Subject: acka-research Digest V4 #83
From: [email-masked]
To: acka-research digest users <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 00:00 EDT

acka-research Digest	Tuesday, May 11 1999	Volume: 04  Issue: 083

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

From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4161
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 00:45:12 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 8 May 1999, Mueller wrote:

:I am in favor of the basic idea (a radical simplification of the rules and
:a fresh start), but this implementation is terrible.  

I have heard several people say this, or words to that effect.  I have said
them myself.  I haven't seen anyone propose any substantial change since I 
started to think this, so I don't think it is going to happen.  You all know
how I voted; I don't think this is way this should be done, but in the
absence of any actual alternative, I will dance with the devil who is
present.

:
:All of the old proposals would be gone with the number restarting at 301,
:all the anachronistic Suber stuff (like a rule explicitly permitting
:DEBATE) would be in, and worst of all, all the very useful solutions to
:basic nomic problems would be erased.  Ackanomic would have to worry again
:about basic metaphysical problems like creating a zillion points through
:the permisability of the unprohibited.

The basic nomic problems are there for a reason:  Peter put them there so
there was something to do.  It is the same reason that the original scoring
system is so lame.  
:If you insist on totally new foundations, then at that point we can
:massively restructure easily because the rules will be so small, but this
:prop is just a can of worms.

The current situation is a can of nothing.  

rufus, who returns from vacation.

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

End of acka-research Digest V4 #83
**********************************