Subject: Ackanomic Voting Digest V2 #130
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Voting Digest)
To: acka-voting-digest

Ackanomic Voting Digest     Friday, August 8 1997     Volume 02 : Number 130

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2252 rejected (Eliminate CFCJing onself)

Proposal 2252
Eliminate CFCJing onself
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 19 = 68.421053%
Yes:  9    No:  7     Present:  0   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Karma
	Chaos
	two-star
	Techno
	Malenkai
	ThinMan
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	mr cwm
	Guy Fawkes
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Alfvaen
	Vynd
	Rex Mundi
	Robert Sevin

PRESENT votes:

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of rejected proposal:

! Proposal 2252
! Eliminate CFCJing onself
! Malenkai
! Distributed at 19:05:27 on Sunday, 20 July 1997
! 
! 
! This is a Modest proposal.
! 
! {{[To me, calling a CFCJ on onself seems out the spirit, or does not
! exploit the harf of the rule.  There seem to be two cases to call a 
! CFCJ, and neither of them are appropriate on onself.  If one wants to
! penalize onself, there are easier, and perhaps more interesting, ways
! to do so.  While it may be a noble goal to penalize onself, it seems
! that if there is enough damage, harf, or interest in the crime, someone
! else will call the CFCJ]}}
! 
! ----------------------------------------------------------------------
! 
! Amend rule 710, "Criminal Justice", to replace:
! 
! "
! 3) Its "statement" shall be "X has committed a Crime", where X is
! replaced with the name of a registered player. 
! "
! 
! with:
! 
! "
! 3) Its "statement" shall be "X has committed a Crime", where X is replaced
! with the name of a registered player other than the initiator. 
! "

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:32 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2254 accepted (List Cleanup)

Proposal 2254
List Cleanup
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 19 = 68.421053%
Yes:  10    No:  4     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

#award Malenkai: 2 A$ : elec. potato P2254, August 07

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Karma
	Rex Mundi
	two-star
	Techno
	Malenkai
	ThinMan
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	Guy Fawkes
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Chaos
	Robert Sevin

PRESENT votes:
	Alfvaen
	Vynd

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 2254
List Cleanup
Malenkai
Distributed at 19:55:56 on Sunday, 20 July 1997

This is a Modest proposal.

{{[Gist: remove any observers who are not actively observing when setting
up the new lists]}}

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

Create a new rule numbered 422.1 titled "List Cleanup", which reads:

"
I.  For the purposes of this rule, the term "observer" is defined as it
is in rule 422, except that those who would hold the title Elder if
they rejoined the game two weeks after the date this rule was created
are excluded [Brinjal and Bascule, I believe].  {{All observers lose
the ZZimsy attribute.}}

II.  It is a duty of the Postmaster to send a message to all observers,
asking them if they wish to remain subscribed to the lists they are
subsribed to.  This message shall be sent within 7 days of the creation
of this rule [to allow a big window on transition of the office].

III.  All observers who fail to send an affirmative response to the
Postmaster within 7 days of the message being sent are ZZimsy observers.
Acquiring the ZZimsy attribute is considered a change in the game state.

IV.  The Postmaster shall remove all ZZimsy observers from all lists
to which they are subscribed.

V.  The Postmaster shall publically post a list of all ZZimsy observers;
upon doing so, this rule shall repeal itself.
"

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

Amend rule 422, "Postmaster", to replace:

"
Any person subscribed to any public forum who is not a player is
considered to be an observer.
"

with:

"
Any person subscribed to any public forum who is not a player is
considered to be an observer.  It is a privilege of the Postmaster to
remove any observer from any list provided they are given 7 days notice,
and they do not object within that time.
"

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:32 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2253 accepted (Defining self-similarity)

Proposal 2253
Defining self-similarity
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 19 = 68.421053%
Yes:  12    No:  2     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

#award Malenkai: 2 A$ : elec. potato P2253, August 07

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Karma
	Alfvaen
	Vynd
	Rex Mundi
	two-star
	Techno
	Malenkai
	ThinMan
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	Guy Fawkes
	Chaos

PRESENT votes:
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 2253
Defining self-similarity
Malenkai
Distributed at 19:15:47 on Sunday, 20 July 1997

This is a Modest proposal.

Amend rule 1003, "Organizations", to replace:

"
For any two Organizations X and Y, orgsim(X, Y) is defined as the
percentage of members of X who are also members of Y. 
"

with:

"
For any two Organizations X and Y, orgsim(X, Y) is defined as the
percentage of members of X who are also members of Y, except for the
case where X and Y are the same, in which case it is defined to be 0. 
"

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2257 accepted (Table Lookup Is Easier)

Proposal 2257
Table Lookup Is Easier
Alfvaen

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 19 = 68.421053%
Yes:  9    No:  3     Present:  3   ...Proposal accepted.

Alfvaen bribed Tammany A$ 5 to vote YES.

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Chaos
	Tammany
	Vynd
	Techno
	Rex Mundi
	two-star
	Alfvaen
	ThinMan

NO votes:
	mr cwm
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Karma
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	Niccolo Flychuck
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 2257
Table Lookup Is Easier
Alfvaen
Distributed at 22:53:44 on Sunday, 20 July 1997

Amend Rule 207, "Scoring When A Proposal's Voting Results are Reported",
as follows:

Replace the existing text of section III

{{[
     III. Scoring on Accepted Proposals If a non-Modest proposal is
     accepted, the player who proposed it receives 10 points, and every
     player who voted NO on it receives 3 points.
]}}

with the following(delimited by FOO):

FOO

     III. Scoring on Proposals 

     If a Modest proposal is accepted, the player who proposed it receives
     5 points, and every player who voted NO on it receives 1 point.  If a
     Grandiose proposal is accepted, the player who proposed it receives
     16 points, and every player who voted NO on it receives 5 points.
     If a proposal which is neither Modest nor Grandiose is accepted,
     the player who proposed it receives 10 points, and every player who
     voted NO on it receives 3 points.

     If a Modest proposal is rejected, but meets quorum, the player
     who proposed it loses 5 points, and every player who voted YES
     on it receives 1 point.  If a Grandiose proposal is rejected, but
     meets quorum, the player who proposed it loses 12 points, and every
     player who voted YES on it receives 5 points.  If a proposal which
     is neither Modest nor Grandiose is rejected, but meets quorum,
     the player who proposed it loses 7 points, and every player who
     voted YES on it receives 3 points.

     Voting NO on a proposal which is accepted, or voting YES on a proposal
     which is rejected, is called "anti-voting".

     A proposal can only be declared to be Modest or Grandiose as defined
     by the Rules.

FOO

Delete the existing section IV.  {{[This has been folded into Section III.]}}

{{[
     IV. Scoring on Rejected Proposals If a proposal is rejected, but
     meets quorum, the player who proposed it loses 7 points and every
     player who voted YES on it receives 3 points.
]}}

Replace the existing text of section VI

{{[
     VI. Short Proposal Bonus If a non-Modest proposal is accepted which
     contains less than five lines, none of which contains more than
     80 characters, including space characters, of text in the body of
     the proposal (excluding whitespace and furniture), the player who
     submitted it is awarded 5 extra points.
]}}

with the following(delimited by BAZ):

BAZ

     VI. Short Proposal Bonus

     If a proposal is accepted which contains less than five lines,
     none of which contains more than 80 characters, including space
     characters, of text in the body of the proposal (excluding whitespace
     and furniture), the player who submitted it is awarded half again
     as many points as e would have gained from Section III, above,
     rounded up.

BAZ

In Section VII, replace "a three-point bonus" with "a bonus equivalent to
the points which would be gained by anti-voting[one point for Modest
proposals, five points for Grandiose proposals, three points otherwise]".

Renumber Sections V-VIII of the Rule as Sections IV-VII.

Amend Rule 209, "Modesty and Pride", by deleting the second and fourth
paragraphs.

{{[ All the scoring information has been moved into Rule 207. ]}}

Also, append the following text(delimited by QUUX):

QUUX

The sentence that declares a Proposal to be Modest or Grandiose is
considered "furniture" for the purposes of Rule 207.

QUUX

Renumber Rule 207.2, "Keep 'em in the Game", to 206.  Renumber Rule 207.3,
"Foolishness", to 207.2.

{{[ It fits uncomfortably in the R207 Rule Suite anymore, which is
devoted otherwise entirely to scoring on _proposals_ only.  Perhaps the
other Rules in the Suite should be folded into R207 for simplicity as well.
]}}

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2258 accepted (Capital Offices)

Proposal 2258
Capital Offices
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  12 / 19 = 63.157895%
Yes:  12    No:  2     Present:  1   ...Proposal accepted.

#award Malenkai: 2 A$ : elec. potato P2258, August 07

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Guy Fawkes
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Chaos
	Vynd
	Rex Mundi
	two-star
	Alfvaen
	Malenkai
	Robert Sevin
	ThinMan
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	mr cwm
	Techno

PRESENT votes:
	Karma

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	Niccolo Flychuck
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 2258
Capital Offices
Malenkai
Distributed at 00:34:55 on Tuesday, 22 July 1997

{{[gist - create a 3rd class of offices called capital offices, which 
are basically tradeable offices.  The current tradeable offices are
hopelessly broken, this fixup will lay the groundwork for 2 new
independent ideas:

1) orgs owning offices
2) the office of sorceror as a tradeable office, expensive so that
orgs would generally own one.

The groundwork here would also make it easier to create other cool
tradeable offices (we could dump entities and gadgets, every empowered
thing could be an office ;-) ]}}

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

I.  Amend rule 401, "Offices, Commonalities", in the following ways:

1) replace [at the top of the rule]

"
Offices are named, unownable entities, unless the rules specify otherwise
for a particular office.
"

with:

"
Offices are named, unownable entities, except for Capital Offices, which
are Tradeable entities.
" 

- ---------

1a) Add the following to the end of the text of section (i):

"
Players are the only entities eligible to serve as officers.
"

[This is a bug now with tradebable offices and entities that may hold
tradeable entities.  The next proposal will allow orgs to hold capital
offices, but I want to decouple this groundwork from that proposal,
because we may not want orgs to hold offices -- seperate vote.]

- ---------

2) replace [in section (iv)]

"
For any given Seat, there can be an "Acting" Officer only if the Seat
is vacant.
"

with:

"
A Capital Office is never filled in an Acting capacity, except as described
in rule 404.
";

and add the following to the end of section (iv):

"
An entity never holds a particular seat in both an Acting capacity and
a "normal" capacity.  If this ever appears to be the case, it is assumed
that they are holding the office in an Acting capacity only.
"
 
{{[rule 404 is impeachment.  The clause being replaced is wrong, we don't
play that way, so either the game is broken, or something else neuters
that clause (actually its the vacation rule with its godlike precedence,
and the impeachment rule, which impeaches the officer before the IP is
resolved).  IAC, we don't need it.  We need the gizz added to the end,
unfortunately, for a couple of loopholes]}}

- --------

3) Add "(except for Capital offices)" before the final period of section
(vi), clause b) [this is the bit where terms will allow the officer to 
act in an acting capacity until it is filled again.  We do *not* want
this for capital offices, but it will win by intra-rule precedence]

- ---------

4) Replace: 

"All offices are either Functional or Political." with:
"All offices are either Functional, Political or Capital." 

[in section (x).  The default will remain political (I want to change
that to a different word someday, like "fun" or something, but not here)];

and append the following to section (x):

"
Capital Offices are filled by the owner of the Office, when the owner
is an enitity eligible to hold Offices, otherwise such an Office remains
vacant.
"

- ----------

5) Append the following to the end of the text of section (ii):

"It is possible that an office has no duties.";

and append the following to the end of the text of sectionb (iii):

"It is possible than an office has no privileges."

{{[this is brought about by CFJ 439.  While I think that CFJ should be
judged FALSE, it raises an interesting point that this fixes]}}

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

II.  Amend rule 404, "Offices, Impeachment", as follows [Impeachment
of tradeable offices is horribly broken, IMO]:

1) replace

"
(iii) Upon submission of the IP, the Player in question shall no longer
be considered to hold the Seat, instead filling an "Acting" role for the
Office. There shall be no action taken to fill that Seat until the IP is
resolved.
"

with:

"
(iii) Upon submission of the IP, and while it remains unresolved, the
entity holding the Office shall be said to be holding it in an Acting
capacity.
"

2) Append the following text to the end of section (v):

"
If the office was a Capital Office, it is transferred Somewhere Else,
and becomes unowned.
"
 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

III.  Amend rule 593, "Ackanomic Research Guild", to replace:

"
The Office of Wizard has one seat. This office is Tradeable, and is held 
by the player who possesses the seat, if any. When this seat is vacant
(and not buried), it is auctioned in a public Auction, with a minimum bid
of A$100.
"

with:

"
The Office of Wizard is a Capital Office with one seat.  When the office
is in the Treasury or Somewhere Else, it is auctioned in a public 
Auction, with a minimum bid of A$100.
"
 
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amend rule 1040, "Party Hall" as follows [this thing has been amended 20
times already :-)]:

1) replace [at the top of the rule]:

"
I. Party Hall is an Institution. Party Hall is in session when there are
three or more Swingers.
"

with:

"
I. Party Hall is an Institution.  Party Hall is in session when at least
3 Swinger Offices are filled.
"

{{[this wording change is important, because capital offices always
exist in the treasury]}}

- -------

2) Replace:

"
      II. The number of members of Party Hall is equal to the number of 
Parties plus the number of Capital Swingers plus one. Each member is a
Political Officer known as a Swinger. The Office of Swinger is an Optional
Political Office.
"

with:

"
      II. The number of members of Party Hall is equal to the number of 
Parties plus the number of Capital Swinger offices filled plus one. 
Each member is an Officer known as a Swinger.  Capital Swingers are
Capital Offices; otherwise the Office of Swinger is an Optional Political
Office.
" 

3) Replace section III, subsection B with:

"
B. Capital Swingers - 

Capital Swinger Offices are Capital Offices.  Whenever an enity that
is any type of Swinger acquires a Capital Swimger's office, the newly
acquired office is transferred to the Treasury.

The number of Capital Swinger offices that exist in the Treasury at
any one time is 7 less the number of non-Warm Swinger Offices in
Party Hall.  If there is ever a different amount in the Treasury,
Capital Swinger offices are created or destroyed in the Treasury so
that the proper number exist there.

If a Capital Swinger Office exists in the Treasury, then:

1. Any player who is not currently a Swinger may announce eir desire
to purchase an Office of Capital Swinger from the Treasury.

2. An amount of A$ equal (100 + (Number of Swingers in Party Hall
multiplied by 50)) is transferred from that player's account to the
Treasury.

3. The player names the Office a legal Ackanomic name; upon doing so,
it is transferred from the Treasury to the player.

4. A Capital Swinger may resign at any time. In such a case, the Office of 
Swinger e resigned from is transferred to the Treasury.  All of the Party
Chess pieces associated with it are destroyed.
"

4) Append the following to section V.:

"
At the completion of this process, the Capital Swinger office in question
is transferred to the Treasury.
"

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

Amend rule 255, "Vacationing", to replace:

"
(including possible non-assignment) of these duties.
"

with:

"
(including possible non-assignment) of these duties (or the office).
"

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2255 accepted (Remove some more unused rules)

Proposal 2255
Remove some more unused rules
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 19 = 68.421053%
Yes:  9    No:  5     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

#award Malenkai: 2 A$ : elec. potato P2255, August 07

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Alfvaen
	Rex Mundi
	two-star
	Techno
	Malenkai
	ThinMan
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	Guy Fawkes
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Vynd
	Chaos
	Robert Sevin

PRESENT votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Karma

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 2255
Remove some more unused rules
Malenkai
Distributed at 20:10:37 on Sunday, 20 July 1997

This is a Modest proposal.

{{[these rules may have been fun to read while in the proposal
queue, but I do not think we need them in the ruleset]}}

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

Repeal Rule 42, "Revenge of Life, the Universe, and Everything"
Repeal Rule 938  "We Shall Inherit The World!"
Repeal Rule 1322 "Doomsday! Part II"
Repeal Rule 1324 "More Blatant Elitism"
Repeal Rule 1326 "Gimme that Gnome yet again"
Repeal Rule 2103 "Doomsday! Part II"
Repeal Rule 2104 "More Blatant Elitism"
Repeal Rule 2105 "Universal Nomic Strikes Back!"
Repeal Rule 2106 "Gimme that Gnome yet again"

{{[listed twice because that is the way they are in the rules document.
The one that is wrong will fail.  Also, I have no idea why they were in
the 1300s, any renumbering should have put them in the 1100's]}}

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 20:59:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Acrobot <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2256 accepted (vault: not found)

Proposal 2256
vault: not found
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  12 / 19 = 63.157895%
Yes:  7    No:  4     Present:  3   ...Proposal accepted.

#award Malenkai: 2 A$ : elec. potato P2256, August 07

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	Chaos
	Techno
	Rex Mundi
	two-star
	Alfvaen
	Malenkai

NO votes:
	Guy Fawkes
	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
	Vynd
	Robert Sevin

PRESENT votes:
	/dev/joe
	Karma
	ThinMan

Active players who did not vote:
	CarsesraC
	Antimatter
	Niccolo Flychuck
	You can call me Al
	breadbox
	fnord

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 2256
vault: not found
Malenkai
Distributed at 20:21:59 on Sunday, 20 July 1997

This is a Modest proposal.

{{[this is like the Synod was when proposal 2220 was submitted,
a complex, unused rule.  Perhaps this proposal will spur interest
and proposals to simplify and repair (as 2220 did), perhaps not and
acka will decide to eliminate the rule.  In any case, same comments I
made in the proposal 2220 debates apply here too, nothing more, no
need to rehash them.  It is still my opinion that a useable rule,
(meaning a rule meant to be used in the course of normal, as opposed
to extradordinary gameplay, should be either used or repealed, if its
been around awhile.]}}

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

Repeal rule 607, "Winning by Finding the Crystal Chalice"
Repeal rule 607.1, "Vault Divination"

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

End of Ackanomic Voting Digest V2 #130
**************************************