Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #76
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Sunday, June 30 1996         Volume 01 : Number 076

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 21:31:55 +0000
From: Matt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

Kelly Martin wrote:
> keep in mind that, if it is found that you were removed as Speaker
> (per ThinMan's CFJ), none of the above had any effect because you were
> not Speaker at the time you purported to be, and any actions you
> undertook as putative Speaker would be without legal force.
> 
> also, the correct spelling is "relevant".
> 
> k.

Also, sentences should begin with capital letters.

Bascule

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:13:30 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Breaking The Politness Moon (was Re: Acka: being in gaol)

>your request is duly noted.  however, if you really want to see "Acka"
>on all messages that pass through the remailer, i suggest you talk to
>the Postmaster about the possibility of having it automatically add
>the appropriate tag to all messages.  this is done at Pnomic and at
>Agora.
>
>k.

[I'm gonna pull a Mohammed here.  I can't help it.  The urge is overpowering me]

Were you raised in a barn, kelly?  Maybe locked away in a dark closet as a
child, never having the chance to interact with other humans beings?  Have
you been playing nomic for so long that you forgot that it is just a game?

It's called being considerate, kelly.  Most people learned it in the third
grade.  So you use a different system than the rest of us.  So what?
Remember that these are real human beings you are playing with, not little
digital 1's and 0's.

Maybe to clear up the matter, we ought to see how the Illinois or Texas
legislatures handle interoffice email, and pass a rule (or several
interconnected rules) so that we can do it the same way.

And while I'm on a rampage, I might as well let it all out.  I'm sick of
nitpicking comments when you have nothing positive to add.  I'm sick of you
posting a reply to a public message solely for the purpose of correcting a
spelling error.  I'm sick to death of the holier than thou attitude you
carry around with you.

You might be a smart person, Kelly, I'm not denying that, but I think
reading a couple of books by Miss Manners could greatly improve your
relationships with the world around you.

snowgod
about to be mooned

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:15:46 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Official

At 9:31 PM 6/29/96, Matt wrote:
>Kelly Martin wrote:
>> keep in mind that, if it is found that you were removed as Speaker
>> (per ThinMan's CFJ), none of the above had any effect because you were
>> not Speaker at the time you purported to be, and any actions you
>> undertook as putative Speaker would be without legal force.
>>
>> also, the correct spelling is "relevant".
>>
>> k.
>
>Also, sentences should begin with capital letters.

not if you were locked in a closet with only ee cummings to read during
your formitive years :)

p.

snowgod
Ambassador
 Former CSRR
Acting Senator (seat c)
Wearing a prosthetic forehead
The Witchfinder General never declared me a heretic
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 16:53:18 -0500
From: Kelly Martin <[email-masked]> 
Subject: Re: Acka: Breaking The Politness Moon (was Re: Acka: being in gaol) 

"Phil" == Phil Ackley <[email-masked]> writes:

Phil> Were you raised in a barn, kelly?

this statement expresses a prejudice against farmers.  how uncorrect
of you. :)

Phil> It's called being considerate, kelly.  Most people learned it in
Phil> the third grade.

hm.  my school must have chosen to teach spelling instead.  there does
seem to be a fascination with the third grade in here, though.  my
third grade teacher took funeral leave when Elvis died, so maybe my
class wasn't typical.

Phil> And while I'm on a rampage, I might as well let it all out.  I'm
Phil> sick of nitpicking comments when you have nothing positive to
Phil> add.

i've already discussed this with you privately.

Phil> I'm sick of you posting a reply to a public message solely for
Phil> the purpose of correcting a spelling error.

it was a spelling error in the Spelling Moon.  have you no sense of
irony?

Phil> You might be a smart person, Kelly, I'm not denying that, but I
Phil> think reading a couple of books by Miss Manners could greatly
Phil> improve your relationships with the world around you.

have you ever read Miss Manners?  if you had, you'd realize that a
missive like the one you just felt the need to spew all over creation
is completely unmannerly.  i believe the phrase is "the pot calling
the kettle black."

k.

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:11:55 GMT
From: Simon Clarke <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC CFJ Casino

> 8) Results and payoffs...
 
It might be better to put all stake money into a "pool" and 
distribute it equally among all the winners once the result is known
(ie one share per A$10 staked). If the total is not exactly 
divisible then round winnings down and the remainder is the house`s
cut. This way bets could still be taken even if the outcome appeared
to be "obvious".  

Also, betting on adoption of Proposals might be more convenient than
CFJs if only because there is a fixed time before the results are
known. 

Brinjal.

PS "vigorish"??

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:49:25 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC CFJ Casino

Brinjal wrote:
> PS "vigorish"??

The word is defined in my dictionary (Merriam Webster's Collegiate, 10th ed.)
with one meaning more or less as it was used in the Casino CFJ:
 "1: a charge taken (as by a bookie or a gambling house) on bets; also: the
  degree of such a charge < a ~ of five percent >  2: interest paid to a
  moneylender"

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:52:48 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 936

> Proposal 936 - Sat Jun 29 13:14:02 EDT 1996
> 	gsub(//,"")
> Pascal  (Jason Reed)
> 	print $0 >>tfile
> 	print name[key] "  (" first[key] " " last[key] ")" >>tfile
> 	body = 1
> 	next
> 	} 
> 
> {if(body) print $0 >>tfile}
> 
> END	{if(tfile) {
> 		mailout = "mail -s \"Ackanomic: Proposal " lastprop "\" acka <" tfile
> 	print mailout
> 	system(mailout)
> 	}}

Wayne, was this really submitted or did your script break and mail part of
itself out instead of the proposal?  Also, I did not receive proposal 935.

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 19:04:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Extinguishing the Flames

As the President of Ackanomia, and the Postmaster whose mailing list this
all passes through, I request that Kelly, snowgod, Bascule, Malenkai, and
others end all their petty arguments or take them to private e-mail.

While I encourage players to proofread their proposals, CFJ's, etc. before
submitting them, it should be recognized that general public messages are
more likely to contain small errors, and since they aren't going to be
guiding the play of the game for the who-knows-how-long, these errors are
less important.

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 20:06:18 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC CFJ Casino

Simon Clarke wrote:
> 
> > 8) Results and payoffs...
> 
> It might be better to put all stake money into a "pool" and
> distribute it equally among all the winners once the result is known
> (ie one share per A$10 staked). If the total is not exactly
> divisible then round winnings down and the remainder is the house`s
> cut. This way bets could still be taken even if the outcome appeared
> to be "obvious".
>

I actually like this better, the "obvious" problem was what was nagging me
the most. This solves it nicely, but I insist on the 10% vigorish for the
hard work the House does, and I think the Treasury should gain/lose. 
Perhaps a synthesis of the two. If not, your idea, straight out of the
box, is better than mine.

Of course, as far as the "obvious" problem goes, part of the effect would
be to cut down obvious CFJs, as everyone but the caller would be raking
in the cash on them.
 
> PS "vigorish"??

Vigorish, (slang vig) just means a cut of gambling stakes taken by the
house. I don't know if its an American English only word. 

Malenkai

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 21:16:37 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 205 (mr cwm)

mr cwm has been chosen to judge the following. He has
3 days to accept or decline the appointment.

Clerk of the Courts

Call for Judgement 205
  Subject:  Immutable Rules
Initiator:  Calvin N Hobbes
    Judge:  mr cwm (selected Jun 29, 1996, 21:15h New York Time)

Statement:

The text of immutable rules cannot be changed by a proposal. The only way to
alter them is via power granted by rules that specifically and directly
allow entities to do so.

[no additional material was provided by the initiator - CotC]

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 21:18:55 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 206 (Robin Hood)

Robin Hood has been chosen to judge the following, and has
3 days to accept or decline the appointment.

Clerk of the Courts

Call for Judgement 206
  Subject:  Immutable Rules II
Initiator:  Calvin N Hobbes
    Judge:  Robin Hood (selected Jun 29, 1996, 21:15h New York Time)

Statement:

It is possible to change the text of immutable rules by any means a player
would like to use, so long as that mean is not a proposal.

[no additional material was provided by the initiator - CotC]

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 20:54:29 -0500
From: Kelly Martin <[email-masked]> 
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 205 (mr cwm) 

"CFJ205" == Malenkai  <[email-masked]> writes:

CFJ205> Statement:

CFJ205> The text of immutable rules cannot be changed by a
CFJ205> proposal. The only way to alter them is via power granted by
CFJ205> rules that specifically and directly allow entities to do so.

this is two statements, and should not have been accepted for
judgement, per Rule 589.

k.

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:09:39 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: Breaking The Politness Moon 

This will be my last word on this matter, until such time as a politness
moon is called against me.

>Phil> Were you raised in a barn, kelly?
>this statement expresses a prejudice against farmers.  how uncorrect
>of you. :)

It actually only raises a prejudice against people who wre raised in damp
dark places, without much human interaction.  Farm animals would probably
have poor social skills too if they were able to speak.

>
>Phil> And while I'm on a rampage, I might as well let it all out.  I'm
>Phil> sick of nitpicking comments when you have nothing positive to
>Phil> add.
>i've already discussed this with you privately.

No we didbnt discuss.  I made a request and you responded megitively.
There was no actual exchange of ideas.

>Phil> You might be a smart person, Kelly, I'm not denying that, but I
>Phil> think reading a couple of books by Miss Manners could greatly
>Phil> improve your relationships with the world around you.
>have you ever read Miss Manners?  if you had, you'd realize that a
>missive like the one you just felt the need to spew all over creation
>is completely unmannerly.  i believe the phrase is "the pot calling
>the kettle black."

I admited at the start of my post that I was going to be impolite.  It's a
one time deal.  There has never been a moon called on me.  But people don't
cringe for the most part every time they read one of my posts.

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:21:29 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 205 (mr cwm) 

Kelly Martin wrote:
> 
> "CFJ205" == Malenkai  <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> CFJ205> Statement:
> 
> CFJ205> The text of immutable rules cannot be changed by a
> CFJ205> proposal. The only way to alter them is via power granted by
> CFJ205> rules that specifically and directly allow entities to do so.
> 
> this is two statements, and should not have been accepted for
> judgement, per Rule 589.
> 

The CotC's policy has been to leave that determination up to the
judge-designate (qv CFJ 201), as R 589 does not say *who* is to not
consider it for judgement (ie, judge-designate or CotC). As the CotC
does not actually judge, it has been left to the chosen judge to
decide whether it should "be considered for judgement". This 
interpretation was not objected to when CFJ 201 was distributed.

Note that "CotC" amd "judge" are both refferants in R 589, so it is
unclear. The CotC prefers public disclosure to decision by fiat, and
CFJ 201 has established the custom.

Clerk of the Courts

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

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:41:04 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official

By R 542, I announce the formation of the FUN Party:

Malenkai
Speaker

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

(1) Bascule, and Calvin n Hobbes, and Malenkai have formed the FUN Party,
this statement declares its existance.

(2) The name of the party is the FUN Party.

(3) The FUN Party may be joined by unanimous agreement of all current
members of the FUN Party.

(4) The goals and ideals of the Party are to have FUN.

Would the Tabulator and Web-Harfer and other officers please make note
of its existance.

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

Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 00:16:16 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 207 (tinan)

this is not a name has been chosen to judge the following, and has
3 days to accept or decline the appointment.

Clerk of the Courts

Call for Judgement 207
  Subject:  Blue Cross
Initiator:  Malenkai
    Judge:  this is not a name (selected Jun 30, 1996, 00:15h New York Time)

Statement:

If a player who has a Blue Cross leaves the game, they will have a
Blue Cross when they rejoin the game.

[no additional material was provided by the initiator - CotC]

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #76
******************************