Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #19
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest    Tuesday, February 17 1998    Volume 03 : Number 019

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 02:42:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Token Compromise

On Mon, 16 Feb 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> Perhaps we should avoid tokens with the following compromise:
> 
> Trinkets can still be created of any value.
> However, any player may sneer at a Trinket created of value less than A$6.
> If anyone sneers at a trinket within 3 days of its creation, the Trinket
> is so unstable, and the sneer so powerful, that the Trinket explodes in a
> flurry of Ackadollars equal to its value.

Can't we just huff and puff and blow the trinket back into A$ :) 

> 
> Trinkets with "cool" descriptions or neat and appropriate titles would not
> be sneered at, and so would survive, as would trinketsabove A$5 in value.
> 
> (You can set the min value higher if you want.)
> 
> Comments?
> - -- 
> Duncan C. "" Richer aka
> Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
> Cambridge, 1st Yr PhD(PMa) - .Nomic Elector, Frgn Minister, HP(Morpork)
> Acka - President "Gumball" RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 02:49:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Token Compromise

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Uri Bruck wrote:

> > Trinkets can still be created of any value.
> > However, any player may sneer at a Trinket created of value less than A$6.
> > If anyone sneers at a trinket within 3 days of its creation, the Trinket
> > is so unstable, and the sneer so powerful, that the Trinket explodes in a
> > flurry of Ackadollars equal to its value.
> 
> Can't we just huff and puff and blow the trinket back into A$ :) 
No, we sneer and leer and melt the trinket down.

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Yr PhD(PMa) - .Nomic Elector, Frgn Minister, HP(Morpork)
Acka - President "Gumball" RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 02:52:23 -0500 (EST)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Token Compromise

uzOn Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Can't we just huff and puff and blow the trinket back into A$ :) 
> No, we sneer and leer and melt the trinket down.

Sneering is already regulated by the rules.  Why not make huffing and
puffing regulated too?

rufus

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 04:04:26 -0500 (EST)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2724

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Proposal 2724
> The Great Tomato Debate
> Guy Fawkes (Robert Shimmin)
> 

I fail to see we need to have a hearing to determine that tomaotoes are
evil.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 04:20:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2709 accepted

> Proposal 2709 - Mon 09 Feb 1998 15:13 EST
> Special Move Groundwork
> Slakko (Duncan Richer)
> 
> [...]
> 
> Amend Section 4 of Rule 1044 by relabelling subsection e as d, and
> inserting the following text immediately after subsection c:
> 
> "d. A player may convert 10 Swingpoints into 1 Benefyt. Benefyts are
> tradeable entities."
> 
> Amend subsection e of Section 4 of Rule 1044 by replacing all instances of
> "(c)" with "(d)".
> 
> [...]

Section 4 of Rule 1044 consists of two sentences, and has no
subsections. Therefore the two changes quoted above have no effect.

breadbox
Rule-Harfer

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 04:30:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Senate Elections

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, David Scheidt wrote:

> The following nominated themselves for the Senate seat recently vacated
> by our esteemed president:
> 
> Rex Mundi
> The Gingham Wearer
> else...if

So, which Klingon do you want on the High Council? :-)
Qapla!

Yours,
Slakko
trying to do a Gowron impersonation
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Yr PhD(PMa) - .Nomic Elector, Frgn Minister, HP(Morpork)
Acka - President "Gumball" RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 08:26:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Proposal 2727
> Lon Chaney, Roll Over
> Slagothor (Eric Plumb)
[deletia]
> If a player is Lycanthropic, this fact and the animal in which e is a
> Lycanthrope shall be depicted on the Player/Entity page along with the
> rest of eir attributes.

The idea is sort of original, but this paragraph alone will make me vote
against it.  The P/E page is and always has been completely unregulated,
voluntarily maintained as a service to the players by a kind and generous
player.  I see no good reason to change this state of affairs.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 08:30:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2709 accepted

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> 
Results of Proposal 2709
> 
> 20/25 votes: Quorum achieved
> 9/15 YES votes: Proposal accepted
Just scraped in.

I note that this Party Chess-affecting proposal was 5-1-0-1 on the
Swingers,
and 4-5-5-4 on the non-Swingers.

Why were non-Swingers so against the idea of modifying a game they are not
even playing?  Also, like my last RFC, this idea was discussed beforehand,
and the only objection was raised by Niccolo.  He thought maybe they
should have been Otzma Cards, but even then he admitted that the delayed
or counterable nature of Otzma Cards probably made them unsuitable.

Why weren't any of your objections raised?

>     NO:
> Alfvaen              (MetaMorph)
> breadbox
> Malenkai             (Vulcan)
> Guy Fawkes
> rufus                (SPAM)
> two-star             (MetaMorph)

Yours,
Slakko
Paranoid President a la Gumball
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Yr PhD(PMa) - .Nomic Elector, Frgn Minister, HP(Morpork)
Acka - President "Gumball" RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 08:54:54 -0500 (EST)
From: AARON KEESLER <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Jagger

{{ [ Does anyone know why I delimited this with "JAGGER"?  I may even
give you some A$ if you can tell me.  Fortunato might know. ] }}

I might, but only if it has to do with the Wild Cards series.  Does it?

- ------------------
Aaron Keesler
Lotus Notes Administrator
Intranet Administrator
Adtran, Inc.
- ------------------

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 09:11:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:
> 
> > Proposal 2727
> > Lon Chaney, Roll Over
> > Slagothor (Eric Plumb)
> [deletia]
> > If a player is Lycanthropic, this fact and the animal in which e is a
> > Lycanthrope shall be depicted on the Player/Entity page along with the
> > rest of eir attributes.
> 
> The idea is sort of original, but this paragraph alone will make me vote
> against it.  The P/E page is and always has been completely unregulated,
> voluntarily maintained as a service to the players by a kind and generous
> player.  I see no good reason to change this state of affairs.

What P/E page?  The rules don't say anything about the existence of a P/E
page :-)  So this first sentence would actually be meaningless.
Although perhaps a retract/resubmit with that sentence modified to read 
"It is the duty of the <blah office, probably Web-Harfer is best here> to
track which players are Lycanthropic."

It's only two points for a retract, and you could get Guy Fawkes' vote
with it.  It might be worth it.

Yours,
Slakko

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Yr PhD(PMa) - .Nomic Elector, Frgn Minister, HP(Morpork)
Acka - President "Gumball" RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 09:56:13 -0500 (EST)
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

> > If a player is Lycanthropic, this fact and the animal in which e is a
> > Lycanthrope shall be depicted on the Player/Entity page along with
the
> > rest of eir attributes.
> 
> The idea is sort of original, but this paragraph alone will make me
vote
> against it.  The P/E page is and always has been completely
unregulated,
> voluntarily maintained as a service to the players by a kind and
generous
> player.  I see no good reason to change this state of affairs.

I agree. I like the idea but will probably vote against it. You've
actually said all attributes of a player must be listed on a page called
the player/entity page without specifying which officer is to do it,
which I believe would mean the speaker would have to do it. I would
suggest you retract and resubmit without this bit.

TGW.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 10:01:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

>If the Werewolf of London bites a player, that player becomes Lycanthropic
>in the animal of eir choice.  If e has not chosen an animal within three
	Whose choice? The werewolf or the player?

- --
- -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 11:02:48 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Proposal 2727
> Lon Chaney, Roll Over
> Slagothor (Eric Plumb)
> 
> {{ Warning Contains: Werewolf }}
> 
> {{ Add "Artist: Warren Zevon" to the Literature List. }}

Hrmph.  Yeah, fine, Werewolf of London is good.  But I dunno about this.

> 
> {{ [ All this has basically no effect as is; I'm hoping people will add
> later what effects Lycanthropy has, other ways to make the Werewolf bite
> people, etc. ] }}
> 
> Create a Rule with a unique number in the 900's, with the title
> "Ah-ooooooo", and the following JAGGER-delimited text:
> 
> JAGGER
> There exists a unique, unownable entity known as the Werewolf of London.
> The Werewolf of London (hereafter Werewolf for purposes of this Rule) is
> initially in his cave, which is located Somewhere Else.
> 
> If the Werewolf of London bites a player, that player becomes Lycanthropic
> in the animal of eir choice.  If e has not chosen an animal within three
> days, an animal shall be assigned to em by the Mad Scientist.
> 
> If a player is Lycanthropic, this fact and the animal in which e is a
> Lycanthrope shall be depicted on the Player/Entity page along with the
> rest of eir attributes.
> 
> During a Full Moon, the Werewolf will leave his cave and stalk the streets
> of Ackanomic.  "Hear 'im howling at your kitchen door; better not
> let 'im in." [ "Werewolves of London," Warren Zevon ]  If any player 
> attempts to change eir Location during a Full Moon, the Werewolf will bite
> em unless e owns Wolfbane.  Trinkets have no effect on the behavior of the
> Werewolf.  {{ [Take that, Annoyers.] }}
> 
> At the end of a Full Moon period, the Werewolf will return to his cave.
> JAGGER
> 

I like it.

> {{ [ Does anyone know why I delimited this with "JAGGER"?  I may even
> give you some A$ if you can tell me.  Fortunato might know. ] }}
> 
> Amend Rule 593, "Ackanomic Research Guild," by appending the following
> VEGA-delimited text immediately before the section of that Rule beginning
> with Roman numberal II.
> 
> VEGA
> D. Astronomer
> 
> The Office of Astronomer has one seat.  An Election shall be held for the
> Office of Astronomer on the first day of each calendar month.  It is a
> Duty of the Astronomer to observe all the moons of Acka and declare a Full
> Moon lasting from one to six Acka days.  E must do this a minimum of
> one times in the calendar month since e was Elected, and may do so up to
> once per Acka moon in any one calendar month.  If the Astronomer fails to
> perform eir Duty or does so incorrectly, e shall be immediately Impeached.
> 
> The Office of Astronomer can never be held by a player whose Ackanomic
> name is Fortunato, for Fortunato is the Astronomer's mortal enemy.
> VEGA
> 
> {{ Repeal the last sentence of section D of Rule 593.  [ I just couldn't
> resist. ] }}
> 

Fine by me.

> {{ Hold an Election for the Office of Astronomer. }}
> 
> 

This is unneccessary, and will actually cause problems.  The election
would begin immediately, and no one would have been nominated yet.

                                  - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 11:04:36 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:
> 
> > Proposal 2727
> > Lon Chaney, Roll Over
> > Slagothor (Eric Plumb)
> [deletia]
> > If a player is Lycanthropic, this fact and the animal in which e is a
> > Lycanthrope shall be depicted on the Player/Entity page along with the
> > rest of eir attributes.
> 
> The idea is sort of original, but this paragraph alone will make me vote
> against it.  The P/E page is and always has been completely unregulated,
> voluntarily maintained as a service to the players by a kind and generous
> player.  I see no good reason to change this state of affairs.
> 
> Guy Fawkes
> 
> 

Good point.

                                   - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 11:10:14 -0500 (EST)
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2710 rejected

> 20/25 votes: Quorum achieved
> 8/19 YES votes: Proposal rejected
> 
> > Proposal 2710 - Mon 09 Feb 1998 15:15 EST
> > More contrivance
> > The Gingham Wearer (Tom Walmsley)

I seem to recall someone, perhaps Fortunato, mentioning the possibility
of having a hearing to throw out one of the Zuriti'ili guidelines. Would
this have any more support, or do people like Zuriti'ili the way it is?

TGW.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 11:15:56 -0500 (EST)
From: AARON KEESLER <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2710 rejected

Yup, that was me.  I would definitely support that.

>-----Original Message-----
>From:	The Gingham Wearer [SMTP:[email-masked]]
>Sent:	Tuesday, February 17, 1998 10:10 AM
>To:	[email-masked]
>Subject:	Re: Acka: Proposal 2710 rejected
>
>> 20/25 votes: Quorum achieved
>> 8/19 YES votes: Proposal rejected
>> 
>> > Proposal 2710 - Mon 09 Feb 1998 15:15 EST
>> > More contrivance
>> > The Gingham Wearer (Tom Walmsley)
>
>I seem to recall someone, perhaps Fortunato, mentioning the possibility
>of having a hearing to throw out one of the Zuriti'ili guidelines. Would
>this have any more support, or do people like Zuriti'ili the way it is?
>
>
>TGW.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 11:21:15 -0500 (EST)
From: AARON KEESLER <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2727

Ack.  If I had actually read the part about the Astronomer, I would have
known for sure :)  I love those books...  However, maybe I'm just
foolish, but I can't see a section D in Rule 593.

>> The Office of Astronomer can never be held by a player whose Ackanomic
>> name is Fortunato, for Fortunato is the Astronomer's mortal enemy.
>> VEGA
>> 
>> {{ Repeal the last sentence of section D of Rule 593.  [ I just couldn't
>> resist. ] }}
>> 
>
>

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 15:58:28 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Token Compromise

Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 16 Feb 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
> 
> > Perhaps we should avoid tokens with the following compromise:
> >
> > Trinkets can still be created of any value.
> > However, any player may sneer at a Trinket created of value less than A$6.
> > If anyone sneers at a trinket within 3 days of its creation, the Trinket
> > is so unstable, and the sneer so powerful, that the Trinket explodes in a
> > flurry of Ackadollars equal to its value.
> 
> Can't we just huff and puff and blow the trinket back into A$ :)
> 
> >
> > Trinkets with "cool" descriptions or neat and appropriate titles would not
> > be sneered at, and so would survive, as would trinketsabove A$5 in value.
> >
> > (You can set the min value higher if you want.)
> >
> > Comments?
> > - --
Yeah can anybody make em up?

Hoover 2300

THE Vacuum Of The Century.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:12:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2710 rejected

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> I seem to recall someone, perhaps Fortunato, mentioning the possibility
> of having a hearing to throw out one of the Zuriti'ili guidelines. Would
> this have any more support, or do people like Zuriti'ili the way it is?

I would support it, but would prefer that it only target specific
Guidelines.  I think purging the entire list is a bit too much.

- -rico

I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder. 

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:20:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, AARON KEESLER wrote:

> Ack.  If I had actually read the part about the Astronomer, I would have
> known for sure :)  I love those books...  However, maybe I'm just
> foolish, but I can't see a section D in Rule 593.
> 
How could you not read the part about the Astronomer?  He's only in 2 and
3 and those are the best two in my opinion.  Anyway, the earlier part of
the proposal would have created section D.  THe part repealed would have
been about you never being able to hold the office.  Which is entirely
unfair, if funny.

- -rico

Jesus loves me, but I'm getting a restraining order.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:36:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Towsner wrote:

> >If the Werewolf of London bites a player, that player becomes Lycanthropic
> >in the animal of eir choice.  If e has not chosen an animal within three
> 	Whose choice? The werewolf or the player?

That would actually be pretty funny, to have the werewolf choose.  I think
that since, pronoun-wise, I use 'e' and 'eir' for players and 'he' and
'his' for the Werewolf (well, all the werewolves in the song are male; I'm
not being overly sexist) it's not terribly unambiguous.  I also think the
antecedent is pretty clear.  (I've always wanted to use that word in
everyday conversation.  You wouldn't believe how few chances you get to do
so in Hawaii.)  

A CFJ might rule differently, but that's half the fun of Acka.

- -rico

Save the whales!  Collect the whole set!

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:39:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2727

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, John Frederic Mc Coy wrote:

> > {{ Hold an Election for the Office of Astronomer. }}
> > 
> This is unneccessary, and will actually cause problems.  The election
> would begin immediately, and no one would have been nominated yet.

So it would end as soon as it began, right?  With no nominees?  It would
probably default to... (drumroll, please) the Speaker.  Yeah, I'll take it
out and do random determination the first time.

- -rico

I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder. 

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:53:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2725

On Mon, 16 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> {{[It seems a bit unsporting to allow details in the YORL
> story to change without explanation, or to drift inexplicably.
> That is part of the challenge.  Sam/Romeo was weaponless, and
> the bar was nearly empty.  If we need weapons and a mob to

Simple explanation.  This is a cartoon.  Haven't you read the compendium
of rules for Cartoon Physics?  Don't you remember when Elspeth,
empty-handed, reached behind her back and pulled out a giant hammer to
whack a giant with?  Or when Narf, in his haste, crashed straight through
a wall in Snowgod's castle, leaving a giant Narf-shaped hole?

Speaking of inanities, I want to know what happened to the Lunatic Finger.
I was going to reintroduce it but was rudely interrupted.  :-)

- -rico, who faked his "random" .sig generator's prescience this time

First law of Cartoon Physics: Gravity works in waves.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 18:00:06 -0500 (EST)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2725

>-rico, who faked his "random" .sig generator's prescience this time
	Quite frankly, while your .sig generator was very prescient for a
random device, for a human it bordered on non sequiters.

- --
- -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 18:02:09 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked] (Andrew Stefanski)
Subject: RFC: New Otzma Cards

Proposal 1:

Create a new rule, numbered 1240.18, with the title "Otzma card of type 
Recount", with the following TRYAGAIN-delimited text:

TRYAGAIN
This card may only be played in the public forum.

When this card is played, the card-player may name any proposal that e authored 
that has either been accepted or rejected in the last 3 days.  All changes made 
by that proposal to the rules are undone.  The proposal is then treated as a 
newly submitted proposal.

Any points gained by the card player due to the proposal being accepted or 
rejected are removed.  Any points lost due to the proposal being accepted or 
rejected remain.

There can only be 2 Otzma cards of this type in existance at any one time.  
"Recount" Otzma cards have an F-designation of rare.
TRYAGAIN

- ----------------------
Proposal 2:

Create a new rule, numbered 1240.19, with the title "Otzma card of type Gimme 
now!", with the following IWANT-delimited text:

IWANT
This card may only be played in the public forum.

When this card is played, the card-player names another player, and an Otzma 
card that the other player owns.  The card-player gains possession of that Otzma 
card.

Counter-Action:  The card gained by the card player is returned to the player he 
took it from, and the other player gains possession of an Otzma card that the 
card-player owns.  If the card-player does not currently own any Otzma cards, 
then the next card he gains possession of goes to the other player.

There can only be 10 Otzma cards of this type in existance at any one time.  
"Gimme now!" Otzma cards have an F-designation of normal.
IWANT

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 21:13:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2725

On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Towsner wrote:

> >-rico, who faked his "random" .sig generator's prescience this time
> 	Quite frankly, while your .sig generator was very prescient for a
> random device, for a human it bordered on non sequiters.
> 

For those infidels who do not believe I actually do have a random .sig
generator, (and who probably believe that black is not a color and
tomatoes are not evil): I do, it isn't, and they are.  It [the
generator] just isn't very random at all, only choosing from between
about 20 of my 200 taglines, and it only invokes when I log in or tell it
to, which I usually don't feel like doing between messages.  Thus the
non-randomness and non-sequiturs.  I will notify it that you are impressed
with its prescience.  (I was really spooked by the clubs one though.  That
was its best yet, and I swear I didn't fake that.)

- -rico

Man is the best computer available...and the only one which can be mass 
produced by unskilled labor. 

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

End of acka-research-digest V3 #19
**********************************