Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #23
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest    Saturday, February 21 1998    Volume 03 : Number 023

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 03:02:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email programs

On Fri, 20 Feb 1998 [email-masked] wrote:

> Can anyone recomend a good e-mail program? I'm currently using 
> Microsoft Internet Mail (the one from with internet explorer) but I 
> am now unable to send any emails through it. I've tried re-installing 
> it but it still won't work. Whenever I go to the outbox or try 
> sending a message I get the response:
> 
> "This folder has been damaged.
> It will be repaired."
> 
> I'm sending this on a shareware program that I happened to have on a 
> CD from a magazine cover. If anyone could tell me how to fix the 
> problem I am having, or recomend a good program I could download (I 
> don't want to download the whole of internet explorer four or 
> anything though!) then I would greatly appreciate it. Of the two 
> options a fix would be preferable, but advice on either would be very 
> welcome.

I use PC-Pine for my mail.  It works well, and I believe it handles both
IMAP and POP protocols.  It doesn't filter, though, you have to do that at
the mail-server end.

Downloadable from ftp://ftp.cac.washington.edu/pine/pcpine/

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: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 03:43:43 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: Please unsubscribe me

Don't reply on this message to a maillist, but to a private 
emailadress without the word "Acka:" in the subjectline.
Because Im forced to delete without reading every emailmessage that 
has in the subjectline "Acka;".  

Hi, I recieved two emails:
One that was seeing that Im not subscribed to acka-research and
the other that came for that same list.

BTW I have that problem with all the ack maillist to were I was 
subscribed.Im busy for several weeks to unsubscribe from all those 
list, because I don't play anymore in the ackanomic game and I also 
don't read the acka messages.

There are two ways for me to go: One ask nice if can get unsubsribed 
from all the acka maillist or become not nice and start spamming the 
lists so that my adress is removed from the maillist because Im 
spamming to the list. 

I want to stay nice. So send please a message to the mantainer of 
this and the other acka maillists that Im will spam this and other 
acka maillist if Im not unsubscribed from those in one week. 

Jeroen M.W. van Dijk

BTW my emailadresses are "[email-masked]" and "[email-masked]" 

- ------
Date sent:        Tue, 10 Feb 1998 12:46:03 -0800
To:               [email-masked]
From:             [email-masked]
Subject:          Majordomo results: Re: Little question
Send reply to:    [email-masked]

- --

>>>> unsubscribe acka-research
**** unsubscribe: [email-masked]' is not a member of list
'acka-research'. 
**** contact "[email-masked]" if you need help. 
>>>> unsubscribe acka-finance 
**** unsubscribe:[email-masked]' is not a member of list 
'acka-finance'. 
****contact "[email-masked]" if you need help. >>>> 

> Date:          Wed, 11 Feb 1998 08:59:04 -0500 (EST)
> From:          "Robert G. Shimmin, an all-around Nice Guy" <[email-masked]>
> To:            [email-masked]
> Cc:            [email-masked]
> Subject:       Re: acka-research-digest V3 #254
> Reply-to:      [email-masked]

> 
> On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, acka-research-digest wrote:
> 
> > > Poetic liscence
> > > Can twist the numbers slightly.
> > > Read _Infinity's Shore_
> > 
> > Hey, when's the next flippin' book coming out, anyway?
> 
> May 1998.
> 
> GF
> 
> 
> 

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 08:15:51 -0500 (EST)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Thanks!

Thanks for the help people. If you can read this then I can now send
email from a program I can use. Internet mail seems to be working again.
Thanks!

TGW.

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 08:15:52 -0500 (EST)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Timeliness

> Like I said, the only way I could have _not_ won by Agenda Hats is if
the
> SC overturns its original definition of attributes.  I have still won,
> just on a different date, if they overturn on the basis of my public
> action question - because I submitted another message after Rule 340
was
> changed.

Are you 100% sure of this? I know you sent lots of messages with
mis-spelt words in them after that date, but you also had the chartreuse
goose for a bit around that time too. Not that I'm trying to undermine
you or anything. I'm just calling things as I see them.

TGW.

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 08:23:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Timeliness

On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> > Like I said, the only way I could have _not_ won by Agenda Hats is if
> the
> > SC overturns its original definition of attributes.  I have still won,
> > just on a different date, if they overturn on the basis of my public
> > action question - because I submitted another message after Rule 340
> was
> > changed.
> 
> Are you 100% sure of this? I know you sent lots of messages with
> mis-spelt words in them after that date, but you also had the chartreuse
> goose for a bit around that time too. Not that I'm trying to undermine
> you or anything. I'm just calling things as I see them.

You're right.  So we'd have everyone else still with their Agenda Hats,
and me the Agent of KAOS, but without having won a cycle.  Jeez, how
annoying is that.

Slakko,
rapidly becoming more expert in unwinning.

But what would happen to the scores?
- -- 
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: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 08:34:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: More Timeliness (relevant to CFJ 526)

IIRC, the appeal which is continuing regarding my alleged win of Cycle 18
was dependent on what constituted the content of a message, and what
actually makes sending a public message ambiguous.

Guy Fawkes made the argument that my message was ambiguous because, if
referring to vegetables was later made a crime, it would be impossible to
determine whether or not I had committed such a crime.  Does that mean
that every message that contains the word "swede" is ambiguous, because it
is not known whether swede is referring to the vegetable or the
nationality?

We already have Crimes which could be committed, but might not be, by some
messages.  For example, what is to say that some encoded message (such as
the hexadecimal messages that have been sent in the past) is not a hidden
signal about game information, and therefore a commission of Game
Misconduct?  Should all messages in code be ambiguous?

It seems much more reasonable that sending a public message is unambiguous
if the text which constitutes the message is unambiguous.  To say that the
"meaning" of the message must be unambiguous is to invite players to make
all public messages ambiguous, by deliberately interpreting messages
differently to everyone else.  IMHO, this is not a "reasonable"
interpretation of what makes a message unambiguous or not.  I sent some
ASCII-represented characters.  Which characters they were, and in what
order they appeared, was not questioned.  Therefore, my message was
specified fully and unambiguously.

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: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 14:32:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2734

On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> "
> {{all game custom is hereby destroyed.}}
> "
> 
> The rules and the game state may only be changed as described 
> in the rules. Actions described in the rules may only be performed, 
> and shall only have those effects, as specified by the rules. 
> Whatever is not explicitly prohibited or regulated by the rules, 
> however, is permitted and unregulated. Game custom, spirit of 
> the game, and linguistic interpretation are external concepts 
> and are not regulated or part of the game state. 

One question: What is to stop the "game custom" which comes into existence
when Rule 101 is re-amended suddenly being all the previous game custom?
After all, the rules don't prevent this, and what exactly is "game custom"
if the rules tell us that they aren't allowed to tell us what it is?

I would like to hear more from Malenkai about why he feels the need to
completely abandon all game custom (or at least make the pretence of doing
so).

- -- 
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: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 14:45:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2734

> One question: What is to stop the "game custom" which comes into existence
> when Rule 101 is re-amended suddenly being all the previous game custom?

I think its a matter of interpretation.

> After all, the rules don't prevent this, and what exactly is "game custom"
> if the rules tell us that they aren't allowed to tell us what it is?

I think its a matter of interpretation.
 
> I would like to hear more from Malenkai about why he feels the need to
> completely abandon all game custom (or at least make the pretence of doing
> so).

I feel no such need.  I find the idea of this proposal interesting.

Malenkai

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 14:54:19 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2718 accepted

> > Proposal 2718 - Fri 13 Feb 1998 23:00 EST
> > Traveling Exhibition
> > Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)

> > {{ This is a modest proposal.

I have a vague memory of seeing a CFJ on this kind of subject before,
but...is this really a Modest proposal, if the declaration is enclosed
in {{ }}?

- --
- --Veal Fan(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--Julia Fordham:Porcelain
Current Book--Terry Pratchett:Lords And Ladies
This is not a rebel song, this is 'O Canada'!

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

Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 18:05:17 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2733

On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> Proposal 2733
> Reduced to Firewood
> Slakko (Duncan Richer)
> 
> This is a Modest Proposal.
> 
> {{All Trinkets in the Cabinet are transferred to Alfvaen.}}
> 
> {{[After all, there's only one there, and he put it there as far as I
> know.]}}
> 
> Repeal Rule 945, "The Cabinet".
> 
> {{[I haven't seen the Cabinet used for a while - no-one wanted anything
> put in there when I was elected, and I think Beware the Forbidden Fruit's
> been there for a while.  This is old, unused ruleset which can be
> abandoned safely IMHO.]}}
> 
> 

It was all my doing, actually.  I created the Rule, Beware the Forbidden
Fruit! and the only other trinket that was in there, which I think
Beldin's pants ate or something.  I'd always rather hoped it would catch
on, but apparently people only liked the idea enough to vote it in, not to
use it.  So go ahead :)

                                        - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

End of acka-research-digest V3 #23
**********************************