Subject: Ackanomic Voting Digest V2 #29
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Voting Digest)
To: acka-voting-digest

Ackanomic Voting Digest     Friday, April 4 1997     Volume 02 : Number 029

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 13:15:41 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1902

Proposal 1902
Ammending Swingers' Weight
Niccolo Flychuck

This is a Modest proposal.

Ammend R1230.3 "Swinger Like to Play Around III- mostly odds" to read in
full:

[After each play, the Chess-Umpire calculates the Swingers' Weights and
posts that information.] 

Mobility for a piece is defined as follow:
If the minimum distance a piece can move is greater than one, and the
difference between the minimum distance that piece can move and the
maximum distance that piece can move is equal to or smaller than two, then
that piece's Mobility is equal to half the number of legal moves currently
available to it without making a capture.

{{[This should set a more realistic Mobility measure for pieces such as a
Camel or an il-Nabi, which have a fixed range]}}

For all other pieces Mobility is equal to the greatest distance a piece
can move without making a Capture.

{{[This is the current definition, which is more suitabale for pieces such
as Rooks, and Bishops, which are generally more powerful when they can
move a greater distance]}}

 Each Swinger's Weight is calculated in the following manner: 

For a Swinger whose King is on-board 

Weight =
    (Total material value of the on-board pieces) +
    for each piece (Mobility of that piece)
    for each piece (add 5 if the piece attacks at least one opponent
    piece)
    for each piece (add 4 if the piece defends at least one friendly
    piece)

{{[I've also increased the the effect of attacking and defending pieces,
this should allow Weight to better reflect the board position]}}

For a Swinger whose King is off-board 
Weight=0 

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:48:50 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1905

Proposal 1905
Institution Session
Niccolo Flychuck

 Append to R720 "Institutions" the following text:
 
"
 6. If no other rule defines when a given Institution is in session, then 
 it is in session when it has more than 1 member.
 "

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:48:51 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1871 accepted (The moment most of us have been waiting for.)

Proposal 1871
The moment most of us have been waiting for.
snowgod

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 18 = 72.222222%
Yes:  7    No:  4     Present:  4   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	You can call me Al
	IdiotBoy
	mr cwm
	Calvin N Hobbes
	fnord
	ThinMan
	Mohammed

NO votes:
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	breadbox
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Bascule
	Robert Sevin
	Narf
	Vynd

Active players who did not vote:
	Ackers
	Jammer
	snowgod
	Red Barn
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1871
The moment most of us have been waiting for.
snowgod
Thu Mar 27 12:06:57 1997

Create a new Rule entitled "Entity Transfer Protocol, Part 1" with the
following text:

{{[The following two rules create a system wherin objects can be traded
between nomics.  The third provides a means of removing this rule from our
ruleset in case something goes wrong]}}

1) There exists the functional office of Customs Officer. The duties and
privlidges of the Customs officer are set forth by this rule and by the
rule entitled "Entity Transfer Protocol, Part 2: Properties".

2) a) Nomics who have assigned to one of their players the duties and
responsibilities similar to those assigned in Ackanomic to the Customs
Officer and whose rulesets include a rule or rules substantially similar to
Ackanomic's  Entity Transfer Protocol will be designated Trade Partners of
Ackanomic (in the opinion of the Customs Officers involved). The Customs
Officer of Ackanomic shall have final authority to designate Trade Partners
of Ackanomic, though it is considered bad form for the Customs Officer to
use this power to attempt a scam.  Hereafter the unmodified term "Customs
Officer" shall be assumed to include both the Customs Officer of Ackanomic
and any player in a Trade Partner nomic having duties similar to those of
the Customs Officer of Ackanomic.

b) In order to be considered substantially similar to Ackanomic's Entity
Transfer Protocol, a rule or rules must specify definitions for all of the
properties listed in section 5 below, must specify these definitions in
such a way that they will not conflict with the definitions specified by
the rules of Ackanomic, and must institute the inspection procedure
describe in section 4 below.

3) Only game entities assigned values for the properties listed in section
5 below by the rulesets of their Nomics of Origin may be transferred into
Ackanomic or into Trade Partner nomics. Game entities may not be
transferred into nomics not recognized as Trade Partners of Ackanomic, and
entities originating from nomics not recognized as Trade Partners to
Ackanomic may not be transferred into Ackanomic.

4) a) Whenever an entity is transferred into or out of a nomic, an Entity
Profile must be communicated to the Customs Officer of both any nomic out
of which the entity is being transferred and any nomic into which the
entity is being transferred.

b)The transfer shall not take place until all Customs Officers who received
the Entity Profile have approved the transfer and have notified their
nomics of the transfer by communicating to their nomics the Entity Profiles
of the transferred entities, and until 72 hours have passed from the time
of such notification without players objecting to the transfer.

c) The Customs Officer must inspect all transfers into and out of his or
her nomic and prevent any transfer that will result in an ambiguity in the
rules of any nomic.

5) An entity's Entity Profile must specify its values for the following
properties:

Properties:
Entity Behavior Rule
Nomic of Origin

***

Create a new rule entitled "Entity Transfer Protocol, Part 2: Properties"
with the following text:

In order to be transferred between nomics, an entity must have rule-defined
values for the following properties in accordance with the specifications
and restrictions set out in the following definitions:

Entity Behavior Rule, or EBR - An entity's EBR becomes a temporary part of
a nomic's ruleset when that nomic contains the entity, and is removed from
a nomic's ruleset as soon as the entity is no longer present within the
nomic. When an EBR becomes part of a nomic's ruleset, it is added as a
temporary subsection of a rule specified in that nomic's ruleset as the EBR
Host Rule. If a nomic's ruleset does not specify an EBR Host Rule, then
that nomic's definition of the EBR property (if there is such a definition)
shall be considered to be in conflict with Ackanomic's definition of the
EBR property. An entity's EBR may specify properties and states for that
entity not defined in this or other rules. The EBR Host Rule for Ackanomic
shall be this rule.

Nomic of Origin - The nomic whose rules created the entity and define its
properties.

**

Create a new rule entitled "Entity Transfer Protocol, Part 3: Just in Case"
with the following text:

One month after the acceptance of this rule as hearing shall be called to
determine if ETP should remain in Ackanomic's ruleset, or if the project
was a dismal failure.  Valid responses to the hearing are "Yes!  We want
our ETP" and "No!  ETP is bad for me!"

If the results of the hearing is "Yes!  We want our ETP" than this rule
shall repeal itself.  If the result of the hearing is "No!  ETP is bad for
me!" than this rule, and all other rules created by the proposal which
created this rule will be repealed.

{{[This is a test of an Cross-Nomic trading system that Ackanomic has
worked on in conjunction with Dr. West of the Pumpkin Patch.  PP has
recently passed a version of this rule into their ruleset, and it is my
sincerest hope that we may soon do the same.  Remember: This is only an
experiment.  If this doens't work out we can always repeal it! ]}}

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:48:51 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1870 accepted (Greasing the Wheels of Justice)

Proposal 1870
Greasing the Wheels of Justice
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 18 = 72.222222%
Yes:  12    No:  2     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

+2 A$ Malenkai: epotato P1870

YES votes:
	You can call me Al
	IdiotBoy
	Bascule
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	mr cwm
	Calvin N Hobbes
	fnord
	ThinMan
	Vynd
	Malenkai
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	Narf
	Mohammed

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin
	breadbox

Active players who did not vote:
	Ackers
	Jammer
	snowgod
	Red Barn
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1870
Greasing the Wheels of Justice
Malenkai
Thu Mar 27 12:06:55 1997

{{[these rule changes have 2 effects.  1 - to have a mechanism where
a player can announce their intent to continuously decline CFJ
assignemnt, thus saving time when they are selected, and 2 - to put
players who deadbeat on CFJs in that mode as well.  In either case,
a player can easily remove themselves from this mode.]}}

======================================================================

I.  Amend R 212, "Selecting A Judge", as follows:

a) replace "any other applicable rules" with "any applicable rules"
where it appears in the first sentence.

b) add the following text at the end of the rule:

"
A player whose name appears on the CFJ Ineligibility List (List) is
ineligible to be selected as a Judge.  As a public action, a player may
remove their name from the List if it is on the List, or add their name
to the List if it is not there already.

Whenever a player is considered a deadbeat as per this rule or rule 213,
their name is added to the CFJ Ineligibility List if it is not already
there.

{{The CFJ Ineligibility List is destroyed, if it exists, then the
CFJ Ineligibility List is created containing no names.  This section
has precedence over every rule except rule 1121, "This Is Where The
Party Ends", to which it defers :) }}
"

======================================================================

II.  Amend R 413, "Clerk of the Court", to add the following section
to the end of the rule:

"
(f) maintaining and making public upon request the CFJ Ineligibility 
List.
"

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:48:49 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1904

Proposal 1904
When Modesty Runs Wild Again
Niccolo Flychuck

This is a Modest proposal.

A proposal to Ammend R209 by appending the following text to the
second paragraph:

 "
 If a Modest proposal ammends a rule that was accepted less than 21 before
 the proposal was accepted, and the author of that rule is also the author
 of the proposal, or a Modest proposal ammends a rule that was ammended by
 a Modest proposal less than 21 days before that proposal was accepted and 
 the author of the former
 proposal is also the author of the latter proposal, then the author of
 the  proposal does not receive any points for the proposal's acceptance.
"

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:48:52 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1872 rejected (This Proposal Is Not the Least Bit Self-Referential)

Proposal 1872
This Proposal Is Not the Least Bit Self-Referential
snowgod

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 18 = 72.222222%
Yes:  6    No:  7     Present:  2   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	Bascule
	mr cwm
	Narf
	Calvin N Hobbes
	Mohammed
	Vynd

NO votes:
	IdiotBoy
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	breadbox
	fnord
	ThinMan
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	You can call me Al
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Ackers
	Jammer
	snowgod
	Red Barn
	Techno

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 16:48:48 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1903

Proposal 1903
Those Wacky Aliens
IdiotBoy

Insert the following text (delimited by <-->), as paragraph 3 of Section I
of Rule 1131 (The Sinister Alien Abduction Act):

<-->
If the Sinister Aliens are deemed incompetent and all three Alien Target
Designation Numbers are prime, then the Treasury shall pay A$100 to
each active player, to recompense them for the emotional duress caused by 
the Sinister Alien attack.
<-->

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 18:08:30 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1906

Proposal 1906
Foolishness
IdiotBoy

If a player submits a proposal which meets the following conditions, then
proposal is a Foolish Proposal:

a) The first line of the proposal is "I was young and foolish then, I feel
old and foolish now."
b) The rest of the text of the proposal is a previously submitted and
rejected proposal.
c) The previously submitted and rejected proposal was authored by the
player resubmitting it.

Whenever a Foolish Proposal is accepted or rejected, all scoring effects
from rule 207 related to its acceptance or rejection shall be doubled.

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 22:19:24 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1907

Proposal 1907
...And Justice for All
Malenkai

{{[
This "fixes" the CFJ submission problem to allow justices and praetors
to submit CFJs, and anyone to submit rule of fact CFJs.

note that the Praetor is already covered, ie, a CFJ they submitted
cannot be assigned to them under the Praetor rule, and if proposal
1890 passes, the Praetor will have complete freedom to avoid any
conflict of interest.

As for the justices, I propose 3 cases: 1) leave it alone.  2) allow
justices the option to not sit on a particular cfj, 3) prohibit
justices from sitting on their own cfj
]}}

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

I.  [re-allow anyone to submit CFJs, put back rule of fact CFJs]

      1. Amend R 211, "Invoking Judgement", to replace: 

      "
      Any player (who is neither Praetor, Justice nor Acting-Justice) who
has a question or complaint about any matter concerning the laws and
their interpretation
      " 

      with 

      "
      Any player who has a question or complaint about any matter
concerning the rules, the facts, or their interpretation
      " 

      {{[Its always bothered me that fact-based CFJs were impermissible]}} 

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

II.  Create a new rule numbered 211.1, called "Conditional Judicial
Amendment", with the following text, delimited by '***':

***
Upon creation of this rule, a hearing shall be called with valid responses
of [with responses sent to [email-masked]]:

1) The Judicial system is fine the way it is
2) We should allow the Justices the option to decline to sit on certain CFJs
3) We should not permit the Justices to sit on their own CFJs

If the result of this hearing was the response denoted by 3), the amendment
in the following section delimited by double dollar signs shall be applied:

[
$$
Amend Rule 417, "Justices Rock" to append the following text to the
end of the rule:

"
If a CFJ comes before the Supreme Court that was originally submitted by
one of the Justices, then an acting Justice is selected to sit on the
Court to adjudicate that CFJ only, in the original Justice's stead; the 
procedure used to select the Acting Justice in this case is the same as if
the original Justice went on vacation. 
"
$$
]

If the result of this hearing was the response denoted by 2), the amendment
in the following section delimited by double plus signs shall be applied:

[
++
Amend Rule 417, "Justices Rock" to append the following text to the
end of the rule:

"
When a CFJ comes before the Supreme Court, a Justice, as a public action,
may decline judgement on that CFJ.  In this case, an Acting Justice
is selected to sit on the Court to adjudicate that CFJ only, in the
original Justice's stead; the procedure used to select the Acting Justice
in this case is the same as if the original Justice went on vacation. 
"
++
]

This rule repeals itself after the results of the hearing are released,
and all rule changes, if any, as directed by this rule and the results
of the hearing, are applied.

***

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

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 22:19:26 -0600
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1873 accepted (Another amendment)

Proposal 1873
Another amendment
Calvin N Hobbes

Votes cast by active players:  14 / 17 = 82.352941%
Yes:  9    No:  2     Present:  5   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	You can call me Al
	IdiotBoy
	/dev/joe
	Robert Sevin
	mr cwm
	Narf
	fnord
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod

NO votes:
	ThinMan
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Mohammed
	breadbox
	Bascule
	Vynd

Active players who did not vote:
	Ackers
	Red Barn
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1873
Another amendment
Calvin N Hobbes
Thu Mar 27 19:59:31 1997

This is a Modest proposal

Amend R1117 by replacing the first paragraph with:

"A player's stars are aligned when, and only when, her score, her number of
A$, and the number of accepted proposals she has authored are all prime. A
player experiences a minor epiphany as she leaves the Ackanomic Afterlife if
and only if her stars were aligned at some point while she was in the
Ackanomic Afterlife. A player endures a jolt of personal empowerment only by
correctly reporting to a public forum that within the past 24 hours she has
had a minor epiphany."

{{[ I'm not sure what the rule means right now because of the last sentence
of that paragraph, and because it seemed that there could be some endless
chronological problems with the "as she is placed". This amendment would
make it all rather clear ]}}

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

End of Ackanomic Voting Digest V2 #29
*************************************