votes: Proposal accepted
>> 
> I assume that this was too fast of a cut & paste job.  The numbers
> appear correct, but 6/13 is certainly not sufficient for proposal
> acceptance.

Blargh! Five demerits for the Tabulator!

Sorry if I confused anyone.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 22:41:14 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2363 rejected

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Results of Proposal 2363
> 
> 12/17 votes: Quorum achieved
> 6/13 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
>     YES:
> Slakko              (SPAM)
> mr cwm              (SPAM)
> Balsamic Dragon     (SPAM)
> Alfvaen             (MetaMorph)
> Tammany                                 [Slakko bribed Tammany A$5]
> Bonus Vote                              [mr cwm cast a Bonus Vote]
> 
>     NO:
> Niccolo Flychuck    (MetaMorph)
> ThinMan             (Vulcan)
> Malenkai            (Vulcan)
> Vynd                (Vulcan)
> /dev/joe            (Vulcan)
> Rex Mundi
> breadbox

So much for the numbers.  There's three YES votes I thought I had - I
won't name names but you know who you are.  In some cases you may have
forgotten, in others not realised the link between this and the crucial
later proposals that made it so relevant.  If, however, any of you were
double agents for the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired), then I weep
for the future of Acka.

I don't want to kill off the rule necessarily - I just don't believe in
total and utter immutability.

> 
>     PRESENT:
> Karma               (Harf)
> 
>     ABSTAINED:
> Fortunato           (SPAM)
> Red Barn
> Archie Leach
> Calvin N Hobbes     (Harf)
> two-star            (MetaMorph)
> 
I appreciate that most of those abstaining were not interested, or too
busy.  Yet this is the only way we can fix the problem the Vulcans have
left us.  I say that this is the time for the elimination of such
problematic pieces of legislation as the last Paragraph of Rule 1.

Yours-Dean-Brown-esquely,

Slakko

- --
Duncan C. Richer -- aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother -- Now Really Lost!
Queens' College  -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory --  Cambridge University
"... and entirely motivated by hormones.  Works for me!"   --  Freakazoid!
http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/27/Index.html <-- Imperial Nomic Game 27

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

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 22:53:45 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2363 rejected

On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Duncan Richer wrote:

> 
> So much for the numbers.  There's three YES votes I thought I had - I
> won't name names but you know who you are.  In some cases you may have
> forgotten, in others not realised the link between this and the crucial
> later proposals that made it so relevant.  If, however, any of you were
> double agents for the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired), then I weep
> for the future of Acka.
> 
> I don't want to kill off the rule necessarily - I just don't believe in
> total and utter immutability.

I have now gone through the other proposals in the grab bag of Rule 1
fixers.  As a whole, they will no longer work to produce the desired
effect.  However, on closer inspection the order of the first three
proposals is in fact irrelevant.  They create distinct actions, which work
together to enable the final blow to be struck by a renumbering.  Without
Proposal 2363 or an equivalent, that final blow is illegal - but with it
the situation is enabled.  I may, in the future, but not as a result of
this message, (note the unambiguous language) decide to resubmit it
foolishly.  

I am giving people two chances to fix the problem that has been created.
If you want to create a fun situation with a lot of interestingly worded
CFJs, then vote YES for these proposals.

If you don't believe in permanent immutability of rules, then vote YES.

If you don't believe the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired) rule should
still have power of veto over the ruleset, then vote YES.

Just remember - please vote - apathy won't survive against a Vulcan
onslaught.

I hereby plead with the following people to vote YES:

Slakko (well at least I know I'll vote for it), mr cwm, Balsamic Dragon,
Alfvaen, Niccolo Flychuck, Karma, Fortunato, Rex Mundi, breadbox, Red
Barn, Archie Leach, Calvin N Hobbes and two-star.  If any of you are
listening, this could be our last best chance for eliminating the
immutability of rule 1.

Vote YES on 2369 and 2372.  2373 will need to wait until a proposal like
2363 gets accepted, but I won't bother with that if 2369 and 2372 fail to
get the support that they all-too-badly need.

YES 2369
YES 2372
YES 2369
YES 2372
YES 2369
YES 2372
YES 2369
YES 2372

Got the message?  Please?

Yours grovellingly,
Slakko
- --
Duncan C. Richer -- aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother -- Now Really Lost!
Queens' College  -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory --  Cambridge University
"... and entirely motivated by hormones.  Works for me!"   --  Freakazoid!
http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/27/Index.html <-- Imperial Nomic Game 27

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

End of acka-research-digest V2 #176
***********************************