Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #45
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Tuesday, June 11 1996        Volume 01 : Number 045

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 1:42:16 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: Festival of Torkola

I hearby declare the start of the Festival of Torkola.  There shall be
much rejoicing.  This Festival shall last all the way thru Friday.  Hopefully
by then we can have resolved the current situation.  

The Festival shall end at Midnight on Friday.

Wayne

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 10:00:56 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 897 -retracting

OK, I've seen enough objection to that single clause to convince me to
retract this proposal.

I am officialy retracting proposal 897. 
I may resubmit it without the infamous Yellow Clause, since no-one saw the
'loophole' built into it, or rather its open-endedness, or whatever. 

On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Mohammed wrote:

> 	In fact, I find the whole idea of regulating the content of
> people's web pages rather annoying.  I'll have to vote no as well. 
> 
> --Mohammed

It has nothing to do with regulation of contents. However, placing
propaganda on a web page, which presented as a service of the officer
invloved is highly improper, and borders on the abuse of authority. TV
commercials have their own slot on TV, and it is clear to everyone that
they are commercials. Likewise newspaper ads. I don't see anyone claiming
that such practices violate the manufacturers freedom of speech and
expression. Why should Propaganda, which just another form of advertising,
be any different?

Nicolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 01:24:01 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Politness Moon (again)

>        I wouldn't have said that if I thought the proposal was
>particularly creative or fun.  I do my part around here to encourage
>creativity.  (Come to think of it, I'm also the person most frequently
>Mooned.  Maybe I should calm down a bit.  Nah.)

>        I think using game mechanisms to force an issue is in poor
>taste.  Rather like blinking web pages, or twenty-line signature files
>(*ahem*).

A game mechinism is there to be expoited in whatever ways the rules allow.
If you don't like it, close the loophole.  For that matter, if you don't
like my proposal, vote against it.  It is I who will lose the points, and
you who will gain.  If you want to encourage others to do the same then
post a message explaing why you don't like the proposal.  Don't just toss
it off as trash.  That's the wrost kind of criticism, when you criticize,
but have nothing of value to add.

>        I strongly support Malenkai(?)'s proposal to introduce double
>braces to replace the Resolution idea.

As do I

snowgod
Ambassador
CSRR
Acting Senator (seat c)
Wearing a prosthetic forehead
In fear of being burned as a heretic

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:29:53 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Disc. Melankai's double braces

On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:

> 
> >        I strongly support Malenkai(?)'s proposal to introduce double
> >braces to replace the Resolution idea.
> 
> 
> As do I
> 
I support it as wel. It's a method which can serve as a substitute for
several existing 'hacks' if you will, and it does so elegantly and
effectively.

Nicolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 01:31:31 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Common Sense Report 2 

There is a new trend in Ackanomic, leading away from the time of fun and
innovative rule changes, to a series of rule changes that seek to make this
wonderful game more like real life.  As your CSRR, as well as ambassador,
and acting senator, I feel that I cannot be a part of this trend.  Though I
believe in the Office of CSRR, as it was originally intended, I do not feel
comfortable performing a funtion that is no better than a rule ripper.

Therefore, I will issue this CSRg CSR.  Rule 695/1 is hereby repealed.  The
text of Rule 695/1 is below.

- ----

Rule 695/1 (Mutable)
Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy
The Governor (Dan Marsh)

        (a) The Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy shall exist.
     This office may be referred to as CSRR.
        (b) The purpose of the Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and
Redundancy
     is to make changes to the rules when it finds that the rules, as
written, do
     not make sense, are redundant, do not conform _in fact_ to their
     interpretation in game custom, or are redundant.  The Office may perform
     other functions if they conform to the rules.  [The Office should make
minor
     changes.  But if it can get major changes past the, shall we say, review
     process, it can.]
        (c) CSRR shall be a Functional Office with one seat.
        (d) (1) The CSRR Officer may publish suggested changes to the
rules.  Such
     a publication may be referred to as a "Common Sense Report" or "CSR."  The
     CSRR Officer shall assign a unique number for reference purposes to
each CSR
     he publishes.
            (2) Changes to the rules suggested by a CSR shall be limited to
     modifying an existing rule or repealing an existing rule.  A CSR may not
     propose the modification or repeal of immutable rules.
        (e) (1) If any player objects to the changes in the CSR within the
Official
     Voting Period, he shall publish his objection.  The changes proposed by the
     CSR shall not be made.  This subsection shall not prevent any formal
     proposal from being made.  [In other words, even if there are objections to
     the CSR, the CSRR Officer, or anyone else, can still propose it as a formal
     rule proposal.]
            (2) If no player objects to the changes in the CSR within the
     Official Voting Period, the changes proposed in the CSR shall be made.  The
     CSRR Officer shall publish a notice that the changes have been made.  All
     Officers responsible for modifying any official rule set(s) [e.g., the
     Web-Harfer] shall modify such rule set(s) upon receipt of such publication.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 01:37:16 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Official: From the CSRR 

Efective after the publication of CSR 2, I am resigning from my position of
CSRR.  I see a destructive trend occuring in Ackanomic.  The streamlining
of the rules is fine in itself, but when it turns into a situation where
fun is sacrificed for realism, I will not support it.  I love the old
rulesin their present form.  I see no reason to repeal them before passing
new rules that are just as much fun.  I don't want to see the fun taken out
of the game, for fear of losing players,  or of players losing interest.

I believe that in the current climate of Ackanomic, the position of CSSR is
viewed as a tool to make the game more serious (and in my opinion, less
fun).  I want no part of that office.

snowgod
Ambassador
CSRR
Acting Senator (seat c)
Wearing a prosthetic forehead
In fear of being burned as a heretic

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 10:17:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mohammed <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic:  Official (Appointer)

> Efective after the publication of CSR 2, I am resigning from my position of
> CSRR.
	The Functional Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy 
now has an open Seat.  Anyone who wants it can nominate his ear by 
responding to this publicly (I'll acknowledge each nomination as I get 
it, so if there's no response, something went wrong.)
	The Nomination Period begins now and will last until this time 
Thursday.

- --Mohammed, Appointer

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 10:33:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mohammed <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 897 -retracting

> It has nothing to do with regulation of contents. However, placing
> propaganda on a web page, which presented as a service of the officer
> invloved is highly improper, and borders on the abuse of authority.
	You can submit impeachment papers just as easily as anyone else 
can.  Allowing Criminal Justice to sort things out is the wimp's alternative.

> commercials have their own slot on TV, and it is clear to everyone that
> they are commercials. Likewise newspaper ads. I don't see anyone claiming
> that such practices violate the manufacturers freedom of speech and
> expression.
	Yes, but that is the choice of the broadcasters and publishers,
not a law.  (And there are product plugs in movies that are -not- set off
from the rest of the movie, propaganda that is embedded in supposedly
objective newscasts, etc.  I don't see anyone claiming there should be
laws to ban such stuff, except in Russia, where hard-line Communist
candidates are calling for a "responsible press" -- is this what you
mean?) It is my hope that Ackanomians are capable of holding their tongues
(fingers?) as appropriate without having rules to tell them how and when.
	We currently have completely free speech in Ack, with the sole
restriction that we must be polite (and the penalty for being polite is
not so harsh.) Anything we do to restrict that is a restriction we're
placing on ourselves. 

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 10:35:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mohammed <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic:  So long, (None Yet)

	I'm leaving (None Yet) as of this message.  Sayounara.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 11:34:56 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 856 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 856
  Proposal 856 - Tue Jun 04 16:29:37 EDT 1996
  Nice one /dev/joe
  Bascule  (Matt Black)

Quorum met : 18 eligible voters -- 16 players cast votes

11 YES votes   4 NO votes   1 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

Bascule gains 10 points.  294 -> 304

11 YES votes:  
  Brinjal                                                         
  ThinMan                                                         
  De'ghew                Underworld                               
  Bascule                                                         
  Calvin N Hobbes                                                 
  snowgod                (None Yet)                               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)                               
  /dev/joe                                                        
  SnafuMoose                                                      
  Techno                 Underworld                               
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)                               

4 NO votes:  5 points each
  Robin Hood                                  242 -> 247          
  Niccolo Flychuck                            104 -> 109          
  Wayne                  Underworld           240 -> 245          
  Mohammed               (None Yet)           225 -> 230          

1 PRESENT votes:
  Malenkai                                   

2 ABSTENTIONS:
  Dr McSpong                                  
  Merlin the Happy Pig                        

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  The Great Old One                           
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Foozball Unity vote                         
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================
Proposal 856 - Tue Jun 04 16:29:37 EDT 1996
Nice one /dev/joe
Bascule  (Matt Black)

This Proposal is a Resolution

The players of Ackanomic commend the web-harfer on an
excellent job. They note that the ruleset is much 
easier to browse with the new web pages. Their only
reservation is that the magic potato somewhat resembles
a magic turd. However they are most pleased with what
is a grand effort.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 11:35:22 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 859 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 859
  Proposal 859 - Tue Jun 04 23:36:03 EDT 1996
  Fixing Leaving the Game and Coming Back in a Different Cycle
  this is not a name  (Mike Epstein)

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

10 YES votes   4 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

this is not a name gains 10 points.  284 -> 294

10 YES votes:  
  Robin Hood                                                      
  Brinjal                                                         
  ThinMan                                                         
  De'ghew                Underworld                               
  Bascule                                                         
  this is not a name     (None Yet)                               
  /dev/joe                                                        
  Techno                 Underworld                               
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)                               
  Mohammed               (None Yet)                               

4 NO votes:  5 points each
  Malenkai                                    220 -> 225          
  Calvin N Hobbes                             -25 -> -20          
  snowgod                (None Yet)           115 -> 120          
  Wayne                  Underworld           245 -> 250          

0 PRESENT votes:

4 ABSTENTIONS:
  Dr McSpong                                  
  Niccolo Flychuck                            
  SnafuMoose                                  
  Merlin the Happy Pig                        

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  The Great Old One                           
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Foozball Unity vote                         
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================
Proposal 859 - Tue Jun 04 23:36:03 EDT 1996
Fixing Leaving the Game and Coming Back in a Different Cycle
this is not a name  (Mike Epstein)

A player who leaves the game during one game cycle and re-enters in 
another shall not be entitled to claim the points e possessed during the 
first game cycle.

This rule takes precedence over Rules 362 and 691 and any other mutable 
rules which deals with players' entering and leaving the game.

[[Rule 666 specifies that all players' points are set to zero at the end 
of a cycle, but this would not apply to non-players. Rules 362 and 691 
specify that under certain circumstances an ex-player may rejoin the game 
with the same score e had when e left. This leaves a loophole the size of 
Montana in end-of-game situations.]]

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 10:41:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mohammed <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic:  RFC Senate purge

RFC xxx
Senate purge
Mohammed (Jason Orendorff)
- -----
This is a resolution.  All players on vacation who hold Senate Seats are 
hereby stripped of those Seats, and those Senate Seats are made vacant.
- -----

The current situation with the Senate is nuts.  Let's fix it.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:07:32 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mohammed <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic:  RFC retroactivity

I want to rewrite R106, if it doesn't turn out to be Too Late. First I
want to point out that the rule proposed by Malenkai would not be
prohibited by R106 if that rule were immutable; Rule 106 applies to rule
changes, not rules.  I want to make a stronger form of the retroactivity
ban:

< No rule change may have retroactive application.

to

> No rule may generate any effect that applies retroactively to a time
> before the generation of the effect, except by changing the current
> interpretation of the rules by creating new game custom.  A rule change
> may not have any effects retroactive to before its adoption.  The new game
> custom created by a judgement, however, applies retroactively to the
> situation it concerns, if any.

This could then be transmuted back to Immutable (or turned into a 
high-Power rule) with no objection from me.

Those a little worried about any regulation of game custom that might 
arise from this should notice that it does nothing to change the 
situation that already exists:  judgements create new game custom.  See 
rule 216.

As for the other part of the rule, saying when a rule change is adopted, 
I want to rewrite that and put it elsewhere.  Another hack job is due for
R491, and R516 can be repealed entirely.  Out:

< [R106]
< A rule change will take effect when either the prescribed voting
< period has elapsed, or all players have cast their vote, whichever
< is first.

< [R491]
< A rule change is valid if it calls for one or more of these effects,
< and no other effects: the creation of a new mutable rule; the
< amendment of an existing mutable rule; the repeal of an existing
< mutable rule; a change of the mutability of any rule.
<
< When a valid rule change is adopted, the effect or effects called
< for by its text shall be carried out.

< [R516]
< (i) A Proposal is any collection of text, designated as a Proposal,
< submitted in the proper manner. All Proposals are valid. The term
< "proposed rule change" is synonymous with the term "Proposal." 
<
< (ii) A Rule Change is a Proposal that has been adopted through the
< applicable process. An invalid Rule Change is eliminated instantly
< upon becoming a Rule Change, before it takes effect. The author of
< an invalid Rule Change is penalized 2 points.

In:

> A rule change is a description of an effect that falls into one of these
> categories:  the creation of a new mutable rule; the amendment of an
> existing mutable rule; the repeal of an existing mutable rule; a change
> of the mutability of any rule. 
>
> When a proposal is accepted, each rule change described in the proposal's
> text is applied to the rule set, one at a time, in the order they appear
> in the proposal.

If you think this is worthwhile, please vote against the transmutation of 
R106 to Immutable.  I'll write up and submit this proposal after the 
Festival.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:10:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mohammed <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic:  Official

The Magic Potato goes to Bascule this week.

For some odd reason I just don't think about Potatoes on Monday....

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:16:07 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Creation of Nobs party

Announcing the formation of a new political party:  Nobs

The initial members of Nobs are:
/dev/joe, Mohammed, and ThinMan

The Charter of Nobs:

1. The goal of the Nobs party is to repeal or rewrite poorly written
rules in the existing rule set, and prevent more such rules from
being added.  Fun rules are OK, but they should be well-written fun
rules.  Rules with some purpose are preferable to do-nothing rules.

2. A secondary goal of Nobs is to get party unity votes.  This won't
be stressed too much, but it does mean that you're at least expected
to vote on every proposal.

3. If a loophole is discovered in the rule set that allows an
unexpected action, it is permissible to take advantage of that
loophole before removing it, particularly if it can result in a
win for a member of Nobs.

4. Players may only join Nobs with the approval of a majority of the
existing members.  A player may be removed from Nobs for not voting,
or for any other reason, by the approval of a majority of the other
members.  The charter of Nobs may be amended by a majority of the
members.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:17:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Swinger for Nobs

Oops, forgot to add in that last message, that I (/dev/joe) am
the Swinger in Party Hall for Nobs.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:26:13 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Ackanomic:  RFC Senate purge 

>RFC xxx
>Senate purge
>Mohammed (Jason Orendorff)
>-----
>This is a resolution.  All players on vacation who hold Senate Seats are 
>hereby stripped of those Seats, and those Senate Seats are made vacant.
>-----

I would support this.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:40:05 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jerome Herrman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official (Appointer)

I hearby nominate myself for the position of CSRR. 

Techno

On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, Mohammed wrote:

> > Efective after the publication of CSR 2, I am resigning from my position of
> > CSRR.
> 	The Functional Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy 
> now has an open Seat.  Anyone who wants it can nominate his ear by 
> responding to this publicly (I'll acknowledge each nomination as I get 
> it, so if there's no response, something went wrong.)
> 	The Nomination Period begins now and will last until this time 
> Thursday.
> 
> --Mohammed, Appointer
> 

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:42:56 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: Official 

In my capacity as Financier, under the authority of Rule 482, I hereby
dismiss myself as assistant to the Financier.  This dismissal should by
no means be interpreted as an indication of dissatisfaction with my work;
indeed, I acknowledge that I have done an outstanding job as assistant
Financier.  Nevertheless, I have decided that it is inappropriate for me
to be both Financier and assistant Financier so I have no choice in the
matter.  I wish myself the best of luck in my future endeavors.

ThinMan

Financier
former Assistant Financier
Senator
All-around great guy

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:52:07 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jerome Herrman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: RFC Senate purge

The way this is written, only currently vacationing senators will be 
removed from office.  There should be something to prevent the same 
situation we have now from happening again.

Techno

On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, John Bollinger wrote:

> 
> >RFC xxx
> >Senate purge
> >Mohammed (Jason Orendorff)
> >-----
> >This is a resolution.  All players on vacation who hold Senate Seats are 
> >hereby stripped of those Seats, and those Senate Seats are made vacant.
> >-----
> 
> I would support this.
> 
> 
> ThinMan
> 

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:01:41 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Retracting P898 (was RFC retroactivity)

> I want to rewrite R106, if it doesn't turn out to be Too Late. First I
> want to point out that the rule proposed by Malenkai would not be
> prohibited by R106 if that rule were immutable; Rule 106 applies to rule
> changes, not rules.  I want to make a stronger form of the retroactivity
> ban:
> 
> < No rule change may have retroactive application.
> 
> to
> 
> > No rule may generate any effect that applies retroactively to a time
> > before the generation of the effect, except by changing the current
> > interpretation of the rules by creating new game custom.  A rule change
> > may not have any effects retroactive to before its adoption.  The new game
> > custom created by a judgement, however, applies retroactively to the
> > situation it concerns, if any.

[...]

> If you think this is worthwhile, please vote against the transmutation of 
> R106 to Immutable.  I'll write up and submit this proposal after the 
> Festival.

I think it's worthwhile, and I can do more than vote against it.  I hereby
retract proposal 898, "Ack! Pfffft!".

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:01:54 +0000
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

> The Magic Potato goes to Bascule this week.

It's not very useful this week! (Festival of Torkola)

Bascule 

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:14:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 856 Passes

> Players on Vacation who did not vote:
>   fon                                         
>   The Great Old One                           
>   chess piece face       Foozball             
>   Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
>   Foozball Unity vote                         
>   Robert Sevin           Foozball             

I request that Wayne change the name of Foozball to Permanent Vacation
in the voting script, to match the change which occurred in the game.

> Proposal 856 - Tue Jun 04 16:29:37 EDT 1996
> Nice one /dev/joe
> Bascule  (Matt Black)
> 
> This Proposal is a Resolution
> 
> The players of Ackanomic commend the web-harfer on an
> excellent job. They note that the ruleset is much 
> easier to browse with the new web pages. Their only
> reservation is that the magic potato somewhat resembles
> a magic turd. However they are most pleased with what
> is a grand effort.

I want to acknowledge that, although the previous web-harfer was somewhat
behind at the time I took over, I could not have put the new pages together
so quickly without the framework he had set up.

I would like to re-do the CFJ pages, however, to make the sections more
closely match the actual parts of a CFJ (Statement, Initiator's Comments,
Judge's Comments, Justice's Comments, 2nd Judge's Comments, Supreme Court's
Comments, etc.)  I find it unnecessary to have "Decision" sections as the
judgement is given at the top already.

I will do this when I find the time.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:13:15 +0000
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: three new Blueprints

From Mohammed:
> > This is potentially very funny - and potentially disastrous! Plus the 
> > inventor rule is even more powerful than this. I can't see why 
> > Mohammed couldn't produce a game winning device for instance, or what
> > if the Frobnotzer deleted all the text in the ruleset inbetween the
> > nouns that the Frobnotzer's nodes are connected to? 
> 	As for your main point, consider this:  once I publish a 
> Blueprint, I can't create a Gadget to match until a week has passed, and 
> even at that time, the thing has no owner--it must be auctioned off.
> During that week, I could be impeached, or the ruleset could change to 
> make the Gadget illegal (which destroys the Blueprint).  I don't want to 
> see any more committees in the game.  They'll let you down in a crunch; 
> it's happened to us before.

It's not _really_ a new committee; it's the senate minus the 
Inventor. Yes, it might let us down, but this rule wouldn't
prevent any of these other actions you describe from happening. 

> 	I -do- support the following checks/balances, and though I
> don't plan to propose them myself, I'll vote for any one that comes up:
> 	. A minor rewording of the Gadgets rule to say that if the Inventor
> is on vacation or in the Gaol, the creation process is put on hold.
> 	. A new rule defining Emergency Proposals, which would have a voting
> period of just four days and require a larger majority to pass.  I
> originally intended to do this with a Gadget, but I now think that would
> run afoul of the rules.
> 	One safeguard already built into the rules is that the Inventor
> takes a hefty penalty when he is impeached!  Trust me, I'll do nothing to
> wreak havoc on the game.  I'll build plenty of Monkey Wrenches before I
> try anything as ambitious as the Frobnotzer.

OK. But that relies on your integrity - you might go mad next week :)
or, more likely, there might be a less responsible or less careful
inventor in the future.

> 	Another safeguard is that a player can always propose a Resolution
> of the form "Five Plunky Monkey Wrenches will be created, and the Inventor
> shall auction them off, one at a time." if e thinks there aren't enough
> Wrenches in the game.  Or, more bluntly, a resolution like "Such and such
> a Gadget is broken." 
> 
> --Mohammed

OK. 

Plus points for the proposal:

It gives the senate something to do
It's a relatively fun way to censure the inventor

Bascule

 

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:19:40 +0000
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 907

> >Proposal 907 - Mon Jun 10 15:44:30 EDT 1996
> >Spring Cleaning
> >Wayne  (Wayne Sheppard)
> >
> >Repeal 306
> >Repeal 379
> >Repeal 339
> >Repeal 431
> >
> >[[ These proposal have been around long enough.  Let's clean house and
> >make room for some more proposals. ]]
> 
> There's plenty of room for all sorts of rules. There's no limit on the 
> rule set. These rules are short and fun. I urge a NO vote on 907.
> 
> this is not a name
> Historian
> File Clerk

I'm with this is not a name.

Bascule
Inhabitant of the Den of Iniquity
Justice
Silly
Definately Not Welcomer
Bearer of the Magic Potato (can I make it into Magic Chips?)

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:28:57 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Potato usefulness

> > The Magic Potato goes to Bascule this week.

> It's not very useful this week! (Festival of Torkola)

> Bascule 

Note that the Potato has its effect when proposals complete their voting 
periods, so generally applies to proposals made before their author
received the potato.

Also note that the festival's ban only applies to distributing proposals
for voting.  See rule 797.

The proper statement would be that if the Festival lasted through Monday
(it doesn't, it only goes until Friday) then the potato would be somewhat
useless next week.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:58:55 +0000
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ

I Call for Judgement on the following topic:

Bascule has won the current cycle of Ackanomic.

Comments:

From Wayne:
> Bascule's score was at 256 on Friday morning.  Then he retracted his
> two proposals @ 16:00 on Friday.  When I logged on Sat night, I sent
> out the results of several proposals.  Once I finished sending out the
> proposals, I then deducted the 2 points from Bascule.  If I had followed
> the chronological order of events, the two points should have been
> deducted before I sent out 837.
>
> p837.res:  Bascule                                     256 -> 259          
[snip]
> p848.res:  Bascule                                     283 -> 286          
> Here is where I deducted the two points from Bascule, giving him his
> current score of 284.
> It is apparant that timing can be very important in issues such as this.
> I feel that the only fair thing to do is correct the error and declare
> Bascule the winner, unless it is found that someone else has already won
> before Bascule.  

A minor error from the Scorekeeper meant that my score was never
published as being 257. Strict chronological interpretation of the 
rules would have meant my score was at 257 after the failure
of p837. Therefore my score was 257 after the failure of p837.
Therefore I won the cycle at that point.

Bascule

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:26:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic:  Official (Appointer) CSRR

To:   Ackanomians
From: mr cwm

I wish to nominate myself for the Office of CSRR.

I will be going on a 4 or 5 day vacation tomorrow, so I will make one
campaign statement now:  I believe the important but limited purpose of
the Office of CSRR is to make Ackanomia easier to understand by making the
Rule Set reflect its realities.  When I first came to Ackanomia, for
example, the rules required that all Acknomic names be alphnumeric, yet
game custom included spaces as allowed characters.  If there had been a
CSRR Officer then, the rule could have been edited to reflect that custom,
and I, as a new player, would have had a clearer picture of Ackanomic
reality. As CSRR Officer, that is the kind of change I would intend to
make, and would be happy to accept suggestions for.  I make two pledges: 
I will not knowingly attempt to make changes that affect the game as it is
actually played, and I will not attempt to change the gender or
gender-neutrality of any pronoun.

> 	The Functional Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy 
> now has an open Seat.  Anyone who wants it can nominate his ear by 
> responding to this publicly (I'll acknowledge each nomination as I get 
> it, so if there's no response, something went wrong.)
> 	The Nomination Period begins now and will last until this time 
> Thursday.
> 
> --Mohammed, Appointer
> 

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 14:44:44 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Common Sense Report 2

>Therefore, I will issue this CSRg CSR.  Rule 695/1 is hereby repealed.  The
>text of Rule 695/1 is below.

I object to this CSR.

this is not a name
Historian
File Clerk

- --
      Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
"Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge
 where there is no river."         --Nikita Khrushchev
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/      Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 15:54:13 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ

>I Call for Judgement on the following topic:
>
>Bascule has won the current cycle of Ackanomic.

i am not doubting the fact that you may have had 257 points and shlould
win at that point, but it may turn out that I have won before you did.
I have to await the results of other judgements before it can be
official.

Wayne

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 17:21:42 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Postmaster: "Reply-to" headers, new party lists

I've set the "reply-to" header for the main Ackanomic list to go back
to the list.  We'll see how this works, and I'll be doing this for the
other lists too.

I've also created new mailing lists for the Underworld and Nobs parties,
and added Wayne, Techno, and De'ghew to the Underworld list, added
myself, Mohammed, and ThinMan to Nobs's list, and removed myself and
Mohammed from our old party lists.

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 14:21:37 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Ackanomic:  Official (Appointer) CSRR

As a former CSRR, I completely and totaly support mr. cwm to be the next
CSRR.  His objectives are completely inline with what the office should be
doing, and I believe his record is above reproach.

snowgod
Ambassador
 Former CSRR
Acting Senator (seat c)
Wearing a prosthetic forehead
In fear of being burned as a heretic

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 19:03:36 -0700
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 897 -retracting

> You can submit impeachment papers just as easily as anyone else
> can.  Allowing Criminal Justice to sort things out is the
> wimp's alternative. 

No, CFCJ is the proper procedure for less serious violations. Impeachment
is for gross negligance, non-performance, or abuse of the office.

As for it being the wimp's alternative, it costs A$50, win or lose.
An IP only costs a few points, and only if you lose.

I'd rather regulate a behaviour than going around impeaching and
CFCJing behaviour for which the abuser may not even know is
objectionable.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 19:09:39 -0700
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic:  RFC Senate purge

Mohammed wrote:
> 
> RFC xxx
> Senate purge
> Mohammed (Jason Orendorff)
> -----
> This is a resolution.  All players on vacation who hold Senate Seats are
> hereby stripped of those Seats, and those Senate Seats are made vacant.
> -----

I see no problem with the Acting Senators. These people (current
senators) helped build the game we are playing. I was personally
shocked when I came back from a 10 day trip to Europe to see myself
almost booted out of office by a rule.

I am personally disturbed by the direction the game is going. It is
beginning to show an air of intolerance, as well as exclusionary
tendencies.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 19:13:20 -0700
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic:  RFC retroactivity

Mohammed wrote:
> 
> First I want to point out that the rule proposed by Malenkai would not be
> prohibited by R106 if that rule were immutable; Rule 106 applies to rule
> changes, not rules.

I thought Strict Constructionalism went out with the witch burnings.
What is a "rule change"? A change in the rules :)

If I said "party change", you'd think "change in the composition of
the party".

Would not an addition to the party be a "party change"?
Would not an addition to the rules be a "rule change"?

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 19:20:21 -0700
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic:  Official (Appointer) CSRR

mr cwm wrote:
> 
> To:   Ackanomians
> From: mr cwm
> 
> I wish to nominate myself for the Office of CSRR.
> 

I endorse mr cwm for this office. He has shown an exceptional clarity
of thought and respect for the rules, and shall make an excellent CSRR.

I encourage all those who supported my candidacy for the office 
to join me in endorsing mr cwm, and I encourage the Appointer to
appoint him.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:41:36 -0700
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Ackanomic: Official

Mohammed wrote:
> 
> The Nomination Period for Clerk of the Courts ended some time ago; the
> Nominees are this is not a name, Malenkai, and De'ghew.  I select Malenkai
> to be the Candidate for Clerk of the Courts.  Now two confirmation
> messages from the (acting) Senate are necessary.  Thanks.
> 

The Court's copy of R612 indicates that Senate confirmation is no
longer necessary, so unless someone objects, I shall start the duties
of the office tonight, 6/11.

1) I will gather up all loose ends from Mohammed, and issue a report,
and issue Basule's CFJ, and any others I find. I ask Mohammed to not
do so, to avoid confusion.

2) I request all CFJs and CFCJs be submitted with the titles
Ackanomic: CFJ (or CFCJ).

3) I request all CFJs, and verdicts be sent directly to me, and not to
the public forum. The reason is efficiency and timing, and bandwidth.
Anything addressed just to me will get faster turnaround. Secondly, most
people submit only to the CotC anyway, so temporal order will be
maintained if all people do (see CFJ 168). Thirdly, since I must 
redistribute to the public forum anyway, you will be doubling the
traffic on that forum by posting it there. This will reduce bandwidth.
It will get out on the same day in most cases anyway, so no need to
rush.

4) The "random" method to be used will be to roll a dice against the
Registrar's list on the Web Page.

5) I am committed to an efficient office that will have same day
turnaround (for North America anyway) 80% of the time, and 2 day 
turnaround in all other cases.

6) I will be submitting a proposal to "bypass" the CotC when the
officer is AWOL, after the Festival.

7) Temporarily, I am still having ISP problems. This will be fixes.
Send them to both [email-masked] and [email-masked].

Malenkai
Clerk of the Courts

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #45
******************************