Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #79
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Monday, July 1 1996         Volume 01 : Number 079

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:33:53 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: Scores...

Here are the scores as they were when /dev/joe won the game on Jun 24.
I am now zeroing out the scores and such..

112	Malenkai             A   (Randy Hall) 
100	ThinMan              A   (John Bollinger) 
65	Mohammed             A   (Jason Orendorff) 
58	Techno               A   (Jerome Herrman) 
51	this is not a name   A   (Mike Epstein) 
51	Pascal               A   (Jason Reed) 
47	Bascule              A   (Matt Black) 
42	Robin Hood           A   (R Shaw) 
38	/dev/joe             A   (Joseph DeVincentis) 
34	snowgod              A   (Phil Ackley) 
32	De'ghew              A   (John Spickes) 
29	Wayne                A   (Wayne Sheppard) 
22	mr cwm               A   (Eric Murray) 
0	pTang1001001sos      A   (Mark Nau) 
0	fon                  V   (Adrian Smith) 
0	chess piece face     V   (Paul Swan) 
0	The Great Old One    V   (Sean Crystal) 
0	Simon Marty Harriman V   (Andy Swan) 
0	Robert Sevin         V   (Mitchell Harding) 
0	Brinjal              A   (Simon Clarke) 
- -3	Niccolo Flychuck     A   (Uri Bruck) 
- -5	Kelly Martin         A   (Kelly Martin) 
- -10	Calvin N Hobbes      A   (Thierry Joffrain) 

And from /dev/joe here is a list of all of the score changes that were
made to get this output:

Now we still have the "keep em in the game" rule so CNH's score went up
to 20 when he reached -60, then went down 10 so he should be at 10.

Malenkai had the magic potato starting Jun 17 at 12:23 CDT.
His last proposals to pass were P894 & 895, which were distributed at
Jun 10, 00:25 EDT, so they finished voting at Jun 17, 00:25 EDT
(Jun 16, 23:35 CDT) so he got no points from the potato.

Bascule held the potato from Jun 11, 11:10 CDT until Malenkai got it,
so he scores extra 2 points for his proposals that passed in that time.

Dr McSpong had the potato the week before that, but he made no proposals
any time recently.

These score changes need to be made (this list is not necessarily complete,
and the first two are changes for the cycle 3)

Jun 11, 16:29 EDT: P856: potato: Bascule +2
Jun 12, 23:40 CDT (Jun 13 00:40 EDT): Steel Flea: Niccolo Flychuck -3
Jun 13, 00:42 EDT: Malenkai wins cycle 3; cycle 4 begins
Jun 13, 17:14 EDT: P866: is this short (ThinMan +5?)
Jun 13, 17:16 EDT: P869: short: ThinMan +5
Jun 16, 02:41 EDT: P887: Malenkai reached 76 points and claimed the trombone
Jun 16, 17:59 EDT: P891: potato: Bascule +2
Jun 16, 17:59 EDT: P892: potato: Bascule +2
Jun 17, 00:25 EDT: P895: short: Malenkai +5
Jun 17, 00:26 EDT: P898: retracted: /dev/joe -1
  undo all the score changes for P898: /dev/joe +10, Bascule -3, Techno -3
Jun 17, 12:23 EDT (= 11:13 CDT): P903 Bascule +2 for potato
Jun 17, 13:20 EDT: P904: short: ThinMan +5
Jun 17, 13:35 EDT: P906: short: Wayne +5
<last of the pre-festival of torkola proposals>
Jun 20, 23:38 CDT: Steel Flea: Techno -3
Jun 23, 22:53 -0500 (CDT): appealed CFJ 190: Kelly Martin -5
Jun 24, 14:00 EDT: appealed CFJ 187: De'ghew -5
Jun 24, 18:25 -0700 (= 20:25 CDT): /dev/joe wins cycle 4
  (all scores set to 0, etc.)
Jun 25, 20:07 -0700: CFJ 190 overturned: Calvin N Hobbes -1

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:44:35 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: Appointment

I appoint Malenkai as my Assistant Tabulator.

Wayne

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:51:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposals 951 & 943

We may wish to allow players who have been placed on vacation by the
auto-vacation rule to be declared dead.  I suggest a vote of NO on P943
and P951 for this reason, and hope a proposal will be submitted along the
lines of CSR 3, which only granted immunity from being declared dead to
players on vacations that they themselves had placed themselves on.

- -mr cwm

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:56:52 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 910 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 910
  Proposal 910 - Sun Jun 23 04:25:19 EDT 1996
  Overuse of R451
  /dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Quorum met : 18 eligible voters -- 15 players cast votes

15 YES votes   2 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

/dev/joe gains 9 points.  0 -> 9

15 YES votes:  
  Robin Hood                                  =   0               
  Brinjal                                     =   0               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   0               
  Niccolo Flychuck                            =   0               
  De'ghew                Underworld           = -25               
  Bascule                FUN                  =   0               
  Nobs Unity vote                             =   0               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =   0               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 =   9               
  Techno                 Underworld           =   0               
  Underworld Unity vote                        =   0               
  pTang1001001sos                             =   0               
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           =   0               
  Wayne                  Underworld           =   0               
  Mohammed               Nobs                 =   0               

2 NO votes:  2 points each
  Malenkai               FUN                    0 -> 2            
  this is not a name     (None Yet)             0 -> 2            

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  snowgod                (None Yet)           
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  Pascal                                      

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 910 - Sun Jun 23 04:25:19 EDT 1996
Overuse of R451
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

1. Amend Rule 112 'At Least One Mutable Rule'.
   Change the word 'inpermissible' to 'impermissible'.

2. Amend Rule 218 'Registered Players'.
   Change the word 'parrticipate' to 'participate'.

3. Amend Rule 306 'The Magic Potato, Creation of'.
   Change the word 'chosing' to 'choosing'.   
   [[not 'choking', as ispell suggested. :-) ]]

4. Amend Rule 414 'The Office of the Tabulator'.
   Change the word 'Tabluator' to 'Tabulator'.
   Change the word 'priveledge' to 'privilege'.
   Change the word 'Delagates' to 'Delegates'.
   Change the word 'priveledges' to 'privileges'.

[[Don't amend 451 to change 'mispelled' to 'misspelled'. 
  This is the cute kind of thing that gives flavor to the game,
  and it looks intentional.]]

5. Amend Rule 457 'Vacationing'.
   Change the word 'help' to 'held'.
  [[ in 'The duties of any offices help by the player shall be performed...' ]]

6. Amend Rule 463 'Voting Options'.
   Change the word 'determing' to 'determining'.

7. Amend rule 508 'Justices Rock'.
   Change the word 'Presidental' to 'Presidential'.

8. Amend rule 514 'Contracts, Creation of'.
   In part (i), change the word 'recieved' to 'received', and change the
     word 'indentical' to 'identical'.
   In part (v), change the word 'existance' to 'existence'.
   Change the word 'non-Enforcable' to 'non-Enforceable' each time it
     appears (parts (iv) and (vi)).
   Change the word 'Enforcable' to 'Enforceable' each time it appears
     (parts (ii), (iii), and (v)).

9. Amend rule 542 'Creation Political Parties'.
   Change the word 'Politcal' to 'Political'.

10. Amend rule 545 'Notes and Comments'.
   Change the word 'doube' to 'double'.
   Change the word 'completly' to 'completely'.
   Change the word 'expilcitly' to 'explicitly'.  
   [[This rule needs other fixes]]

11. Amend rule 551 'Contracts, Preventing Abuse'.
   Change 'non-Enforcable' to 'non-Enforceable' in part (i)b)4).
   Change the word 'Enforcable' to 'Enforceable' each time it appears
     (parts (i)a) (twice), (ii)a), and (ii)c)).

12. Amend rule 554 'Tammany, Creation of'.
   In part (v), change 'recieved' to 'received'.
   In part (viii), change 'inadvertantly' to 'inadvertently'.

13. Amend rule 566 'Tools IV'.
   Change the word 'atributed' to 'attributed'.

14. Amend rule 569 'Overturning Judgements'.
   Change the word 'apeal' to 'appeal' each time it appears (6 times).
   Change the word 'frivously' to 'frivolously'.
   Change the word 'appelate' to 'appellate'.

15. Amend rule 570 'Player Names'.
   Change the word 'refering' to 'referring'.
   Change 'aphanumberic' to 'alphanumeric' (in the comment at the end).
   Change 'superceeds' to 'takes precedence over' and 'Register' to
     'Registrar' in the sentence "This clause superceeds any
     mutable rule which would deny the Register these duties and
     rights."

16. Amend rule 571 'Changing Player Names'.
   Change the word 'anounces' to 'announces'.
   Change the word 'sents' to 'sends'.

17. Amend rule 578 'Retracting CFJ's'.
   Change the word 'CFG' to 'CFJ'.

18. Amend rule 583 'The Ambassador, Creation of'.
   Delete '[sp?]'.  [[ This was after 'endeavour'. ]]

19. Amend rule 589 'Invoking Judgement'.
   Change the word 'inherintly' to 'inherently'.
   Change the word 'ammend' to 'amend' both times it appears.

20. Amend rule 593 'The Inventor, Creation of'.
   Change the word 'concensus' to 'consensus'.

21. Amend rule 604 'After a Name Change'.
   Change the word "CJF's" to "CFJ's".

22. Amend rule 607 'File Clerk, Creation of'.
   Change 'recieving' to 'receiving' in part (iii)a).
   Change 'Enforcable' to 'Enforceable' each time it appears
     (parts (iii)b), (iii)c), (iii)d), and (iv)b))
   Change 'non-Enforcable' to 'non-Enforceable' in part (iv)b).
   Change 'precendence' to 'precedence' in part (v).

23. Amend rule 615 'Speaker, Creation of'.
   Change 'precendence' to 'precedence' in part (iv).

24. Amend rule 648 'Confirmation Procedure'.
   Change 'comfirmed' to 'confirmed'.

25. Amend rule 666 'End of Cycle'.
   Change 'Chartruese' to 'Chartreuse' each time it appears (twice).

26. Amend rule 682 'For Personal Glory'.
   Change 'apear' to 'appear'.
   Change 'enaction' to 'enactment'.

27. Amend rule 683 'ExtraNomic Entites.'.
   Change the title to 'ExtraNomic Entities'.

28. Amend rule 709 'Gaol, Creation of'.
   Change 'silmultaneously' to 'simultaneously'.
   Change 'superceeds' to 'takes precedence over'.

29. Amend rule 710 'Criminal Justice'.
   Change the word 'TRANSFERRENCE' to 'TRANSFERENCE'.
   Change 'superceeds' to 'takes precedence over'.

30. Amend rule 712 'Gaoler, Creation of'.
   Change 'Priviledges' to 'Privileges' in part (iv).

31. Amend rule 721 'R. Organizations'.
   Change 'Acaknomic' to 'Ackanomic'.

32. Amend rule 726 'R. Party Hall'.
   Change 'represenatative' to 'representative'.

33. Amend rule 767 'Nothing Important'.
   Change 'spontaneous' to 'spontaneously'.

34. Amend rule 775 'Church, Creation of'.
   Change 'anouncement' to 'announcement' in parts 2d (twice), 7c, and 8e.
   Change 'infomation' to 'information' in part 2d.
   Change 'duites' to 'duties' in part 4d.
   Change 'apublic' to 'a public' in part 8e.

35. Amend rule 779 'Succession Proceedings'.
   Change 'ineligable' to 'ineligible' in part 4a twice.
   Change 'regretablly' to 'regrettably' in part 5a.
   Change 'equivelent' to 'equivalent' in part 5a.
   Change 'superceeds' to 'takes precedence over' in parts 5a and 5b.
   Change 'privelege' to 'privilege' in part 5a.
   Change 'Permissability' to 'Permissibility' in part 5a.

36. Amend rule 786 'Gadgets, Creation of'.
   Change 'Privelege' to 'Privilege' in part (iii).
   Change 'offerred' to 'offered' in part (iii)e).
   Change 'Priveleges' to 'Privileges' in part (iv).

37. Amend rule 790 'Fat Lady, Creation of'.
   Change 'Acknomic' to 'Ackanomic'.
   Change 'untill' to 'until'.
   Change 'This rule take precendence' to 'This rule takes precedence'.

38. Amend rule 797 'Festival of Torkola'.
   Change 'superceeds' to 'takes precedence over' in parts 4 and 5b.
   Change 'distributation' to 'distribution' in part 5b twice.
   Change 'priveledges' to 'privileges' in part 5b.
   Change 'priveledge' to 'privilege' in part 5b twice.

39. Amend rule 798 'Palindromes are Inherently Amusing'.
   Change 'accessable' to 'accessible'.

40. Amend rule 826 'Acid Rain Dance, Creation of'.
   Change 'decription' to 'description'.
   Change 'Immediatly' to 'Immediately'.

41. Amend rule 829 'Handling Paradox Wins'.
   Change 'permissable' to 'permissible'. 

42. Amend rule 867 'Eggs and Fruit'.
   Change 'Chartruese' to 'Chartreuse' each time it occurs (5 times).
   
43. Amend rule 870 'Self Deleting Text'.
   Change 'superceeds' to 'takes precedence over'.

44. Amend rule 894 'Map, Creation of'.
   Change 'boundries' to 'boundaries'.
   Change 'non-existance' to 'non-existence' twice.

45. Amend rule 906 'Restrictions on Points'.
   Change 'thier' to 'their'.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:57:22 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 911 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 911
  Proposal 911 - Mon Jun 24 00:53:34 EDT 1996
  Duh
  /dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

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

13 YES votes   2 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

/dev/joe gains 9 points.  9 -> 18

13 YES votes:  
  Robin Hood                                  =   0               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   0               
  Niccolo Flychuck                            =   0               
  De'ghew                Underworld           = -25               
  Bascule                FUN                  =   0               
  Nobs Unity vote                             =   0               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =   2               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =   0               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 =  18               
  pTang1001001sos                             =   0               
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           =   0               
  Wayne                  Underworld           =   0               
  Mohammed               Nobs                 =   0               

2 NO votes:  2 points each
  Malenkai               FUN                    2 -> 4            
  Techno                 Underworld             0 -> 2            

0 PRESENT votes:

4 ABSTENTIONS:
  Brinjal                                     
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  snowgod                (None Yet)           
  Pascal                                      

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 911 - Mon Jun 24 00:53:34 EDT 1996
Duh
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)
Amend R545 by replacing the last sentence
  [[ currently "This rule expilcitly does not apply to this rule." ]]
with "The above parts of this rule do not apply to this rule."

Amend R664 by replacing the last sentence
  [[ currently "This rule does not apply to this rule." ]]
with "The above parts of this rule do not apply to this rule."

[[ Since the ConCon found to not have occurred, we still need to do this. ]]

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:57:48 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 912 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 912
  Proposal 912 - Mon Jun 24 00:53:50 EDT 1996
  Judicial Reform I
  Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Quorum met : 18 eligible voters -- 15 players cast votes

13 YES votes   3 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

Malenkai gains 9 points.  4 -> 13

13 YES votes:  
  Malenkai               FUN                  =  13               
  Robin Hood                                  =   0               
  Brinjal                                     =   0               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   0               
  Niccolo Flychuck                            =   0               
  Bascule                FUN                  =   0               
  Nobs Unity vote                             =   0               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =   2               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =   0               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 =  18               
  Techno                 Underworld           =   2               
  Wayne                  Underworld           =   0               
  Mohammed               Nobs                 =   0               

3 NO votes:  2 points each
  De'ghew                Underworld           -25 -> -23          
  pTang1001001sos                               0 -> 2            
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)             0 -> 2            

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  snowgod                (None Yet)           
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  Pascal                                      

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 912 - Mon Jun 24 00:53:50 EDT 1996
Judicial Reform I
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 588 to add the following paragraph after the existing text of
the rule:

If the CFJ is a Call For Criminal Judgement (CFCJ), the player or players
against which the CFCJ is being called are excluded from "the other
active players" and "remaining pool" as described above. This exclusion
is made before the random determination is made. In other words, a
player who has a CFCJ called against them may not be selected to judge
that CFCJ.

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

{{ All CFCJs whose number is less than 101 shall have 100 added to
their number. This applies whether or not a verdict has been reached
on the CFCJ.}}

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:58:27 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 913 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 913
  Proposal 913 - Mon Jun 24 00:54:04 EDT 1996
  Judicial Reform II
  Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Quorum met : 18 eligible voters -- 15 players cast votes

8 YES votes   6 NO votes   1 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

Malenkai loses 9 points.  13 -> 4

8 YES votes:  1 point each
  Malenkai               FUN                    4 -> 5            
  Robin Hood                                    0 -> 1            
  Brinjal                                       0 -> 1            
  Bascule                FUN                    0 -> 1            
  this is not a name     (None Yet)             2 -> 3            
  Techno                 Underworld             2 -> 3            
  Wayne                  Underworld             0 -> 1            
  Mohammed               Nobs                   0 -> 1            

6 NO votes:  
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   0               
  Niccolo Flychuck                            =   0               
  De'ghew                Underworld           = -23               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =   0               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 =  18               
  pTang1001001sos                             =   2               

1 PRESENT votes:
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)            =   2

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  snowgod                (None Yet)           
  Pascal                                      

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

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 17:58:55 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 914 Passes

Here are the voting results for : 914
  Proposal 914 - Mon Jun 24 00:54:23 EDT 1996
  Economic Reforms
  Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

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

11 YES votes   3 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal PASSES

Malenkai gains 9 points.  5 -> 14

11 YES votes:  
  Malenkai               FUN                  =  14               
  Robin Hood                                  =   1               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   0               
  Niccolo Flychuck                            =   0               
  Bascule                FUN                  =   1               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =   3               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 =  18               
  Techno                 Underworld           =   3               
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           =   2               
  Wayne                  Underworld           =   1               
  Mohammed               Nobs                 =   1               

3 NO votes:  2 points each
  De'ghew                Underworld           -23 -> -21          
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                   0 -> 2            
  pTang1001001sos                               2 -> 4            

0 PRESENT votes:

4 ABSTENTIONS:
  Brinjal                                     
  snowgod                (None Yet)           
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  Pascal                                      

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 914 - Mon Jun 24 00:54:23 EDT 1996
Economic Reforms
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 554, "Tammany" by replacing section (iv) c) which reads:

    c) In the text of the message, it designates an amount of
       currency from 0 to 5 units.

with:

    c) In the text of the message, it designates an amount of
       currency from 5 to 25 units, evenly divisible by 5.

[[Tammany was created before the treasury and the large increases to
our balances, and R 666. This should bring the bribe back into line.
If I wasn't so lazy, I would bribe on every proposal at these rates.]]

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

Amend R 710, "Criminal Justice" by replacing the phrase:

	A "court fee" of 50 units

with the phrase:

	A "court fee" of 20 units

[[this fee doesn't seem in line with the economics of the game. The
courts should be more accessable by reducing high legal fees.]]

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:02:43 -0500
From: T Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 198 verdict 

pTang

It pains me greatly to find myself writing this in reply to your message,
considering that I am very much looking forward to working with you in
friendly Ackanomic.

>Now we see the true meaning of "game custom."  It is really "whatever Malenkai
>wants it to be."

That is completely untrue and a misrepresentation of Malenkai's words.

>  There is a MUCH stronger game custom that exists for officers
>to discharge their duties in all due haste.

Didn't you know that this is a game and that real life takes priority?

>  Most of the Rules make no
>specification as to when the actions of Officers should happen, on the quite
>reasonable assumption that it is clear that when mandated to do something, the
>Officer should do so at first reasonable opportunity.

Look, I complained to Malenkai because he did his job too fast and didn't
give a chance to some of us who are online at irregular intervals (maybe 48
hours without being online) to take part properly. So Malenkai is the last
one you should be complaining about.

>I should like to see your reaction if the Tabulator sat on voting results for
>a few weeks (no mention of time period in R414), or if the Registrar sent the
>new Players their information packet 1 year after they joined (same for R424),
>or if the Scorekeeper were to update scores only when there was a winner
>(R425), or (and I hesitate to give Malenkai another way to abuse his power)
>if the CotC decided to "sit on" those CFJs he didn't like (see R588 - no time
>frame for picking the Judge on a CFJ)... geez, you get the picture.

You know, those syndroms are called "paranoia" and although modern medicine
has trouble curing it, it can be controled. Please try. You were exagerating
widly, and Malenkai didn't do this to "abuse his power". Thinking that is
just crazy. Give everyone a break, get a warm drink, whatever. Just relax.

>This was an outstanding abuse of power.  Your flexible interpretation of the
>importance of "game custom" is instructive as well.  We know how much credence
>to lend such claims in the future.

Whatever. This could have been an interesting topic (very, very, very),
about what kind of commitment we expect from our leaders, but since it has
immediately turned (sour) into a mud slinging match... I'm off to my
diplomacy mail.

Anyone have something interesting to say? Germany won the European cup
final. Neat game huh?

CnH

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:19:36 -0500
From: T Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFJ 205 (mr cwm) 

ThinMan

Should I start stop being amazed and just accept Ackanomic is going
downhill? I have faith in you as a player with a keen sense of how to
address problems and create solutions. I hope my objections are all wrong
and simple misunderstandings.

>As has been elsewhere noted, the statement here is actually two statements,
>thus the CFJ should not be considered.

As has been noted elsewhere, it is the decision of the judge.
Look, how hard is it to say "this whole this is true" or "this whole thing
is false"?? Do we expect our judges to be so stupid as to not be able to
deal with more than one sentence at a time. What about really complex CFJs?
Or do we think we'll never have complex CFJs?

>  If one imagined that the first period
>was, in fact, intended to be a semicolon, then I would argue that the statement
>must be judged FALSE.

I'm not even going to say anything there, too funny. Actully, yes I will, I
need a laugh.

If one imagined this CFJ to be blue, and not red, while actually implying
that it was itself yellow but not brown, then we could imagine (again) a
world full of purple were I would argue that it looked red, whatever it's
real colour. So it's false.

Who cares what anyone imagines. Is the statement (as it stands) true or
false, that's the question.

>  The problematic portion of the statement would be
>phrase beginning with "that".  Rule 115 permits the Rules to be changed if
>the Rules explicitly _or implicitly_ allow it.  This is in opposition, in my
>opinion, to the "specifically and directly" of this CFJ.

So you want to create a dissident, unofficial opinion to this CFJ??? What
_is_ this. If you don't like it, appeal it. I encourage you to use every bit
of the system in place to ensure justice prevails. Follow Kelly's example,
where she was willing to stand up for what she believes and made a public
and official case for it. Unconstructive bickering _after_ the ruling is
made is useless.

Your friend
CnH

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:20:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Scores...

> Here are the scores as they were when /dev/joe won the game on Jun 24.

I found just a few small differences from your list.

Dr McSpong was still a player at the time that cycle ended; I show him as
having 95 points.

> 58	Techno               A   (Jerome Herrman) 

I found Techno to have 55 points.
He had 61 points in the last score report you distributed, and should have
lost 3 from the steel flea, and had 3 deducted in the undoing of score
changes for P898.

> 0	pTang1001001sos      A   (Mark Nau) 

pTang was not a player yet when that cycle ended.

> -3	Niccolo Flychuck     A   (Uri Bruck) 

I found N.F. to have -6 points.  However, this is because of an error in
judging the times of events; his loss of 3 points from the Steel Flea
actually occurred during cycle 4.  See below.

> -10	Calvin N Hobbes      A   (Thierry Joffrain) 

I found him to have 10 points, not -10.  Did you set his score to 20
(not 0) when he reached exactly -60?

> Jun 12, 23:40 CDT (Jun 13 00:40 EDT): Steel Flea: Niccolo Flychuck -3
> Jun 13, 00:42 EDT: Malenkai wins cycle 3; cycle 4 begins

As Malenkai reported, the time stamps on his mail were incorrect because
of a bug in the Win 3.1 version of Netscape, such that it believes you
are in the pacific time zone until you do something completely undocumented
to tell it otherwise.  As a result, the time of the end of cycle 3 should
actually be Jun 12, 21:42 EDT, and N.F. lost 3 points for the steel flea
during cycle 4, not cycle 3.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:24:14 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 936

> Proposal 936 - Mon Jul 01 16:50:53 EDT 1996
> Lazy II
> Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

OK, so I assume the other P936 was an error.

I have yet to receive P935; however, the nomicbot lists it as my
proposal to repeal R829.  R829 is the "Handling Paradox Wins" rule;
it was determined to not have an effect now anyway, and Kelly Martin's
proposed change to R219 incorporates R829's intended effect, but her
proposal does not include repealing this rule.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 18:30:58 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 936

> Proposal 936 - Mon Jul 01 16:50:53 EDT 1996
> Lazy II
> Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

] OK, so I assume the other P936 was an error.

] I have yet to receive P935; however, the nomicbot lists it as my
] proposal to repeal R829.  R829 is the "Handling Paradox Wins" rule;
] it was determined to not have an effect now anyway, and Kelly Martin's
] proposed change to R219 incorporates R829's intended effect, but her
] proposal does not include repealing this rule.

Proposal 935 - Sat Jun 29 13:16:38 EDT 1996
Repealing R829
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Repeal rule 829, "Handling Paradox Wins".
[[The rule has been judged to not work anyway, and if P915 passes, its idea
is incorporated into R219.]]

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

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:33:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 912 Passes

This proposal passed:

> Proposal 912 - Mon Jun 24 00:53:50 EDT 1996
> Judicial Reform I
> Malenkai  (Randy Hall)
> 
> Amend R 588 to add the following paragraph after the existing text of
> the rule:
> 
> If the CFJ is a Call For Criminal Judgement (CFCJ), the player or players
> against which the CFCJ is being called are excluded from "the other
> active players" and "remaining pool" as described above. This exclusion
> is made before the random determination is made. In other words, a
> player who has a CFCJ called against them may not be selected to judge
> that CFCJ.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> {{ All CFCJs whose number is less than 101 shall have 100 added to
> their number. This applies whether or not a verdict has been reached
> on the CFCJ.}}

Now I am left to consider what it does.  Is the text in {{ }} part of the
amendment?  It would seem not, since the amendment says "add the following
paragraph", not "two paragraphs".  Is the text in {{ }} a new rule?
Does our game custom of submitting proposals to new rules without a
statement that they are creating new rules extend to this form?  I hope
one of these is true, because otherwise this becomes an invalid rule
change.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:35:27 -0700
From: Mark Nau <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 198 verdict 

CnH wrote:
[...]
>>  There is a MUCH stronger game custom that exists for officers
>>to discharge their duties in all due haste.
>
>Didn't you know that this is a game and that real life takes priority?
>
>>  Most of the Rules make no
>>specification as to when the actions of Officers should happen, on the quite
>>reasonable assumption that it is clear that when mandated to do something, the
>>Officer should do so at first reasonable opportunity.
>
>Look, I complained to Malenkai because he did his job too fast and didn't
>give a chance to some of us who are online at irregular intervals (maybe 48
>hours without being online) to take part properly. So Malenkai is the last
>one you should be complaining about.
[...]

CnH:  
You seem to be arguing a wholly different point that the one I was
addressing.  Indulge me while I summarize.

I sent a note to Malenkai (in his role as Speaker) that invoked R362 upon all
the vacationing players.  He did not want to see the vacationers bumped from
the game.  Quite reasonable, he issued a CFJ to see whether he could get an out
by having R362 declared to be non-operative upon vacationers.  This attempt
failed.

Because he still did not want to start a process that may well have resulted in
having some number of the vacationers dropped from the game, Malenkai then took
a step that was a clear abrogation of power.

Let me quote directly from Malenkai so there can be no mistaking intent:

- -------BEGIN QUOTE

[...]
I do not want to do this. I belive the vacationing players deserve more
respect. But I will follow the rules, now that they have been clarified.
My options at this point seem to be:

1) Resign as Speaker. If I do that, the request still came while I was
Speaker, so I would still be breaking the rules, as now interpreted,
by not doing it. Not an option. Besides, I a good Speaker. I had that
potato out faster than any predecessor, and I've *possibly* recruited at
least one good player (pTang), to improve our game.

2) Consider this a "penalty worse than losing", and invoke R 111. Athough
I do consider removing these 5 players from the game, 2 of which have 
temporarily lost connectivity, a penalty worse than losing, and have
considered R 111 to avoid the duty, I shall not.

3) Follow the rules, as "strictly written". That seems to have come in
vogue over the last month, so I might as well join the crowd. R 362 says:
 
"then the Speaker must send a message to the player who has been absent.",

and I shall do so, when I have the time. The rule does not indicate a
deadline by which such a message must be sent. Certainly there is no 
"custom" on indeterminate or unspecifed durations, heck, the Fat Lady is
still singing from /dev/joe's win. There is a Witchhunt and Politeness
Moon that have still not been announced, and they were called over 2
weeks ago, and they even have time limits on them. Certainly we are all
over the map on interpreting time, especially when it is not specified.
All the Speakers have been all over the map on the time taken to comply
with R 362, and that is irrelevant anyway, as we don't really need to rely
on custom.

- --------END QUOTE

To believe that Malenkai was failing to send the messages required by R362
because he had obligations in Real Life (as CnH states above) is nonsensical.
He had enough time to write a long dissertation on how he would abuse Speaker's
power to "sit on" the required action indefinately.  There is no other possible
interpretation of the above missive.  Malenkai is not going to meaningfully
discharge his duty as outlined under R362.  I object.

- -pTang1001001sos

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

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:42:54 -0700
From: Mark Nau <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFJ 205 (mr cwm) 

At 05:19 PM 7/1/96 -0500, CnH wrote:
>ThinMan
>
>Should I start stop being amazed and just accept Ackanomic is going
>downhill? I have faith in you as a player with a keen sense of how to
>address problems and create solutions. I hope my objections are all wrong
>and simple misunderstandings.
>
>>As has been elsewhere noted, the statement here is actually two statements,
>>thus the CFJ should not be considered.
>
>As has been noted elsewhere, it is the decision of the judge.
>Look, how hard is it to say "this whole this is true" or "this whole thing
>is false"?? Do we expect our judges to be so stupid as to not be able to
>deal with more than one sentence at a time. What about really complex CFJs?
>Or do we think we'll never have complex CFJs?

UMMMM....... CnH??  It seems that you've missed whole chunks of what's going
on, and now have issued your second abusive and yet wholly incorrect post.

Malenkai recently pointed out that R589 requires a SINGLE statement to be
judged.  I had to reword a CFJ because he was absolutely correct:

"Any CFJ must include a single, clear, and clearly labeled statement that can
 be answered TRUE, or FALSE."
[...]
"CFJ's with no clear statement, or consisting of empty statements or
inherintly contradictory statements or multiple statements shall not be 
considered for judgement."

Notice that CFJs with multiple statements SHALL NOT be considered for judgement.

>>  If one imagined that the first period
>>was, in fact, intended to be a semicolon, then I would argue that the
statement
>>must be judged FALSE.
>
>I'm not even going to say anything there, too funny. Actully, yes I will, I
>need a laugh.
>
>If one imagined this CFJ to be blue, and not red, while actually implying
>that it was itself yellow but not brown, then we could imagine (again) a
>world full of purple were I would argue that it looked red, whatever it's
>real colour. So it's false.
>
>Who cares what anyone imagines. Is the statement (as it stands) true or
>false, that's the question.

Given that the CFJ must be a SINGLE statement, can we not discuss the statement
the author of the CFJ may have _intended_ to submit?  Is this not a reasonable
avenue of discussion?  I puzzled at your hostility toward debate.

- -pTang1001001sos

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #79
******************************