Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #24
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Sunday, June 2 1996         Volume 01 : Number 024

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 11:48:48 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 808 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 808
  Proposal 808 - Sat May 25 09:50:32 EDT 1996
  Repeal Rule 446, "Unanimity is a Great Thing"
  /dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Quorum met : 19 eligible voters -- 15 players cast votes

10 YES votes   5 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

/dev/joe gains 10 points.  97 -> 107

10 YES votes:  
  Dr McSpong                                                      
  ThinMan                                                         
  Niccolo Flychuck                                                
  De'ghew                Underworld                               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)                               
  /dev/joe               Foozball                                 
  Tammany                                                         
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)                               
  Wayne                  Underworld                               
  Mohammed               (None Yet)                               

5 NO votes:  5 points each
  Robin Hood                                  173 -> 178          
  Bascule                                     222 -> 227          
  snowgod                (None Yet)            83 -> 88           
  SnafuMoose                                  121 -> 126          
  Techno                 Underworld           160 -> 165          

0 PRESENT votes:

4 ABSTENTIONS:
  The Great Old One      Underworld           
  Brinjal                                     
  Calvin N Hobbes                             
  Merlin the Happy Pig                        

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  Malenkai                                    
  fon                                         
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================
Proposal 808 - Sat May 25 09:50:32 EDT 1996
Repeal Rule 446, "Unanimity is a Great Thing"
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Repeal Rule 446, "Unanimity is a Great Thing"

[[ The text of the rule is:
     This rule does not apply to proposals that amend, repeal, or
     transmute rules. It only applies to proposals that create new
     rules. When such a proposal passes unanimously, creating a mutable
     rule, that new rule automatically becomes an immutable rule,
     retaining the same rule number it had prior to this transmutation.
     Any proposal that is voted against unanimously creates a new rule
     as if it had been voted for unanimously. This rule then becomes an
     immutable rule, following the procedure described previously.
]]

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 11:49:06 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 809 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 809
  Proposal 809 - Sat May 25 09:51:28 EDT 1996
  Amend the rule " "   
  /dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Quorum met : 19 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

11 YES votes   3 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

/dev/joe gains 10 points.  107 -> 117

11 YES votes:  
  Robin Hood                                                      
  Dr McSpong                                                      
  Niccolo Flychuck                                                
  this is not a name     (None Yet)                               
  /dev/joe               Foozball                                 
  SnafuMoose                                                      
  Techno                 Underworld                               
  Tammany                                                         
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)                               
  Wayne                  Underworld                               
  Mohammed               (None Yet)                               

3 NO votes:  5 points each
  ThinMan                                     147 -> 152          
  Bascule                                     227 -> 232          
  snowgod                (None Yet)            88 -> 93           

0 PRESENT votes:

5 ABSTENTIONS:
  The Great Old One      Underworld           
  Brinjal                                     
  De'ghew                Underworld           
  Calvin N Hobbes                             
  Merlin the Happy Pig                        

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  Malenkai                                    
  fon                                         
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================
Proposal 809 - Sat May 25 09:51:28 EDT 1996
Amend the rule " "   
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Amend the rule " " (originally called "Rob Ert Sevin") by replacing it
entirely with the following:

1. Nothing in Ackanomic shall have the name or title as any other thing
in Ackanomic.  Rules, Players, Offices, Organizations, Political Parties,
and Entities defined in the rules are specifically covered by this rule,
but other things may be covered as well.  Proposals are specifically not
covered.

2. For the purposes of part 1 of this rule, two names shall be considered
the same if any of the following are true:
 a. If all the letters in each of two names are converted to lower case, an
    all characters besides letters and numbers are removed, the two resulting
    strings are identical.
 b. If articles (such as the, a, or an) are removed from the beginning of
    one or both names, they become identical by part 2a of this rule.
 c. If two names are both converted to plural form, or are both converted
    to singular form, they become identical under part 2a or 2b of this rule.

3. If two names are discovered to be identical, the procedure below is
followed to resolve the problem:
 a. If a name chosen by a player (such as a player name, party name, church
    name, etc.) conflicts with a name previously in use, the player choosing
    the name may not use that name and must choose a new name.
 b. If a rule has the same name as something it defines or creates, then a
    comma and the phrase "Creation of" is appended to the name of the rule.
 c. If a rule has the same name as something it doesn't define or create,
    and that other thing is not another rule, then " Rule" is appended to
    the name of the rule.
 d. If a rule has the same name as another rule, then the rule whose name
    was most recently chosen or changed shall have " #2" appended if it
    doesn't already end with " #" and a number; otherwise the number at the
    end of the name of the rule shall be incremented.
 e. If parts 3a-3d do not resolve the problem, then the CSRR officer (if
    one exists) shall change a name in such a way to fix the problem.  This
    change is not a CSR.  If no CSRR officer exists, the Speaker shall make
    the change.

4. If any of parts 3a-3e cause the name of a rule to be changed, any text
of any rule which unambiguously referred to that rule by name shall be
changed to use the new name of the rule.

[[ Here is the original text, which brought up almost as many questions
   as the number of changes it seems to require:
Nothing in Ackanomic shall have a Name or Title that would be the same as
the Name or Title of anything else in Ackanomic if all alphabetic
characters in both Names or Titles were lower-case, and all space
characters were removed. If two or more things in Ackanomic are found to
be in violation of this Rule, the Player who selected the most recent Name
or Title shall change that Name or Title to bring it into compliance. If
the identity of that Player can not be determined, or if that Player has
left the game, that Name or Title shall be brought into compliance by the
Officer, should one exist, in charge of making minor changes to the Rules,
or by another Officer as directed by the Rules. 
]]

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 11:49:52 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 810 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 810
  Proposal 810 - Sat May 25 09:52:09 EDT 1996
  Other Nomics
  snowgod  (Phil Ackley)

Quorum met : 18 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

13 YES votes   0 NO votes   2 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

snowgod gains 10 points.  93 -> 103

13 YES votes:  
  Robin Hood                                                      
  Dr McSpong                                                      
  ThinMan                                                         
  Niccolo Flychuck                                                
  Bascule                                                         
  snowgod                (None Yet)                               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)                               
  SnafuMoose                                                      
  Techno                 Underworld                               
  (None Yet) Unity vote                                            
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)                               
  Wayne                  Underworld                               
  Mohammed               (None Yet)                               

0 NO votes:  5 points each

2 PRESENT votes:
  De'ghew                Underworld          
  /dev/joe               Foozball            

4 ABSTENTIONS:
  The Great Old One      Underworld           
  Brinjal                                     
  Calvin N Hobbes                             
  Merlin the Happy Pig                        

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  Malenkai                                    
  fon                                         
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================
Proposal 810 - Sat May 25 09:52:09 EDT 1996
Other Nomics
snowgod  (Phil Ackley)

This proposal will create a resolution that reads:

We, the citizens of Ackanomic, do acknowledge the existence of other nomic
games.  We  recognize the games of Agora, Fascist, and Thring as valid
nomic games, and accept them as competitors in any game of Internomic.

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 12:25:30 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: Finacial

Would the fianacier or whoever is now doing the job, please
deduct the following amounts for recent bribes:

Malenkai  - 9
snowgod   - 5
/dev/joe  - 2
this is not a name - 10
mr cwm    - 5
Niccolo Flychuck   - 2

Wayne

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 12:06:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Foozball Party Boss named

Since it seems to be in vogue for each party to have a leader or 'boss',
by Rule 115 I (with the agreement of all the other non-vacationing members
of Foozball, which is nobody) declare myself to be the leader and Party Boss
of Foozball.

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:36:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Spickes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Disc: P835

	I like the idea behind this rule, but there is a critical flaw.  
Sections b and c appear to introduce a paradox.  Section b creates 10000 
acres of land, and section c forbids the creation of land.  No exception 
is made for this rule or for section b.  
	It is for this reasone that I must vote against P835.  Snafu, 
please withdraw it and resubmit with text to avoid this paradox.  
	I see another potential problem with the amount of land and its 
units.  The rule asserts the existance of 10000 Acres of land, but 
doesn't restrict land to only being traded, measured, etc. in units of 
Acres.   Because you haven't really defined an Acre, except that it is a 
unit of land, someone might do something like claim 100 square miles of 
land per acre and try to sell them for a high price..  Yeah, this is 
dumb, but someone might do it anyway.  I suggest that you declare the 
Acre indivisible and the only unit of Land, unless specified by other 
rules.  
	De'ghew

- -- 
  John Spickes - Undergraduate - UMCP - http://www.wam.umd.edu/~jspickes
   PGP encrypted email preferred - finger [email-masked] for key

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:28:46 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: Party Swinger

I will be the swinger in Party Hall for the Underworld.

Techno

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 18:35:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Official

In accordance with Rule 633, I declare proposals 835, and 837-848 to be
resolutions.  

The Great Old One
UnderWorld Party

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 18:42:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

> In accordance with Rule 633, I declare proposals 835, and 837-848 to be
> resolutions.  

Make that 663.

The Great Old One
UnderWorld Party

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:45:37 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: Poll #10

The office of Pollster has been empty for awhile. As the new Pollster 
I will do what I can to perform my duties the best I can.  Remember 
to send responses to me, and send poll question ideas as well.

Poll Question #10

Some very active and creative players have recently created web pages 
for the game of Ackanomic.  Please send comments about the pages as 
your responses to this poll.

Pollster
Underworld Swinger

Techno

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:55:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: announce: New player

Report from the acting registrar:

A new player has joined the game.

Real name: Maren Williams
Ackanomic Name: Bob
Email: [email-masked]

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

Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 01:53:33 +0300
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: RFC - Asefa   ( a second try) 

RFC Proposal:
Creation of Asefa
Nicolo Flychuck

A new Institution will be created called Asefa.
There can only one instance of Asefa at one time.
The Asefa will be established if the numbers of Players in Ackanomic exceeds
20 and there is no Asefa.
The Asefa will be disbanded if the number of Players in Ackanomic drops
below 12..
There is no limit to the number of times the Asefa can be established or
disbanded as long as there in no more than one Asefa at any one time.
A member of the Asefa shall be known as a Shatz.(plural Shatzi)
There will be six Shatzi, each Shatz will occupy one seat in the Asefa.
The Asefa seats shall be known by the following names:
Blue,Red,Yellow,Green,Orange,Brown.
Each such will be known by a name corresponding to the name the seat e occupies:
The Blue Shatz occupies the Blue seat, the Red Shatz occupies the Red Seat,
and so on.
A Shatz may keep e's seat until e resigns, is voted out, or until 12 weeks
have passed since e's current term in the Asefa started , whichever comes first.
Whenever there is a vacant seat in the Asefa, elections will be held for
that seat. 
All Players may vote for any Player they wish, by sending their votes to the
Tabulator, except for someone who is a Sentor, a Speaker, a Shatz, or a
President 
The Tabulator will report the outcome of the elections.
This rule defers to R609,R610,R611 in all the details of elections that have
not been specified in this rule. 

Selection of Asefa Spokesperson
The Asefa always has a Spokesperson. The Spokeperson is selected in the
following manner
a. The Shatz who was an Asefa member for the longest consecutive period of
time, mesaured in full days, becomes the Spokesperson. If a Shatz has served
several consecutive terms, the period of time is measured since the first
term of most recent sequence of consecutive terms
b. If there is more than one Shatz who qualifies for Spokesperson accoding
to section a, then the Spokesperson will be Shatz, from among those
qualified according to section a, who recieved the largest number of votes
in eir favor in the most recent elections.
c. If there is more than one Shatz who qualifies for Spokesperson according
to both sections a, and b, then the Speaker will select the Spokesperson
randomally from those Shatzi who qualified for the position of Spokesperson
according to both sections a and b

Whenever resigns, or ends eir term in office, the Asefa waits until either
the end of the election procedure for the vacated seat, or for one week,
which ever comes first, and then selects
a new Spokesperson  according to the above procedure.
Whenever a Spokesperson goes on vacation, a new Spokesperson is immediately
selected, in acccordance with the above procdure, even if the vacationing
Spokeperson, does not resign eir seat in the Asefa.

Calling for Votes and Breaking Ties

Each Shatz has a Tie-Break-Day according to the following list:
Blue - Monday
Red - Tuesday
Yellow- Wednesday
Green - Thursday
Orange - Friday
Brown - Satruday
The Spokesperson has the additional Tie-Breaking-Day of Sunday.

All decision made by the Asefa are made by a simple majority vote, unless
specifically stated otherwise by the rules. In case of a tie, the Shatz
whose Tie-Breaking-Day is the same as the day the  voting day, breaks the
tie. If the Shatz is on vacation, then the Spokesperson breaks the tie.
The voting day is defined as the day on which the vote is completed [[I view
the Asefa as an Institution which a little like a mini-nomic]]

- -------

This my second try at the Asefa. Note that I have added provision for
tie-breaking, and gave the Asefa a little more character.
Now, this may this may need a couple of more items, describing some things
that have to do with forms of discussion within theAsefa.
I think we should have another institution in additional to the Senate, and
Party Hall (although the Senate is not defined as an Institution), so we can
divide up some roles, create some sort of interaction etc.

RFC
Nicolo Flychuck

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:13:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: I Win

I am calling for a Judgement on the following statement:

The game is no longer playable because of Rule 663.  This rule gives
anyone the power to proclaim a proposal a resolution.  Therefore, no
proposals could become Rules or change rules, and the game in a stalemate.  

The Great Old One

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 18:28:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: I Win

> I am calling for a Judgement on the following statement:
> 
> The game is no longer playable because of Rule 663.  This rule gives
> anyone the power to proclaim a proposal a resolution.  Therefore, no
> proposals could become Rules or change rules, and the game in a stalemate.  

I contend that it is still possible to change rules via a Constitutional
Convention, and thus the game is not in a stalemate.  (It just might be
a little difficult to do anything for a while.)

Rule 629, 'Constitutional Convention, Procedure' begins:
"(a) A proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention is not a "proposal" as
    the word is used in any other rule.
(b) (1) Any player may make a proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention.
    (2) A proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention shall be made and
        distributed in the manner that the rules specify that proposals
        are to be made and distributed. ..."

Rule 663, 'Resolutions' states:
"A player may declare that a proposal is a resolution.  A resolution may not
change, add, or delete any rules.  If a resolution is adopted, the effect
described in the resolution shall occur, and the resolution shall not be
added to the rule set."

It seems to me that rule 629 prevents rule 663 from being applied to it, and
even if it doesn't, I think rule 663 does not prevent a resolution from
initiating a Constitutional Convention.

 = = = = = 

Rule 219, 'Winning By Paradox' states:
"If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the
legality of some action cannot be determined with finality, or if some
action appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may call for
judgement on a statement to that effect.  If the statement is judged true,
and the judgement is not overruled, then the player who called for
judgement is declared the winner of the game.  This rule takes precedence
over every other rule for determining the winner of the game."

Further play is not impossible (but is difficult).
There is no action whose legality cannot be determined.
There is no action that appear equally legal and illegal.

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

Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 23:31:33 GMT
From: [email-masked] (Stephen F Roberts)
Subject: Re: Acka: Disc: P835

On Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:36:38 -0400 (EDT), you wrote:

>
>	I like the idea behind this rule, but there is a critical flaw.  
>Sections b and c appear to introduce a paradox.  Section b creates 10000 
>acres of land, and section c forbids the creation of land.  No exception 
>is made for this rule or for section b.  

...Now that is a fine point to draw... But well noticed anyway.
I hereby retract proposal 835 such that this wording can be
corrected.

- --
just a thought
snafu
aka Stephen F Roberts  /------------------------------------\
/---------------------<  and the truth will set you free... |
| [email-masked]         \--------->--------------------------/
| http://www.io.com/~snafu       |
\--------------------------------/

- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/AT d+(-)@ s+:+>- a- C++(+++)>++++ ULAH(+++)$>++++
P++++(+++)$ L+(+++)@ E- W++(+++)>$ N++(+++) o K(++)
w+()$>--- O@ M@ V+++(+)$ PS(++)@ PE-(+)@ Y+ PGP+(++)
t+@ 5++ X++ R+++() tv(+) b+ DI++ D++@ G e++>+++
h---->+ r+++ y++++
- ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 19:49:30 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

>In accordance with Rule [663], I declare proposals 835, and 837-848 to be
>resolutions.  
>
>The Great Old One
>UnderWorld Party

Rule 663 reads:

>A player may declare that a proposal is a resolution. A resolution may not 
>change, add, or delete any rules. If a resolution is adopted, the effect 
>described in the resolution shall occur, and the resolution shall not be 
>added to the rule set. 

I think we've got a crisis on our hands. That rule should read "The 
player who submits a proposal may declare that it is a resolution....". 
In its present form, any player can declare that any proposal is a 
resolution.

Damn. (Hey The Great Old One, very clever.)

How can we resolve this? If we propose a proposal to amend that rule, 
someone can just call it a resolution.

Any ideas?

this is not a name
Historian
File Clerk
Candidate for Appointer and President

- --
        Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
 "The universe is a big place, perhaps the biggest." -- Kilgore Trout
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/          Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 19:54:04 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: I Win

>I contend that it is still possible to change rules via a Constitutional
>Convention, and thus the game is not in a stalemate.  (It just might be
>a little difficult to do anything for a while.)
>
>Rule 629, 'Constitutional Convention, Procedure' begins:
>"(a) A proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention is not a "proposal" as
>    the word is used in any other rule.
>(b) (1) Any player may make a proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention.
>    (2) A proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention shall be made and
>        distributed in the manner that the rules specify that proposals
>        are to be made and distributed. ..."

Yes, and even after a CFCJ (#1) requiring Wayne to distribute my April 28 
call for a Constitutional Convention, he has not done so (to my 
knowledge).

Wayne, please distribute that as a proposal.

>It seems to me that rule 629 prevents rule 663 from being applied to it, and
>even if it doesn't, I think rule 663 does not prevent a resolution from
>initiating a Constitutional Convention.

In any case, Rule 629 has precedence over 663. And isn't 663 somewhat 
invalid anyway, because it does not specifically claim precedence over 
the other rules dealing with proposing proposals and making them into 
rules?

this is not a name
Historian
File Clerk
Candidate for Appointer and President

- --
        Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
   "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure." --Dan Quayle
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/          Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:03:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: CFJ

I call for judgement on the following statement:

Rule 663 allows any proposal to become a resolution.  This rule also
states that a resolution cannot change or create a rule, but the effects
of the resolution shall be applied.  This is, in my judgement (and of
others) a paradox.

The Great Old One

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:05:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: CFJ

Forwarded message:
>From [email-masked]  Sat Jun  1 20:04:46 1996
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
Subject: here's your message back.
To: [email-masked] (Sean Crystal)
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:04:59 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]> from "Sean Crystal" at Jun 1, 96 07:57:04 pm
Content-Type: text

> 
> > Rule 629, 'Constitutional Convention, Procedure' begins:
> > "(a) A proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention is not a "proposal" as
> >     the word is used in any other rule.
> > (b) (1) Any player may make a proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention.
> >     (2) A proposal to hold a Constitutional Convention shall be made and
> >         distributed in the manner that the rules specify that proposals
> >         are to be made and distributed. ..."
> 
> I also call for judgement on the following statement:
> 
> This rule states that Proposals, in Rule 629, are unlike Proposals
> mentioned in any other rule.  (b)(2) says that Proposals to hold a CC are
> to be distributed as the Rules specify.  But since the Proposals in this
> Rule are unlike any other, there are no rules that specify how Proposals
> to hold a CC are to be distributed, therefore there can never be a
> COnstitutional COnvention.
> 
> The Great Old One
> 

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:21:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Official

ACcording to rule 663, Proposal 629 is changed into a resolution.

The Great Old One

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:27:37 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

> ACcording to rule 663, Proposal 629 is changed into a resolution.
> 
> The Great Old One

629?  You're a little late.  629 passed a long time ago, and changing
that now isn't to retroactively unmake rule 629.

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:40:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Crystal <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

> > ACcording to rule 663, Proposal 629 is changed into a resolution.
> 629?  You're a little late.  629 passed a long time ago, and changing
> that now isn't to retroactively unmake rule 629.

Dammit, I meant 829.  

The Great Old (Senile) One

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 20:45:25 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

>ACcording to rule 663, Proposal 629 is changed into a resolution.
>
>The Great Old One

Proposal 629 doesn't exist.

- --
        Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
"I believe in luck: how else can you explain the success of those you
 don't like?"                         --Jean Cocteau
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/         Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 15:02:05
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Palindromes

> I have been considering the ramifications of rule 798 (Palindromes).
> I don't expect this rule to be exercised very often

Too right. I sat down last night to try to construct a palindromic 
rule, but normal palindromes are hard enough to come up with, let 
alone palindromes that have an effect on the game. Plus it would
have to be a beneficial effect, or everyone would vote against.

Some palindromes. Does anyone know any longer ones?

Draw, o coward!
Madam, I'm Adam
Sex at noon taxes  <-- My favourite!

Bascule

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 23:22:40 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Palindromes

>Some palindromes. Does anyone know any longer ones?
>
>Draw, o coward!
>Madam, I'm Adam
>Sex at noon taxes  <-- My favourite!

A famous one: Napoleon's lament: Able was I ere I saw Elba.

There are entire books that are palindromic.

this is not a name
Historian
File Clerk
Candidate for Appointer and President

- --
    Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
"It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that
 encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children,
 practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."
                  --Pat Robertson on the Equal Rights Amendment
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/   Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:59:26 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re:Poll #10

As I am no longer the Pollster, as the Pollster has been eliminated, 
I would ask that everyone still comment on the new WEB PAGES.  The 
creators at least deserve some credit for a job well done.

Techno

ex-Pollster
Member Underworld Party
Party Hall Swinger -- Underworld Party

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #24
******************************