Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #155
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest       Sunday, July 12 1998       Volume 03 : Number 155

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 20:48:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3298

Since things are so slow, I'm going to take a whole message to reply to
this.

Nomicbot wrote:
> Proposal 3298
> JT (JT Traub)

> {{[I realize that these are similar to some other proposals, but I voted
> against those for the primary reason that they should have been bundled
> into one instead 

Firstly those "other" proposals were written separatly 'cause it it
unlikely they will all pass. Including too many disparate ideas in one
proposal is often fatal.

>of trying to scam lots and lots of points through
> seperate props.]}}

Considering that the cycle will end well before anyone can acheive
sufficent points to win, its not "points" that are "being scammed" its
A$. Secondly, those props weren't written with either points or A$ in
mind.

> Repeal rule 1390.1 {{[Wibble]}} {{[null effect rule]}}
> Repeal rule 1317 {{[Codex of Kra]}} {{[has been used at all recently?]}}

Good luck.

> Repeal rule 1308 {{[Bracket/Smiley Pedantry]}}
> Repeal rule 1307 {{[Ackanomic Middle Ages]}}
> Repeal rule 1307.1 {{[The Color Black]}}
> Repeal rule 1142 {{[Reincarnating Into The Third Cat]}}
> Repeal rule 1127 {{[Sanctity of Harf]}}
> Repeal rule 1125 {{[Committee for the Protection, Preservation, and
> Integrity of the Arts]}}
> Repeal rule 1123 {{[snowgod's disease]}}
> Repeal rule 961 {{[curse of the B-ack]}} {{[It's rarely used anyway.]}}
> Repeal rule 594.23 {{[Nyarlathotep]}}
> Repeal rule 319 {{[Unanimity Is Lovely]}}

Didn't I recently try this.

> Repeal rule 42 {{[The Oldest Rule in the Book]}} {{[null effect rule]}}

Hasn't this been tried as well.

K 2

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 20:48:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Hose Free

Jenny has a Book.
Rex Mundi has the Oars
JT and Fortunato are not members of The Twits... but some Twit could
make it so.
Niccolo Flychuck isn't the Acting Chess Umpire <sigh> a few more days
and I'll take the approprate action.
Fortunatly I haven't attempted any other actions...

K 2

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 20:53:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Hose Free

On Sun, 12 Jul 1998, K2 wrote:

>Jenny has a Book.

Since Jenny has the Spellbook of Chorg, I accept his previous offer of the
book and thus I now have it.

I then read the next page of the book.  The page vaporizes in a puff of
smoke filled with yellow and green sparkles.

- --JT

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
[ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 20:56:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3298

On Sun, 12 Jul 1998, K2 wrote:
>Firstly those "other" proposals were written separatly 'cause it it
>unlikely they will all pass. Including too many disparate ideas in one
>proposal is often fatal.

The thing is, I don't think those repeals are really 'seperate' ideas,
but are attempts to collapse 'dead-wood' from the ruleset.

>Considering that the cycle will end well before anyone can acheive
>sufficent points to win, its not "points" that are "being scammed" its
>A$. Secondly, those props weren't written with either points or A$ in
>mind.

The the other option that occured to me was to get a proposal streak,
either way, I didn't see any good reason to put them all singly other than
to gain more than fair rewards :)

>> Repeal rule 1390.1 {{[Wibble]}} {{[null effect rule]}}
>> Repeal rule 1317 {{[Codex of Kra]}} {{[has been used at all recently?]}}
>
>Good luck.

Hey, even Saaremaa/Malenkai admitted that the Codex was put there merely
as a device to aid in a scam and he was surprised it was still there.

>> Repeal rule 319 {{[Unanimity Is Lovely]}}
>
>Didn't I recently try this.
>
>> Repeal rule 42 {{[The Oldest Rule in the Book]}} {{[null effect rule]}}
>
>Hasn't this been tried as well.

Yes, they have both been tried.  I see no reason not to try them again.

- --JT

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
[ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 21:37:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Hose Me Down

JT wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 12 Jul 1998, K2 wrote:
> >Including too many disparate ideas in one
> >proposal is often fatal.
> 
> The thing is, I don't think those repeals are really 'seperate' ideas,
> but are attempts to collapse 'dead-wood' from the ruleset.

However, a Players definition of what constitutes dead-wood may vary.

> The the other option that occured to me was to get a proposal streak,
> either way, I didn't see any good reason to put them all singly other than
> to gain more than fair rewards :)

>>Secondly, those props weren't written with either points or A$ in mind.

> Yes, they have both been tried.  I see no reason not to try them again.

Yes, but so soon?

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

End of acka-research-digest V3 #155
***********************************