Subject: Ackanomic Voting Digest V2 #1
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Voting Digest)
To: acka-voting-digest

Ackanomic Voting Digest     Sunday, March 2 1997     Volume 02 : Number 001

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

Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 16:49:59 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1771

Proposal 1771
Controlling Interest
IdiotBoy

If a player (player A) owns more than 50% of the PFBonds associated with
another player (player B), player A is said to have a "controlling interest"
in player B.

Player A may direct player B, in whom he has to controlling interest, to
vote in a certain way on a given proposal.  This is known as "exercising
one's controlling interest."

Exercising one's controlling interest is accomplished by posting a public
message which unambigously states the following:

a) Player A is exercising his controlling interest in Player B.

b) The proposal on which player A is exercising his interest.  The deadline
for voting on this proposal must be at least 2 days after the message
is posted.

c) The vote which Player B is to cast on the proposal.

When player A exercises his controlling interest, A$30 is transferred from
player A to player B, to cover player B's costs.  Also A$20 is transferred
from player A to the Clerk of the Courts, to file the appropriate documents.

If player B does not vote in the way specified, he is guilty of Stiffing His
Shareholders.

A player who has Stiffed His Shareholders will:

a) Have A$50 transferred from his account to player A, to reimburse with
damages.
b) Have A$30 transferred from his account to the Clerk of the Courts, to
have the paperwork corrected.
c) Have A$1 transferred from himself to the owner of each PFbond in his
name, including player A. [e.g., snowgod owns 60 PFIdiot, Malenkai owns 40
PFIdiot. If IdiotBoy Stiffs His Shareholders, IdiotBoy would pay A$60 to
snowgod and A$40 to Malenkai.]

A player may not exercise his controlling interest in any single other
player more often than once a week.

{{[This will have no immediate effect.  We treat PFBonds kind of like stock
now, anyway.. and this is a move in that direction. The most likely
person to be quickly effected is myself, since all my PFs are public and
snowgod already holds 50 of them.]}}

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

Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 22:04:45 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1772

Proposal 1772
Accepting non-easily-retracted errors
Malenkai

Amend R 713, "Crime", to add the following paragraph directly
after the second paragraph:

"
If, however, the illegally or impossiblility of a publically knowable
change to the game state goes unreported for at least 14 days, the action
or inaction which caused that change is considered legal, but it is still
a Crime.  The change is deemed to have occurred retroactively to the time
of the attempt.  The preceeding does not apply to the case of events
which occur automatically, but whose occurrance is not (or erroneously)
reported [e.g., loss of the Great Trombone].  This paragraph has
precedence over rule 103.
"

{{[see Steve's Essay off of the main page for a discussion of this sort
of meta-rule]}}

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

Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 22:04:46 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1773

Proposal 1773
Honor Must Be Satisfied!
Strider

	Any player sending a public message should be as polite as possible. 
If a player, in a public message, refers to another player in an
impolite fashion, that player may challenge the author of the message to
an Honor Duel.  An Honor Duel is similiar to a Duel in all ways, except
that it may not be refused.  If the challenging player is the winner,
the loser must post a public apology for the impolite remark.  If the
challenged player is the winner, the loser must post a public apology
for misinterpreting the other players remark.  E may also not challenge
another player to an Honor Duel for a period of two weeks.  

	If a player believes that an Honor Duel has been unfairly called, e may
call a hearing on the matter at any time before the duel begins.  The
valid responses to a honor Duel Hearing are "Yes, eir honor was
besmirched!"  and "No, e has an inflated opinion of es own honor!"  If
the verdict of the Hearing is that the players honor was besmirched,
then the duel takes place as if the Hearing had not happened.  If the
verdict of the Hearing is that the player has an inflated opinion of eir
own honor, then the duel is called off, and the Challenger must publicly
apologize to the challenged player.

{{Renumber this rule to 375}}

{{Amend R1209 by adding the text "and Honor Duels" after the text "who
shall be immune from the politeness moon"  in the first sentence of the
twelfth paragraph}}

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

Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 22:04:47 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1748 rejected (Bond Devaluation)

Proposal 1748
Bond Devaluation
snowgod

Votes cast by active players:  10 / 16 = 62.500000%
Yes:  6    No:  5     Present:  0   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	Jammer
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Ludwig
	Lestrade
	Mohammed

NO votes:
	Narf
	fnord
	breadbox
	/dev/joe
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:

Active players who did not vote:
	Robert Sevin
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	ThinMan
	Strider
	Techno

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

Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 22:04:47 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1749 accepted (Bonus Vote Tweak)

Proposal 1749
Bonus Vote Tweak
Mohammed

Votes cast by active players:  9 / 16 = 56.250000%
Yes:  7    No:  1     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	Jammer
	Niccolo Flychuck
	fnord
	/dev/joe
	Lestrade
	Mohammed

NO votes:
	Narf

PRESENT votes:
	breadbox
	Malenkai

Active players who did not vote:
	Robert Sevin
	Ludwig
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	ThinMan
	Strider
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1749
Bonus Vote Tweak
Mohammed
Sat Feb 22 15:05:57 1997

This is a Modest proposal.

[No big deal.  It changes "Protected" to "entity" and also changes
"Bonus Votes can only be used once" to "A particular Bonus Vote can
only be used once" -- that sort of bothered me.  Minor rework.  Also
allows Bonus Vote casters to make mistakes in casting their bonus
votes... without their bonus votes being destroyed.

Going over this rule just made me remember how cool it is.  Maybe
we'll see some Bonus Vote action soon...]

Rule 317 ("Bonus Votes") is amended by changing:
- -----
1. Bonus Votes are Protected.
2. Bonus Votes are Tradeable
3. A player can own at most five Bonus Votes at an given time. If a
Player who already owns five Bonus Votes receives an additional Bonus
Vote, by any means, the additional Bonus Vote is destroyed.
4. Bonus Votes are used in the following manner - A Player sends a
message to the Tabulator that e is using a Bonus Vote on a specific
proposal, and the legal type of Vote that Bonus Vote represents.
Players can only use Bonus Votes that they own.  Bonus Votes can only
be used once.  Any Bonus Vote which does not meet these restrictions
is not a valid vote, and is destroyed.
- -----
to:
- -----
1.  Bonus Votes are tradeable entities.

2.  A player can own at most five Bonus Votes at an given time. If a
Player who already owns five Bonus Votes receives an additional Bonus
Vote, by any means, the additional Bonus Vote is destroyed.

3.  Bonus Votes are used in the following manner - A player sends a
message to the Tabulator that e is casting eir Bonus Vote on a
specific proposal, and the legal type of Vote that Bonus Vote
represents.  The Bonus Vote shall then be counted as a vote on
that proposal.  When the results of that proposal are released by the
Tabulator, the Bonus Vote is destroyed.

4.  A Player can only cast a Bonus Vote e owns.  A particular Bonus
Vote can only be cast once.  Any attempt to cast a Bonus Vote fails if
it does not meet these restrictions.

{{ The Web-Harfer may amend this rule by inserting and/or removing
HTML tags such that each section is in a seperate paragraph. }}
- -----

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

End of Ackanomic Voting Digest V2 #1
************************************