Subject: acka-research Digest V4 #82
From: [email-masked]
To: acka-research digest users <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 00:00 EDT

acka-research Digest	Monday, May 10 1999	Volume: 04  Issue: 082

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

From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4161
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 00:34:53 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 9 May 1999, JT wrote:

> > Still, I agree with Studge that this particular proposal isn't the best
> > idea.Thanks to our excellent historians (not including myself) it won't be
> > verydifficult to figure out how to scam wins, points, or what have you.
> > In fact, I don't doubt that someone who was interested in such a thing
> > could crash the game completely.
> 
> So what (as far as scamming wins).   As for crashing the game, that didn't
> happen before, I doubt it'll happen now.   And MAYBE, just MAYBE we'll
> come up with different and interesting solutions to those scams we all
> seem so damned worried about.

This is one point hwere I agree with JT. It's not about scamming wins, or
preventing people from scamming wins. Any0one who manages to scam a win,
deserves it, or at least the fun of trying. After all, it's only a game!

I won't be voting for this proposal. I have recently reawakened another
nomic, and if this proposal passes, I'm not sure I'll have the energy to
play in two young nomics. I'm not sure it's the right thing to do.
First, there were several times in the past where we were sure that
the ruleset is too rigid and doesn't allow for any change. And in recent
month, we've completey changed our voting systems, and even came up with a
new org system, and I was quite sceptical about anything interesting
coming out of reinstating them.

Another thing. Why start with the standard Suber ruleset?
Why not something simpler?

Niccolo Flychuck
 > 
> > So I'm not going to vote for 4161. But if there were another proposal(s),
> > more along the lines of what Studge is talking about, I would support
> > them. I can't guarantee I would be any more active under a new system
> > (Vynd was startled to discover that working full-time really DOES
> > interfere with playing nomic), but Ifeel like its worth a shot.
> 
> I'm going to vote for 4161.   I think saying 'well this isn't good enough,
> let's wait and see if anyone else proposes something better' is just an
> invitation to slide further into oblivion.
> 
> --JT
> 
> -- 
> [-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
> [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
> [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
> [-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of acka-research Digest V4 #81
> **********************************
> 

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

From: "Bryan Federico" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4161
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 01:42:52 -0400 (EDT)

>	I think both Vynd and Studge misundersand my intend with 4161.  I'm
>not trying to restart Acka, I'm trying to create a new game with a
>significant player base, so it has a chance of surviving.  The Suberian
>ruleset is intentionally flawed: it means we need to fix it, and find our
>own way of fixing it.  If we start with a simple, effective, flawless
>ruleset, then we'll have nothing to do but build out around it.  The idea
>is to have to build it from the ground up, and let the solutions we find to
>the problems in the initial ruleset define the game we end up with.
>
>--
>-Henry Towsner
The only problem with that is that we are not a fresh new set of nomic 
players coming to a new game, so we will most likely create a new nomic that 
is very close to the current one we have, and thats not fast foward its just 
rewind and play again

R-Attila The Farce
(:|Worker|General Contractor|Daring Adventurer|:)

_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

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

End of acka-research Digest V4 #82
**********************************