Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #154
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest      Thursday, July 9 1998      Volume 03 : Number 154

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

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 12:54:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: M2: Replies:

Moo!
__________________________________
In Reply to Vynd
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3259
Date: Tue, 07 Jul. 1998 13:00:14 -0400 (EDT)

Nomicbot Wrote:
> Proposal 3259
> K2
> K 2 (Kelly Kelly)
> 
> This is a Modest Proposal.
> 
> Create a new rule numbered 838 titled "The Mountain" with the text:

Vynd Wrote:
>This proposal would create a very odd situation if it were to pass, and
>then my Land Reform proposal is accepted.  Yeah, I know, I haven't
>proposed it yet.  But I've RFCed it (repeatedly, albeit slowly) and I was
>only waiting for breadbox to return to us before I RFCed its final form,
>one last time.  So anyways, it might be nice if this were retracted, but
>if not, well then I guess things will just be a little confusing for
>awhile.  I imagine we'll survive, but I thought I'd mention it now rather
>than hear the same things I'm saying now from K 2 in another few days.
>
>                            - Vynd

An odd situation, Cool! Can it be fixed or is it fatal? Unfortunately I
am taking currently in orbit and unable to perform any actions (such as
retracting this Proposal). Could you possibly put a fix conditional on
P3259's acceptance in your completed land reform package?
________________________

I would like to take this opportunity to point out that Edward James
Oloms wasn't in The Outing (unless I got really lucky) I decided to
bluff when my links were getting out beyond 6... :)

>The Outing: Danny D. Daniels, Edward James Oloms

__________________________
In Reply to breadbox:
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3288
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 1998 17:04:27 -0400 (EDT)

>> Proposal 3288
>> I Should Be Allowed to Think
>> K 2 (Kelly Kelly)
>> 
>> I was young and foolish then, I feel old and foolish now.
> 
>> Repeal rule 1307, "Ackanomic Middle Ages".
> 
>> {{/dev/joe's score is increased by 10 points. K 2's Score is
>> reduced by 10 points.}}
> 
> Unless the last clause was on the previous submission of this
> Proposal, it is not in fact Foolish.

>Correct again, O Alfvaen.

>This points up a minor problem with the concept of foolishness -
>namely that it is essentially impossible to submit a foolish proposal
>that was originally written by someone else, and adhere to good form.

>breadbox

I read the rule as allowing "good form" to be added after all that
paragraph has precedence over the two prior to it... Oh well, when it
fails I can always re-submit it un amended :)
______________________________________

K 2

Quack Quack?

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

End of acka-research-digest V3 #154
***********************************