Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #126
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Monday, July 22 1996         Volume 01 : Number 126

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 14:23:29 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 995 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 995
  Proposal 995 - Wed Jul 10 01:32:28 EDT 1996
  Types of Otzma Cards - I
  Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)

Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

5 YES votes   9 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

Niccolo Flychuck loses 9 points.  65 -> 56

5 YES votes:  1 point each
  Malenkai               FUN                   31 -> 32           
  Robin Hood                                   15 -> 16           
  Niccolo Flychuck                             56 -> 57           
  snowgod                (None Yet)           -36 -> -35          
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 117 -> 118          

9 NO votes:  
  Brinjal                                     =   5               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =  19               
  gnome                                       =   0               
  De'ghew                Underworld           =   7               
  Bascule                FUN                  =  25               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =  42               
  Habeous Corpus                              =  20               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =  30               
  Wayne                  Underworld           =  17               

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Techno                 Underworld           
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  The Great Old One                           
  Mellon                                      
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  pTang1001001sos                             
  Pascal                                      

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 14:23:45 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 996 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 996
  Proposal 996 - Wed Jul 10 01:32:44 EDT 1996
  Types of Otzma Cards - II
  Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)

Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

5 YES votes   10 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

Niccolo Flychuck loses 9 points.  57 -> 48

5 YES votes:  1 point each
  Malenkai               FUN                   32 -> 33           
  Robin Hood                                   16 -> 17           
  Niccolo Flychuck                             48 -> 49           
  gnome                                       =   0               
  snowgod                (None Yet)           -35 -> -34          

10 NO votes:  
  Brinjal                                     =   5               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =  19               
  De'ghew                Underworld           =   7               
  Bascule                FUN                  =  25               
  Nobs Unity vote                             =   0               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =  42               
  Habeous Corpus                              =  20               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =  30               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 = 118               
  Wayne                  Underworld           =  17               

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Techno                 Underworld           
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  Mellon                                      
  The Great Old One                           
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  pTang1001001sos                             
  Pascal                                      

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 14:24:12 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 997 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 997
  Proposal 997 - Wed Jul 10 01:33:09 EDT 1996
  Creation of Otzma Card type Impeachment
  Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)

Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

6 YES votes   8 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

Niccolo Flychuck loses 9 points.  49 -> 40

6 YES votes:  1 point each
  Robin Hood                                   17 -> 18           
  Niccolo Flychuck                             40 -> 41           
  gnome                                       =   0               
  snowgod                (None Yet)           -34 -> -33          
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                  30 -> 31           
  Wayne                  Underworld            17 -> 18           

8 NO votes:  
  Malenkai               FUN                  =  33               
  Brinjal                                     =   5               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =  19               
  De'ghew                Underworld           =   7               
  Bascule                FUN                  =  25               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =  42               
  Habeous Corpus                              =  20               
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 = 118               

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Techno                 Underworld           
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  The Great Old One                           
  Mellon                                      
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  pTang1001001sos                             
  Pascal                                      

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 14:24:24 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 998 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 998
  Proposal 998 - Wed Jul 10 01:33:24 EDT 1996
  Creation of Otzma Card type Veto
  Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)

Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

8 YES votes   6 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

Niccolo Flychuck loses 9 points.  41 -> 32

8 YES votes:  1 point each
  Malenkai               FUN                   33 -> 34           
  Robin Hood                                   18 -> 19           
  Niccolo Flychuck                             32 -> 33           
  gnome                                       =   0               
  snowgod                (None Yet)           -33 -> -32          
  this is not a name     (None Yet)            42 -> 43           
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 118 -> 119          
  Wayne                  Underworld            18 -> 19           

6 NO votes:  
  Brinjal                                     =   5               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =  19               
  De'ghew                Underworld           =   7               
  Bascule                FUN                  =  25               
  Habeous Corpus                              =  20               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =  31               

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Techno                 Underworld           
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  Mellon                                      
  The Great Old One                           
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  pTang1001001sos                             
  Pascal                                      

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 14:25:30 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 999 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 999
  Proposal 999 - Wed Jul 10 15:39:35 EDT 1996
  Creation of Otzma Card type Double-Me-Election-Vote
  Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)

Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes

8 YES votes   6 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

Niccolo Flychuck loses 9 points.  33 -> 24

8 YES votes:  1 point each
  Malenkai               FUN                   34 -> 35           
  Brinjal                                       5 -> 6            
  Niccolo Flychuck                             24 -> 25           
  gnome                                       =   0               
  Bascule                FUN                   25 -> 26           
  snowgod                (None Yet)           -32 -> -31          
  /dev/joe               Nobs                 119 -> 120          
  Wayne                  Underworld            19 -> 20           

6 NO votes:  
  Robin Hood                                  =  19               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =  19               
  De'ghew                Underworld           =   7               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =  43               
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =  31               
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           =  12               

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Habeous Corpus                              
  Techno                 Underworld           
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  The Great Old One                           
  Mellon                                      
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  pTang1001001sos                             
  Pascal                                      

=================================
It is time for a break.  I'll send more Results out later.

Wayne

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 13:55:16 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 969 Passes

Although it isn't shown, Pascal is the new gnome buddy with -20 points

The question is can Pascal be chosen as the gnome buddy?  I don't think it
will matter as a new gnome buddy will be selected soon.

Wayne

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 14:03:54 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Prop 979 Fails

Here are the voting results for : 979
  Proposal 979 - Sun Jul 07 00:07:07 EDT 1996
  Amnesty is Granted
  /dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Quorum met : 19 eligible voters -- 16 players cast votes

9 YES votes   7 NO votes   0 PRESENT votes
Proposal FAILS

/dev/joe loses 9 points.  104 -> 95

9 YES votes:  1 point each
  Robin Hood                                    8 -> 9            
  Brinjal                                       1 -> 2            
  Niccolo Flychuck                             34 -> 35           
  De'ghew                Underworld             2 -> 3            
  Bascule                FUN                   22 -> 23           
  Kelly Martin           Nobs                  14 -> 15           
  /dev/joe               Nobs                  95 -> 96           
  pTang1001001sos                              25 -> 26           
  Wayne                  Underworld            11 -> 12           

7 NO votes:  
  Malenkai               FUN                  =  -3               
  Mellon                                      =  23               
  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   9               
  gnome                                       =   0               
  snowgod                (None Yet)           = -40               
  this is not a name     (None Yet)           =  39               
  Habeous Corpus                              =  11               

0 PRESENT votes:

3 ABSTENTIONS:
  Techno                 Underworld           
  Robert Sevin           Foozball             
  mr cwm                 (None Yet)           

Players on Vacation who did not vote:
  fon                                         
  The Great Old One                           
  chess piece face       Foozball             
  Simon Marty Harriman   Foozball             
  Calvin N Hobbes        FUN                  
  Pascal                                      

New players who are not active:

====================================================
Wayne, your friendly Tabulator
====================================================

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 14:22:41 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: P966, Blue Cross awarded

> Proposal PASSES
> Proposal 966 - Thu Jul 04 01:53:17 EDT 1996
> Malenkai's Blue Cross
> this is not a name  (Mike Epstein)
> 
> {{The Blue Cross formerly belonging to Malenkai is hereby given back to 
> him.}}

I note that as of July 11, 01:53 EDT, Malenkai has a blue cross.
This was sometime after proposal 1006 was submitted.  Due to the wording of
the rule, proposals Malenkai made in the range of 957 to 1006 do not count
toward silver stripes.  I plan on rewriting the blue cross rule, *again*,
to define a "blue cross rank" for all players, equal to the number of
accepted proposals that player has made, plus 10 for completed terms as
senator or president, and make the blue crosses & stripes be automatic
based on the blue cross rank.  A rank of 20 or more gets a blue cross,
for each 10 above 20, a silver stripe is added, and every 4 silver stripes
a player has merge into a gold stripe as is done now.  This will avoid the
silliness we have now where only proposals submitted *while* a player has
a blue cross count toward silver stripes.  I will also make it clear that
returning players have their old proposals counted in blue cross rank, etc.

snowgod's recent attempt to give Malenkai a blue cross failed, because
Malenkai already one, just as an attempt to give me two blue crosses
failed a couple weeks ago.

While I'm at it, I award a blue cross to pTang1001001sos.  Proposal 963 was
his 20th.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 15:58:38 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1026

Proposal 1026 - Mon Jul 22 15:58:38 EDT 1996
New and Returning Players
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

When a person registers as a player, he shall be considered a returning
player if and only if there exists an Undead with a name which that
person may choose as his Ackanomic name, in accordance with the rules.
Otherwise he is considered a new player.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 15:01:53 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 988 Fails

> Here are the voting results for : 988
>   Proposal 988 - Wed Jul 10 01:28:13 EDT 1996
>   Selecting A Judge
>   Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)
> 
> Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes
> 
> 7 YES votes   6 NO votes   1 PRESENT votes
> Proposal FAILS

This proposal was retracted and a fixed version was submitted.
We need to figure out just what happens to retracted proposals.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 18:13:04 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Scorekeepor

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> I hearby resign as Scorekeepor.  I have done an awful job as your 
> scorekeepor
> and I am embarrassed by my work.  I feel that by resigning as scorekeepor
> I can concentrate more on my job as Promoter and Tabulator.  I also may
> have somne time to author some proposals as well.
> 

I certainly have to disagree that Wayne has done an "awful job". I think
he's done a great job. Anyway, good work, Wayne, and good luck in your new
career writing proposals :). 

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 14:15:41 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Mentors Fails

I am curious why the players who voted NO or Present on this proposal did
so.  Far as I could tell it would have created a methos of quickly getting
new players oriented into the game without too much time and hassle on any
existing players part.

If there is anything I could do to change ytour vote for a future version
of this proposal, please let me know.  I would like to discuss it.

>6 NO votes:
>  Robin Hood                                  =   8
>  Brinjal                                     =   1
>  ThinMan                Nobs                 =   9
>  Niccolo Flychuck                            =  34
>  Kelly Martin           Nobs                 =  14
>  Wayne                  Underworld           =  11
>
>1 PRESENT votes:
>  /dev/joe               Nobs                  = 104
>
>3 ABSTENTIONS:
>  Techno                 Underworld
>  Robert Sevin           Foozball
>  mr cwm                 (None Yet)

snowgod

Ambassador - Former CSRR - Acting Senator (seat c)
Inventor -Senator (seat a?) - Heretic (twice)
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream
Wearing a prosthetic forehead

"Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot"

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 17:26:38 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Scorekeepor

Wayne wrote:
> I hearby resign as Scorekeepor. 

The appointer (this is not a name) should begin a nomination for Scorekeeper.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 18:30:06 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 989 Passes

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Here are the voting results for : 989
>   Proposal 989 - Wed Jul 10 01:28:30 EDT 1996
>   Definition of Judging Index
>   Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)
> 

> 5 The officer in charge of selecting Judges will keep track of JIs.

It looks like more work landed on my desk. It looks like Speed only
gives me three days to do it. Is this thing used? Can I work a deal
with the Web-Harfer to keep such index on the Registrar's page?

Malenkai
Clerk of the Courts

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 18:33:19 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 988 Fails

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> > Here are the voting results for : 988
> >   Proposal 988 - Wed Jul 10 01:28:13 EDT 1996
> >   Selecting A Judge
> >   Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)
> >
> > Quorum met : 17 eligible voters -- 14 players cast votes
> >
> > 7 YES votes   6 NO votes   1 PRESENT votes
> > Proposal FAILS
> 
> This proposal was retracted and a fixed version was submitted.
> We need to figure out just what happens to retracted proposals.

And we need to get rid of that %&^%** JI index. Not only is is more
work, its work that adds no value now. Argh!

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 18:38:17 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 966 Passes

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Here are the voting results for : 966
>   Proposal 966 - Thu Jul 04 01:53:17 EDT 1996
>   Malenkai's Blue Cross
>   this is not a name  (Mike Epstein)
> 
> Proposal PASSES

I'd like to thank Ackanomic for voting me a Blue Cross

Malenkai
More proposals to come :)
Can we get a Black Cross for having 20 fail?

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 18:43:01 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1027

Proposal 1027 - Mon Jul 22 18:43:01 EDT 1996
Undead whoops
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Amend rule 962.2, "Player Leaving/Returning Process", as follows:

1. In step 7 of the procedure for players leaving the game, change
   "Undead created in step 4" to "Undead created in step 3".

2. Add to the end of the rule:

{{ The Undead haunting Mohammed's house is given the name Mohammed. }}

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 18:43:36 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1028

Proposal 1028 - Mon Jul 22 18:43:35 EDT 1996
Regulating the Use (Misuse?) of Acka Entities
Habeous Corpus  (Ed Graham)

1) Create a new Rule titled "Classification of Acka Entities" with the
following text:

There exist 2 meta-types of nomic entities,  Active Entities and Passive
Entities.  Nomic entities created by a Proposal must belong to one of the
two meta-types.  No Acka Entity may belong to both meta-types at the same
time.  

An entity is considered Active if it has the inherent ability to do any
of the following:  adjust Points,  adjust votes,  adjust income,  adjust
status of a Player,  or other actions as may be determined by the Rules
(i.e.  the Voting Gnome,  Blueprints,  Gadgets,  Amber Banana,  Tamany, 
etc)

An entity which does not fit the above criteria is considered Passive
(i.e. Prosthetic Foreheads,  Gumball,  Silly Vacation Hats,  etc.).

When the Rule defining an Entity is amended,  or when new powers are
given to an Entity,  it may change meta-type or remain in its current
meta-type.

Any Player may call into question the classification of any Entity or
change of classification by publicly petitioning the President (or, if
there is no President,  the Speaker).  The President (or Speaker,  if
there is no President) must determine the Entity's classification.  If
the President (or Speaker et al.) is unable to decide which meta-type an
Entity belongs to using previous determinations,  game custom,  or
specific Rules,  then the Entity shall be considered Passive.  

Any Player may challenge the classification of an Entity to the Supreme
Court,  if such exists.  If no Supreme Court exists at the time the
challenge is made,  the Speaker shall make the final determination.

2)  Create a new Rule titled "Punishment for Misuse of Acka Entities"
with the following text:

If a Player believes another Player (hereafter referred to as "the
Offending Player") is attempting or has attempted to use an Acka Entity
in a manner inconsistent with the traditions of the game,  or in
violation of the Rules,  He may request a "Senatorial Decree" on the
matter.  Senatorial Decrees may be granted if a simple majority (or 50%
of the Senators and the Proconsul) determine that such misuse has
occurred or is occurring.

If the Acka Entity involved is Passive at the time of misuse,  the
action(s) resulting in the misuse of the Entity shall be determined to
never have occurred and the Offending Player shall have eir Score reduced
by no less than one (1) Point and no more than six(6) Points at the
determination of the Senate.   If the misuse is determined by the
Senate's judgement to have been intended to result in a reduction of
Points,  the Offending Player's score shall be raised by twenty-five (25)
Points (this sentence takes precedence over the previous one).

If the Acka Entity involved is Active at the time of misuse,  the
action(s) resulting in the misuse of the Entity shall be determined to
never have occurred and the Offending Player shall forfeit eir rights to
access any Active Entity for a period of one week or until the end of the
current cycle at the time of the Decree (whichever is shorter).The
Offending Player shall also have eir Score reduced by twenty (20) Points
and be subject to a Fine of A$ 15.   If the misuse is determined by the
Senate's judgement to have been intended to result in a reduction of
Points,  the Offending Player's score shall be raised by twenty-five (25)
Points and fined A$15 (this sentence takes precedence over the previous
one).

The Offending Player may appeal a Senatorial Decree issued against em
exactly once per Decree. E may petition the Supreme Court to issue an Act
of Justice overturning the actions of the Senate.  The Supreme Court must
consider the petition of the Offending Player,  but reserves the right to
deny the request.  If there is no Supreme Court at the time of the
request for Appeal,  the Speaker Shall assume this duty.  This paragraph
takes precedence over any other Rules dealing with Appeals or Supreme
Court actions.

Nothing in this Rule shall be construed to restrict the Senate from
issuing Decrees on the matter of misuse of Enities by eir own initiative.
 Nothing in this Rule shall be construed to deny any Players' rights to
request a CFJ or any other judicial relief as specified in the Rules. 
This Rule takes precedence over any Rules governing access to Acka
Entities.  

[Proposer's Comment:  Many thanks to snowgod,  Malenkai and /dev/joe for
eir tremendous input.   Without em,  this Proposal would be a lot shorter
and loaded with loopholes and possible paradoxes....Hmmmm]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 17:53:41 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 976 Passes

>   Proposal 976 - Fri Jul 05 22:21:04 EDT 1996
>   569 Fixup, plus get rid of those quote marks
>   Malenkai  (Randy Hall)
> Proposal PASSES

By rule 761, a Parade was held when this proposal was accepted, and Malenkai
was the Guest of Honor.

Malenkai's 7 days to post an interesting description of the parade have
already elapsed.  He loses 10 points.  (This is unfortunate... maybe
something could be done to fix this problem.)

All players, as of July 12, 22:21 EDT, took part in the parade.  Only
Habeous Corpus has joined since that time, and no players have left
(Mohammed left before this).  All other players receive 1 point,
except for players who were on vacation at that time.
By my records, Bascule, Calvin N Hobbes, chess piece face, fon,
pTang1001001sos, Simon Marty Harriman, The Great Old One, and mr cwm
were on vacation at that time.  These players were represented in the
Parade by cardboard cutouts on wheels.

Brinjal, De'ghew, /dev/joe, Kelly Martin, Malenkai, Mellon, Niccolo Flychuck,
Pascal, Robert Sevin, Robin Hood, snowgod, Techno, ThinMan, this is not a
name, and Wayne each get 1 point for participating in the Parade.

The question arises whether or not I had the Great Trombone at this time
(I claimed it afterward, but based on score at a time before the Parade).
I will say I did not have it then, so I gain only 1 and not 10 points.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 19:08:38 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Supreme Court Verdicts

The Supreme Court has reached appeal verdicts on 220, 232, and 234.
Following the Court's wording, is a section on scores and financial
penalties. Would the Acting Scorekeeper (this is not a name) and 
the Financier please take note of this section.

Following that is Malenkai, in the capacity of a player, offering
certain reinbursements of the penalties.

Clerk of the Courts
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------

CFJ 220 - overturning the decision to FALSE with a penalty of one point
to the previous Judge.

Reasoning:

It is not game custom that players vote once on each proposal, as that
could rightly be overridden by R390, if its meaning was as claimed.
Rather, it is game custom that the phrase "Each player has exactly one
vote" is interpreted to mean that each player has the right to vote once
on each proposal or other issue.

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFJ 232 - uphold the decision of TRUE.

Reasoning:

If it could not be determined whether any game custom beyond that
explicity created by Rules and CFJ's could be considered, then we
certainly could not use any such non-explicit game custom to determine the
legality of any action, including the legality of various methods of
posting CFJ decisions.  The "multiple game states" argument is groundless.
The fact that one state includes posting to the CotC as the proper method
of decision submision is useless if it can not be determined whether that
is the legal state of the game.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFJ 234 - uphold the decision of TRUE.

Reasoning:

We concur with the reasoning of Brinjal concerning inconsistancy with R104
in CFJ 235.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Score changes:

De'ghew: -1 (judge on 220)
/dev/joe: -20 (friv appeal of 232)
ThinMan:  -20 (friv appeal of 234)

Financial:

Bascule and mr cwm are the justices, and were the justices at the time the
verdicts were delivered. They should have the penalties assesed to them
as below. The fact that Bascule was on vacation does *not* extend the
due date based on my reading of R 569, as my Websters defines "majority"
as *greater* than 50%. If someone disagrees with this interpretation of
R 569, and the penalty assesment in general, CFJ (but wait 'till I
publish that &^*&&^ JI :)).

R 665 stipulates all rounding is done in the player's favor.

verdicts were delivered 22 Jul, 16:47

220 was due 19 Jul, 21:23; overdue 2.81 days => 5.61 => A$5 penalty apiece
232 was due 19 Jul, 22:24; overdue 2.85 days => 5.70 => A$5 penalty apiece
234 was due 21 Jul, 15:28; overdue 0.95 days => 1.90 => A$1 penalty apiece
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the turmoil at the time, I, in my capacity as a player, offered
to pay the penalies on certain verdicts up to a limit. That amounts to:

I hereby offer to give A$6 to mr cwm. A matching reply on the FM will
close the deal.

I hereby offer to give A$6 to Bascule. A matching reply on the FM will
close the deal.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 19:14:10 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Supreme Court Verdicts

Malenkai wrote:

> Financial:
> 
> Bascule and mr cwm are the justices, and were the justices at the time the
> verdicts were delivered. They should have the penalties assesed to them
> as below. The fact that Bascule was on vacation does *not* extend the
> due date based on my reading of R 569, as my Websters defines "majority"
> as *greater* than 50%. If someone disagrees with this interpretation of
> R 569, and the penalty assesment in general, CFJ (but wait 'till I
> publish that &^*&&^ JI :)).
> 

I note that I may have made an error. There was a time that Bascule
and mr cwm were on vacation at the same time, possibly. The period would
then start at the time mr cwm returned from vacation.

To the Registrar:

a) were mr cwm and Bascule on vacation at the same time?
b) if so, when did mr cwm come back. This may affect the penalties posted
by me previously.

Sorry for the confusion.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 19:34:10 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: JIs

As required by R 989, I publically announce that all player's
JIs are 4.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 19:56:11 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Prop 969 Passes

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Here are the voting results for : 969
>   Proposal 969 - Thu Jul 04 01:54:49 EDT 1996
>   The Proposal Queue is not a Public Forum
>   Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

> Proposal PASSES

> Amend R 423 - Retracting Proposals, to replace the phrase
> 
> "1 point penalty" with the phrase "2 point penalty"

In keeping with the tradition of rule changes applying to when
they passed, Niccolo Flychuck should lose another point for retracting
P 988 on the 11th, after this rule passed.

Malenkai
Assistant to the scorekeeper apparent or to the acting scorekeeper or both

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 22:01:19 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: JIs

Malenkai wrote:
> 
> As required by R 989, I publically announce that all player's
> JIs are 4.
> 
> Malenkai

As /dev/joe has pointed out to me, Habeous Corpus has a JI of 3, due to
my neglecting to account for when 989 became effective, as opposed to
when it was delivered. This baby has got to be nuked, hopefully the
thing that uses it failed.

Also, the penalities I published for the Supreme Court are in doubt.
I believe what I published is correct, but I think it will take a CFJ,
which I will submit shortly.

Malenkai
Trying to obey the rules

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 23:15:41 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 237 (tinan)

this is not a name has been chosen for CFJ 237, and has 3 days to
respond. This is not a cut and paste error.
 
Clerk of the Courts

Call for Judgement 237
  Subject:  Acting Officers
Initiator:  Malenkai
    Judge:  this is not a name

Statement:

The penalties published, and reproduced below, for the Supreme Court's
late appeal verdicts on CFJ 220, 232, and 234 are correct.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

The published penalties were:

>Verdicts delivered:  22 Jul, 16:47

>220 was due 19 Jul, 21:23; overdue 2.81 days => 5.61 => A$5 penalty apiece
>232 was due 19 Jul, 22:24; overdue 2.85 days => 5.70 => A$5 penalty apiece
>234 was due 21 Jul, 15:28; overdue 0.95 days => 1.90 => A$1 penalty apiece

This was suprisingly difficult to figure, and rests on the contentious
assumption that an Acting Justice is the same as a Justice. I wanted to
run this by a Judge just to be sure.

Other facts:

Justice Bascule went on vacation sometime on July 11th and stayed on
vacation until July 22, before the verdicts were delivered.

mr cwm went on vacation on July 10th and returned on July 15 at 10:40 EDT.

In both cases acting Justices were appointed on the day the actual Justices
went on vacation, therefore the Court was fully staffed, by either Justice
or Acting Justice, continuously, since July 11th.

1) So, if Acting Justices count, the vacation clause of R 569 had no effect,
and it was calculated properly. Note also, if relavent, that R 457 has
precedence.

2) If Acting Justices do not count, the last time a "majority" of Justices
were on vacation, from above, was July 15, 10:40, when mr cwm came back.
In this case, the verdicts were due July 22, 10:40, and therefore no
penalties, after rounding, would be due for these 3 CFJs. 

I claim 1) is the proper interpretation. What if the *Acting* Justices 
delivered a late verdict. Surely they should be penalized?

Note that I read "majority", as indicated by Webster, to be *greater* than
50%

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 00:16:56 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official: Scorekeeper Vacant

The functional office of Scorekeeper is vacant.

Anyone wishing to volunteer for the position should email me at 
<[email-masked]>. I will accept nominations until Thu 25 Jul 1996 10:56 
PM EDT.

             this is not a name            [email-masked]
Appointer - Historian - File Clerk - Acting Senator - Priest - Swinger

- --
        Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
"I want to speak about the future, because that's the direction we're
 headed in."                          --Bob Dole
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/         Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 0:22:08 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Acka: Supreme Court Verdicts

It is partly my fault that the verdicts were delayed.  I insist in paying my
fair share of the penalties.

Wayne

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 00:26:25 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official: Scorekeeper Vacant

>Anyone wishing to volunteer for the position should email me at 
><[email-masked]>. I will accept nominations until Thu 25 Jul 1996 10:56 
>PM EDT.

Whoops! I meant Wed 25 Jul 1996 10:56 PM EDT.

tinan

             this is not a name            [email-masked]
Appointer - Historian - File Clerk - Acting Senator - Priest - Swinger

- --
        Mike Epstein     [email-masked]     Long Island, NY
       Bend a carrot if you will, but a turnip will never bend.
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/          Finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 0:28:18 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1029

Proposal 1029 - Tue Jul 23 00:28:18 EDT 1996
On Ice
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

{{[I've done some tinkering with the vacation rule to attempt to handle
long and ambigious vacations, or at least try to put durations
around vacations. Any votes?]}}

Amend R 457, to read in full:

      A player shall be considered "on vacation" when he or she makes a
public request that he or she desires to be on vacation. Players are
allowed to put only themselves on vacation. The Rules may specify other
ways a Player may be put on vacation.

      A player should specify the expected duration of their vacation. If
the duration is not specified when they go on vacation, it is assumed to
be 14 days. If the period specified is longer than 30 days, it is assumed,
and recorded, as 30 days. It is a duty of the Register to keep a record
of the expected duration of vacationing players.

 {{     Grandfather clause: Any player who was on vacation the instant this
rule was adopted will have recorded for them an expected duration of 30
days from the time the rule was adopted. This paragraph has precedence
over the previous one.}}
 
      While a player is on vacation, the player shall not not be randomly
selected for anything. The player shall also not be chosen to perform any
task. The duties of any offices held by the player shall be performed by
the Speaker or someone appointed by the Speaker.

      A player on vacation is not considered and "active player" while
they are on vacation. Nor may they be removed from the game by any
procedure, unless that procedure *explicitly* states that it applies
to vacationing players, or that procedure is part of this Rule.

      The only thing a player on vacation may legally do is take
himself off vacation. A player shall take himself off vacation by declaring
to the public forum that he is back from his vacation. As soon as the
player makes this public declaration, he shall no longer be considered on
vacation.

      Votes cast before a player went on vacation shall count normally. If
a vacationing player does not cast a vote on a proposal, then the player
shall have no vote or abstention recorded for that proposal.

      Succession Proceedings may not be called against a player on
vacation.

      If a player is still on vacation when their expected duration
expires, they are put "on ice", and it is a duty of the Registrar to
announce this fact publically. A player on ice is still considered a
vacationing player, and their on ice status is removed at the same time
they return from, or are removed, from vacation.

      A player who is on ice for 14 consecutive days is automatically
Impeached from any offices they may hold. A player who is on ice for 90
consecutive days is removed from the game.

      This rule has precdence over any mutable rule which conflicts in
whole or in part, with any of its provisions.

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #126
*******************************