Subject: acka-research-digest V2 #192
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest     Sunday, December 7 1997     Volume 02 : Number 192

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 07:29:49 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2428 accepted

On Sat, 6 Dec 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Results of Proposal 2428
> 
> 15/19 votes: Quorum achieved
> 9/14 YES votes: Proposal accepted
> 
>     YES:
> Alfvaen             (MetaMorph)
> breadbox
> The Gingham Wearer
> Fortunato           (SPAM)
> Rex Mundi
> K 2
> Balsamic Dragon     (SPAM)
> Crackfoo            (Harf)
> Slakko              (SPAM)
> two-star            (MetaMorph)
> Niccolo Flychuck    (MetaMorph)
> mr cwm              (SPAM)
> Tammany                                 [K 2 bribed Tammany A$100]
> SPAM Unity Vote
> MetaMorph Unity Vote

This looks like a lot more than 9 votes to me.

> 
>     NO:
> Malenkai            (Vulcan)
> /dev/joe            (Vulcan)
> ThinMan             (Vulcan)
> Vynd                (Vulcan)
> 

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 09:05:43 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2429 accepted

On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> 7/8 YES votes: Proposal accepted        [Proposal is Boring.]
Thank you to everyone who made this boring.
Especially me! (D'oh!)

ABSTAIN:
> Slakko              (SPAM)
That'll teach me - I'll check my votes much more carefully.

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 09:09:06 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2364

On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Proposal 2364 - Wed 12 Nov 1997 14:45:02
> Weighty Matters to Discuss
> Slakko (Duncan Richer)

Um, Brian.  I think we did this one.
Check the second digit.

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 09:18:15 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2466

On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Proposal 2466
> Don't Get Your Knickers In A Twist
> Alfvaen (Aaron Humphrey)

Shouldn't this have been Don't Get Your Knickers in a Twister?
:-)

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Sun, 07 Dec 1997 10:06:39 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2465

> Proposal 2465
> Sid Meier Says, No Corruption In Democracies

> {{[  Since the "never seen it used in over six months" criterion
> seems to work, let's get rid of Proposal bribery.  ]}}

Huh?  Synod hasn't materially changed the game state in over
a year and well ... nevermind :).  I actually haven't seen a
pattern on the repeals, I think there is alot of stuff out
there that has gone more than 6 months without being used that
people refuse to let go of :-).  'Testing the Waters' was an
example.

> Amend Rule 313, "Proposal Bribery", by deleting sections IV and V.
> Also, rename Rule 313 to "Fair Voting".

As for this amendment, one nice thing I have used this for was the
initial distribution of the RoJ fragments.  By placing them in a bribe,
it allowed people to vote on whether they wanted to participate,
and provided a method to automatically transfer the entities to each
player.  This approach is superior, IMO, than just asking people
if they want to participate.  It seems like a nice tool that's worth
keeping ... its certainly more useful than some of the sludge we
*have* decided to keep :-)  I guess we'll see...

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 13:51:12 -0000
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2463

> From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>

> On Sat, 6 Dec 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:
> 
> > Proposal 2463
> > Sploing
> > The Gingham Wearer (Tom Walmsley)
> > 
> > Modify rule 1209 such that all instances of the term "*ping*" with
the
> > inverted commas ("") being delimiters only are replaced by the term
> > "*sploing*" with the inverted commas ("") being delimiters only
> > including the instance of the term in the rule's title.
> > 
> > 
> 
> *sploing*?  Do you actually think this will pass?  Are you familiar
with
> the long literary tradition of machines that go *ping*?  How many
> sentences can I write ending in question marks?  Help, can't anyone
make
> it stop?

In that order:
Yes
No
No
5
No

It won't pass (probably) but should help gain me a few points.

The Gingham Wearer

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 14:15:21 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2429 accepted

On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Results of Proposal 2429
> 
> 16/20 votes: Quorum achieved
> 7/8 YES votes: Proposal accepted        [Proposal is Boring.]
> 
> 
> > Proposal 2429 - Sat 29 Nov 1997 20:26:02
> > Elimination of Round Ambiguity
> > Slakko (Duncan Richer)

Congratulations to Slakko for writing Ackanomic's very first boring
proposal.

                              - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 12:15:01 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2429 accepted

> Results of Proposal 2429

> 16/20 votes: Quorum achieved
> 7/8 YES votes: Proposal accepted        [Proposal is Boring.]

>     YES:
> Alfvaen             (MetaMorph)
> /dev/joe            (Vulcan)
> Rex Mundi
> ThinMan             (Vulcan)
> Crackfoo            (Harf)
> Niccolo Flychuck    (MetaMorph)
> else...if                               [else...if is no longer pending]

Okay, now the new addition to Rule 207, with Boring Proposals, says
that "no points are scored by any player as a result of a Boring
proposal being accepted".  Does that include triggering Whamiols?
I'd say not because the Proposal is not the point, but the no-longer-
pending status of else...if.

(But in _this_ case, the Tuba wouldn't give you points for a Boring
proposal, right?)

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--Dire Straits
Current Book--TesseractsQ
Helium, molybdenum, zinc, iodine--braving the elements, the reptiles and I

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 12:24:35 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2465

> > {{[  Since the "never seen it used in over six months" criterion
> > seems to work, let's get rid of Proposal bribery.  ]}}

> Huh?  Synod hasn't materially changed the game state in over
> a year and well ... nevermind :).  I actually haven't seen a
> pattern on the repeals, I think there is alot of stuff out
> there that has gone more than 6 months without being used that
> people refuse to let go of :-).  'Testing the Waters' was an
> example.

Okay, well, my attempts to repeal rules that _have_ been used in the
past six months both failed.  :-)

> > Amend Rule 313, "Proposal Bribery", by deleting sections IV and V.
> > Also, rename Rule 313 to "Fair Voting".

> As for this amendment, one nice thing I have used this for was the
> initial distribution of the RoJ fragments.  By placing them in a bribe,
> it allowed people to vote on whether they wanted to participate,
> and provided a method to automatically transfer the entities to each
> player.  This approach is superior, IMO, than just asking people
> if they want to participate.  It seems like a nice tool that's worth
> keeping ... its certainly more useful than some of the sludge we
> *have* decided to keep :-)  I guess we'll see...

I did know about the RoJ thng...but I've never seen it used myself,
otherwise.  Also, I remember the conflict between the Bribe and the
Modesty declaration, which both have to occur at the beginning of
the Proposal...  Altogether, I don't see that we'd miss it.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--Dire Straits
Current Book--TesseractsQ
Jim just quit and packed extra bags for Liz Owen.

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 14:50:17 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2465

On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> > > Amend Rule 313, "Proposal Bribery", by deleting sections IV and V.
> > > Also, rename Rule 313 to "Fair Voting".
> 
> > As for this amendment, one nice thing I have used this for was the
> > initial distribution of the RoJ fragments.  By placing them in a bribe,
> > it allowed people to vote on whether they wanted to participate,
> > and provided a method to automatically transfer the entities to each
> > player.  This approach is superior, IMO, than just asking people
> > if they want to participate.  It seems like a nice tool that's worth
> > keeping ... its certainly more useful than some of the sludge we
> > *have* decided to keep :-)  I guess we'll see...
> 
> I did know about the RoJ thng...but I've never seen it used myself,
> otherwise.  Also, I remember the conflict between the Bribe and the
> Modesty declaration, which both have to occur at the beginning of
> the Proposal...  Altogether, I don't see that we'd miss it.
> 

I've been around a little longer, and I seem to recall seeing an attempt
to use it that failed for some reason.  I've never seen it used
successfuly though.  If the RoJ thing, which must be like a year in the
past now, is the last time its been used, then I agree that we could
probably do without it.

                                  - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Sun, 07 Dec 1997 15:08:20 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2465

> I've been around a little longer, and I seem to recall seeing an attempt
> to use it that failed for some reason.  I've never seen it used
> successfuly though.  If the RoJ thing, which must be like a year in the
> past now, is the last time its been used, then I agree that we could
> probably do without it.

Mabye so, but why to people want to dump well-written, potentially
useful rules, and then cry bloody murder when we try to repeal useless
sludge that never has and prolly never will affect the game state?

The fact than snowgod's Disease, Synod, the Sanctity of Harf, Evil
Twins, etc. live forever, while this dies is a bit strange...
 
I guess that is what makes Acka special :-)

Malenkai
BWG

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 15:50:03 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2465

On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> > I've been around a little longer, and I seem to recall seeing an attempt
> > to use it that failed for some reason.  I've never seen it used
> > successfuly though.  If the RoJ thing, which must be like a year in the
> > past now, is the last time its been used, then I agree that we could
> > probably do without it.
> 
> Mabye so, but why to people want to dump well-written, potentially
> useful rules, and then cry bloody murder when we try to repeal useless
> sludge that never has and prolly never will affect the game state?
> 
> The fact than snowgod's Disease, Synod, the Sanctity of Harf, Evil
> Twins, etc. live forever, while this dies is a bit strange...
>  
> I guess that is what makes Acka special :-)

Bingo!

> 
> Malenkai
> BWG
> 

                               - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 1997 23:55:28 -0000
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2463

I hereby retract proposal 2463. I've just realised I've got much better
things to do with my three complaints under rule 1129.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

End of acka-research-digest V2 #192
***********************************