Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #94
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest       Thursday, May 7 1998       Volume 03 : Number 094

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 00:33:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2995

On Wed, 6 May 1998, Raquel Peres da Silva wrote:

> > So in other words I'm doomed if I do and doomed if I don't?
> > 
> > K 2
> > Caped Crusader.
> 
> When I first read this proposal I thought I hadn't understood it (believe
> me, that would be no surprise). I'm relieved to know that, if I
> misunderstood it, so did K 2. It seems like by receiving a brie - which I
> could not avoid unless by commiting a Crime - I would be... commiting a
> Crime! So, what shoice would I have? I don't want to be a criminal!

RFC: Any player who submits a Proposal which would create a Catch-22
situation based on a currently existing Rule shall gain a Winning
Condition.

Actually, I expect this to get enough support from the Mu-Cow hunters
and agents of chaos that it might just pass.  One of these days yer going
to shoot yerselves in the foot, y' hear me boys?

If three more people (IIRC) had anti-voted or attempted to prevent me from
getting that Treasure on P2954, where would we be now?

"Jump, jump, jump, King me," that's where we'd be.

This one's peanuts compared to the other.  Well, cheesy at least.

- -Hubert

There are three kinds of people: those who can count and those who can't. 

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 01:26:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2995

> When I first read this proposal I thought I hadn't understood it (believe
> me, that would be no surprise). I'm relieved to know that, if I
> misunderstood it, so did K 2. It seems like by receiving a brie - which I
> could not avoid unless by commiting a Crime - I would be... commiting a
> Crime! So, what shoice would I have? I don't want to be a criminal!
>

The situation is worse if you're the Caped Crusader.

K 2
glad that if e misunderstood the proposal Ayla did too :)

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 02:47:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Salaries

On Wed, 6 May 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> 
> > 	Alvaen, do I get a salary as AR-C?  I don't think I got a reply to
> > my last message, though I could have missed it.
> 
> Yes, sorry, you did.  I don't know if that Office existed last month
> or not, since I didn't do the salary for it then.

What about the Nyarlathotep?  E is a Functional Office Holder - has e been
paid yet?
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President, Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 09:52:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Salaries

>What about the Nyarlathotep?  E is a Functional Office Holder - has e been
>paid yet?

I'd rather see a CFJ to that effect first.  Or maybe the next Financier will
be more sympathetic.

- --
- --Alfvaen (Web page:http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen)
Song In My Head--They Might Be Giants:They Might Be Giants
Current Book--Barb Galler-Smith & Josh Langston:Druids
I've got a full gas of tankoline and four good New Year tires...

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 11:34:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Salaries

On Thu, 7 May 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> 
> >What about the Nyarlathotep?  E is a Functional Office Holder - has e been
> >paid yet?
> 
> I'd rather see a CFJ to that effect first.  Or maybe the next Financier will
> be more sympathetic.

Let me get this straight.  There is a rule which says

There is an Optional Functional Office of Nyarlathotep.

and you claim it doesn't exist?

That seems pretty tortured logic to me.

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President, Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 11:36:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Salaries

On Thu, 7 May 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> 
> >What about the Nyarlathotep?  E is a Functional Office Holder - has e been
> >paid yet?
> 
> I'd rather see a CFJ to that effect first.  Or maybe the next Financier will
> be more sympathetic.
> 

I don't think there is much to dispute here, actually.  The Blueprint
clearly states that there is a functional office of Nyarlathotep.  No one
seems to dispute that  such an office exists.  The Rules clearly state
that all functional officers are awarded a salary.  So whoever holds the
office of Nyarlathotep should be getting paid.  I don't mean to be rude
Alfvaen, but you should give the guy his cash, or if you see some reason
why you shouldn't, file a CFJ yourself.

                                   - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 11:39:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Salaries

On Thu, 7 May 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
> Let me get this straight.  There is a rule which says
> 
> There is an Optional Functional Office of Nyarlathotep.
> 
> and you claim it doesn't exist?
> 
> That seems pretty tortured logic to me.
> 
The logic is straightforward, it is just wrong.

rufus

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 14:11:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan David Amery <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3004

On Wed, 6 May 1998, Eric Plumb wrote:

> On Wed, 6 May 1998, nomicbot wrote:
> 
> > Proposal 3004
> > Calendar
> > H*bert (Jonathan David Amery)
> 
> ...
> 
> >  Each of the trinkets mentioned above that were created in the possession
> > of players who did not vote either YES or BAA! on the proposal that
> > created this rule are destroyed.
> > 
> >  Each of the trinkets mentioned above that were created in the possession
> > of players who voted BAA! on the proposal that created this rule have
> > their description changed to "This is just an example."
> 
> This is still invalid, H*bert.  The first part is fine now, but these
> parts attempt to discriminate in some way between players who voted a
> particular way on the Proposal...
> 
> Trust me, I know.
> 

 No.  The bribary rule doesn't apply here.  The proposal creates a rule.
What the rule does is it's own business...

 Failing that it takes numerical precidence... :-)

 H*bert.

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 14:20:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3004

>  No.  The bribary rule doesn't apply here.  The proposal creates a rule.
> What the rule does is it's own business...
> 
>  Failing that it takes numerical precidence... :-)

I don't think you're right here. One of the rules (I don't recall which one)
states that no rule may have an effect based on how people voted on the
proposal creating it. It doesn't have precedence either since it doesn't
state "This rule takes precedence over all other rules."

I'm pretty sure that whatever the rule in question is will claim precedence.

TGW.

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:36:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Raquel Peres da Silva" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Rule 1379

Could anyone explain me what's the purpose of Rule 1379? (does it have
one?)

Ayla
Priestess of the Order of the Razor Boomerangs
Priestess of the Church of the Evil Ballot Stuffer

Law of Cat Motion:  A cat will move in a straight line, unless there is a
*really* good reason to change direction.

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:44:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Rule 1379

> Could anyone explain me what's the purpose of Rule 1379? (does it have
> one?)

It was a response to Pumpkin Patch nomic, which enacted a rule that stated
"Ackanomic has a trout in its milk."  Soon after, during the so-called
"war," one of the Patchlings made a comment posted to both Acka's and
Pumpkin Patch's mailing lists, that "At least we don't have a trout in
our milk."  This was a response to that.

Incidentally, since that time, the Patch has had a constitutional
convention and reverted to an earlier ruleset, and I believe they
no longer have the "trout" rule.  If anybody wants to repeal our
corresponding rule, I would not object.

BTW, the purpose of the constitutional convention was to re-establish
a ruleset after the rules were lost because all the players forgot
about the game for a couple months.  Pumpkin Patch is not the most
organized nomic in the world; indeed, Acka exported some of its most
disorganized players to the Patch.  :-)

/dev/joe

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:59:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Rule 1379

> Incidentally, since that time, the Patch has had a constitutional
> convention and reverted to an earlier ruleset, and I believe they
> no longer have the "trout" rule.  If anybody wants to repeal our
> corresponding rule, I would not object.
> 
> BTW, the purpose of the constitutional convention was to re-establish
> a ruleset after the rules were lost because all the players forgot
> about the game for a couple months.  Pumpkin Patch is not the most
> organized nomic in the world; indeed, Acka exported some of its most
> disorganized players to the Patch.  :-)

I remember recently having a look at Pumpkin Patch to try to figure out what
was going on there (I think I'd qualify as one of the least organized players
of Ackanomic :-) and I did notice that that rule was gone. As a matter of
interest which Ackan players now play in the Patch?

TGW.

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 18:02:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Rule 1379

On Thu, 7 May 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> I remember recently having a look at Pumpkin Patch to try to figure out what
> was going on there (I think I'd qualify as one of the least organized players
> of Ackanomic :-) and I did notice that that rule was gone. As a matter of
> interest which Ackan players now play in the Patch?

The main one I seem to recall is erphil aka er, Phil aka frozenwaterdiety
aka snowgod aka Mr. Nacho aka Mr. Lunatic Fringe aka Mr. Lunatic Zombie

Yours,
Slakko
who thanks Phil Ackley for the neat Party Chess Logo
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President, Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 21:27:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Raquel Peres da Silva" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Rule 1379

> > Could anyone explain me what's the purpose of Rule 1379? (does it have
> > one?)
> 
> It was a response to Pumpkin Patch nomic, which enacted a rule that
stated
> "Ackanomic has a trout in its milk."  Soon after, during the so-called
> "war," one of the Patchlings made a comment posted to both Acka's and
> Pumpkin Patch's mailing lists, that "At least we don't have a trout in
> our milk."  This was a response to that.

Just when one thinks e has already seen all kind of weird stuff... :-)

> Incidentally, since that time, the Patch has had a constitutional
> convention and reverted to an earlier ruleset, and I believe they
> no longer have the "trout" rule.  If anybody wants to repeal our
> corresponding rule, I would not object.

I can do this. I would love to repeal a rule. (not to mention the extra
points :-))

> BTW, the purpose of the constitutional convention was to re-establish
> a ruleset after the rules were lost because all the players forgot
> about the game for a couple months.  Pumpkin Patch is not the most
> organized nomic in the world; indeed, Acka exported some of its most
> disorganized players to the Patch.  :-)

Hmmm... Maybe I could export UglyBigNose...

Anyway, thanks for your explanation.

Yours,

Ayla
Priestess of the Order of the Razor Boomerangs
Priestess of the Church of the Evil Ballot Stuffer

Law of Cat Motion:  A cat will move in a straight line, unless there is a
*really* good reason to change direction.

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

End of acka-research-digest V3 #94
**********************************