Subject: acka-research-digest V3 #219
From: [email-masked] (acka-research-digest)
To: [email-masked]

acka-research-digest    Tuesday, September 15 1998    Volume 03 : Number 219

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 02:53:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 3602

On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Randy Hall wrote:

> As I thought about it, however, forgetting about the week vacancy in
> this case, the Hubert situation can exist in the general case, so I
> think it should be fixed, as I said in my comments.
> 
> > I feel that the present system has a major advantage in that appeal
> > verdicts come through in short order.  I believe Guy Fawkes set up the
> > system so that people could choose who they would work with, in order to
> > enable appeals to be dealt with effectively and quickly.  If this change
> > were implemented, I would expect a significant number of appeals to take
> > much longer than they do now.
> 
> The last time I was here, they were slower than erosion :-)  That is what
> prompted my 30 day time limit proposal at the time.  In addition, there are
> plenty of real cases where acting Justices have filled in, and that has
> not slowed down the process at all.  The system has nothing to do with it,
> really, as the evidence shows.
>  
> > I do not necessarily see that everyone who is entitled to be a Justice
> > should necessarily be a Justice.  The system introduced by Guy Fawkes did
> > enable greater participation, but right from the start it was clear that
> > someone could be excluded until another Justice came along.
> 
> But the exclusion is arbitrary, not based on qualifications.  Thus it should
> be eliminated.  Under the current system, either Vynd or myself will be
> excluded, not because of merit, but because of an inherently unfair system
> that rewards being on-line when a Justice forms a cortex or resigns. 
> Imagine if you lived in parts of Africa, where in some cases entire 
> *countries* are connected to the 'net via single analog modems.  
> Eliminating race conditions where they can be is a Good Thing.

I agree on the elimination of race conditions.  However, note that in such
a case I would hope I do not get put in a Cortex with the guy with the
single analog modem.  It would take 30 days just to get halfway through
our arguments.

> 
> Imagine if you were excluded from something you enjoy.  You would ask,
> perhaps, why?  The answer, on balance, should be that the cost of your 
> exclusion is made up for in benefits to the rest of the population (and
> even this premise is legitimately challengable).  In this case, however,
> I don't even see the large benefit to the rest of the population that
> merits the exclusion.

Back when I was eligible, I wondered whether I should become a Justice or
not.  At the time, very few CFJs were being appealed, so I decided I would
have more fun as a first round judge.  Justices are not obliged to remain
Justices - if they want CFJs and there aren't many appeals (or they are
having trouble getting into a Cortex) they can take the robes off for a
while and try their luck at a first-round judgement or two.

>   
> I have worked with Bascule, breadbox, /dev/joe, mr cwm, ThinMan, and possibly
> others on the Supreme Court in the past.  I never once found that it was
> a hindrance because I was working with someone new, in fact, it was fun to
> get different perspectives.  The stability argument as an efficiency argument
> is weak, IMO.  The stability argument for fun is more tenable, but I do not
> believe, like I said, that it merits excluding Vynd or myself.  

The system need not exclude Vynd.  Sure, e is currently without a Cortex,
but, should other Justices be interested, e can always get a vacancy freed
up.  The current system allows both flexibility and stability, depending
on what Justices want at the moment.  The proposed new system only has
flexibility.

Fo.
- -- 
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
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, CotC, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Senator

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 12:12:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 665 (Ethelred)

I am the Water Boatman wrote:

> I hadn't got around to bringing the matter up yet, but as soon as Weishaupt
> attempted to purchase Studge's thrall (cost A$250) I checked on the P/E page
> and saw that e only had A$5. Now, either K 2 was extremely prompt in updating
> the page, or Weishaupt didn't have enough A$ to perform that action.

actually that would mean I hadn't updated the page yet :) I think it was studge (to
lazy to check the log to make sure) gave em A$245 so at the time e had A$250
exactly.

> Aside from that, there's the question of whether or not eir answer to the
> little mathematical problem is satisfactory to fulfil the agenda condition. I'm
> not a mathematician (not by any stretch of the imnagination) so I require some
> guidance on that to help me make my decision. But, as I say, if e didn't have
> enough money to purchase Studge's thrall, then that is academic anyway.

whip out your maths book. this ones gunna be alittle harder than that ;)

K 2

> Ethelred

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 12:44:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Stuff

one trinket. one swingpoint.
WC:
has the Small off-duty Czechoslovakian traffic Warden 30 (Value: A$1)

K 2

Duncan Richer wrote:

> Here, have a Swingpoint.
> Give me all those trinkets.
>
> Fo.
> --
> 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
> Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, CotC, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Senator

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:53:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Gift is so a verb

I remember a discussion about the verb status of gift a while ago.  I seem
to remember some people thought it was only usable as a verb in Acka.
From Merriam-Webster I have the following:

Main Entry: 2gift
Function: transitive verb
Date: circa 1550
1 : to endow with some power, quality, or attribute
2 : PRESENT <generously gifted us with a copy -- Saturday Review> 

(the 2 before gift distinguishes the transitive verb definition from the
noun definition, and appears in superscript on the HTML page).
- -- 
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
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, CotC, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Senator

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 17:31:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Gift is so a verb

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

:I remember a discussion about the verb status of gift a while ago.  I seem
:to remember some people thought it was only usable as a verb in Acka.
:>From Merriam-Webster I have the following:
:
My _The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language_, which is
the biggest dic in arms reach, has the following usage note:

Gift has a long history of use as a verb meaning "to present as a gift;
endow."  The practice to provide a useful distinction, inasmuch as the
verb _give_ can sometimes be ambiguous between "to transfer physical
possession" and "to transfer ownership"; and in fact a verb analogous to
_giftt_ is found in a number of languagess (for ex snip..) Unforrtunately
the verbal use of _gift_ in Modern English is irredeemably tainted (as is
its derivative_ giftable_) by its association with the language of
advertising and publicity (as in _Gift her with this copper warming
plate_.)  In an earlier survey the usage was rejected by a large majority
of the Usage Panel.  Where claity is required, [1] substitutes such as
five as a gift, bestow, or donate are recommended.  * The phrase _free
gift_  LLL plate_.)  In an earlier survey the usage was rejected by a
large majority
of the Usage Panel.  Where claity is required, [1] substitutes such as
five as a gift, bestow, or donate are recommended.  * The phrase _free
gift_ should, of course, be considered redundant.  But the increasing
currency of its use is indicative mainly of the degree to which the word
_gift_ itself has been expropiated by advertisers to refer to merchandise
offerings to which an obligation is attached -- if not a direct price,
then taking a test drive, sitting through a sales pitch, or enrolling in a
book club.

Things underlined are in italics in the dic.

ruf "no kabal (tinc)points for external thread tie-ins" us

 increasing 

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

End of acka-research-digest V3 #219
***********************************