Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #144
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Tuesday, July 30 1996        Volume 01 : Number 144

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:20:04 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 245 (Robin Hood)

Robin Hood has been chosen for the following, and has 3 days
to respond.

Clerk of the Courts

Call For Judgement 245
Subject: Locations
Initiator: snowgod
Judge: Robin Hood (selected Jul 29, 1996, 19:20h New York Time)

Statement:

A player may exist in two "locations" at the same time.

snowgod's Reasoning:

I have no real opinion on this issue I just want a judgement inserted into
game custom.  If a judgement of true is returned it would indicate that a
player is able to reside in his ackanomic home and another location (such
as the afterlife or a hotel) at simultaniously.  A verdict of false should
indicate that a player will reside only in the "location" to which he was
most recently placed.

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 15:22:01 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: Inventor: New Blueprint (IV)

At 7:14 PM 7/29/96, Malenkai wrote:
>this is not a name wrote:
>>
>> >Blueprint - Lovely Green Raincoat
>> >
>> >The Lovely Green Raincoat will increase the score of a player (other than
>> >it's owner) by 5 points whenever that player posts a message of exactly 247
>> >words admiring the Lovely Green Raincoat's owner and praising him for a
>> >specific instance of service to Ackanomic (so long as that player was not
>> >the last person to have had his score increased by the Lovely Green
>> >Raincoat).
>> >
>> >The lovely green raincoat is indestructible.
>>
>> This could easily make for 5-minute game cycles. I would recommend
>> impeaching the Inventor to destroy this blueprint if he decides to create
>> this object.
>
>Yes, it sounds potentially similar to Agora's infamous potato scam.
>
>Malenkai

Hey! Easy now.  No player can use the silly thing twice in a row!  But if
it makes everyone feel better, I'll destroy the blueprint, and create an
Even Lovlier Green Raincoat that can only be used twice a month.

snowgod

Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Acting Senator (seat c)
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

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

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:22:21 +0000
From: Bascule <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Inventor: New Blueprint (IV)

> >Blueprint - Lovely Green Raincoat
> >
> >The Lovely Green Raincoat will increase the score of a player (other than
> >it's owner) by 5 points whenever that player posts a message of exactly 247
> >words admiring the Lovely Green Raincoat's owner and praising him for a
> >specific instance of service to Ackanomic (so long as that player was not
> >the last person to have had his score increased by the Lovely Green
> >Raincoat).
> >
> >The lovely green raincoat is indestructible.
> 
> This could easily make for 5-minute game cycles. I would recommend 
> impeaching the Inventor to destroy this blueprint if he decides to create 
> this object.
> 
>                this is not a name      [email-masked]

And far more importantly, the magic number is 257 :-)

Bascule

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:28:41 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal)

Brinjal has been selected to judge the following, and has
3 days to accept or decline the appointment. Would the Financier please
note Robert Sevin's A$20 Court Fee.

Clerk of the Courts

Call for Criminal Judgement 109
  Subject:  CFJ 113 revisited
Initiator:  Robert Sevin
    Judge:  Brinjal (selected Mon, Jul 29, 1996, 19:30 New York Time)

Statement:

Player Robert Sevin has broken, and is breaking by writing this very CFCJ,
Rule 101.

Reasoning:

Similar to the offense outlined in CFCJ 106, Robert Sevin has manipulated an
extra-nomic entity that is regulated by Rule 706. In CFCJ 106 it was
determined that by drinking Coca-Cola, Malenkai was violating it's regulated
status under Rule 115 and Rule 706. Similarly, in my judgement of CFCJ 106 I
spoke about Coca-Cola. As it is regulated, and nowhere in the rules is it
permitted for my to speak of this regulated object, I have violated the
rules. In fact, every mention of the regulated object in the statement of
this CFCJ is another violation of the rules. CFJ 113 set the precedent of
Rule 115 regulating the acceptable uses of entities. Therefore this is the
logical, although absurd, conclusion to that CFJ. I suggest that before more
people fall victim to this dread violation that some legislation is passed
clearing up the relationship between Rule 115, CFJ 113, and regulated 
entities.

Suggested Penalty: 15 days in Gaol and a score deduction of 3 points.

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 15:34:21 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal)

At 7:28 PM 7/29/96, Malenkai wrote:
>Brinjal has been selected to judge the following, and has
>3 days to accept or decline the appointment. Would the Financier please
>note Robert Sevin's A$20 Court Fee.
>
>Clerk of the Courts
>
>Call for Criminal Judgement 109
>  Subject:  CFJ 113 revisited
>Initiator:  Robert Sevin
>    Judge:  Brinjal (selected Mon, Jul 29, 1996, 19:30 New York Time)
>
>Statement:
>
>Player Robert Sevin has broken, and is breaking by writing this very CFCJ,
>Rule 101.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>Similar to the offense outlined in CFCJ 106, Robert Sevin has manipulated an
>extra-nomic entity that is regulated by Rule 706. In CFCJ 106 it was
>determined that by drinking Coca-Cola, Malenkai was violating it's regulated
>status under Rule 115 and Rule 706. Similarly, in my judgement of CFCJ 106 I
>spoke about Coca-Cola. As it is regulated, and nowhere in the rules is it
>permitted for my to speak of this regulated object, I have violated the
>rules. In fact, every mention of the regulated object in the statement of
>this CFCJ is another violation of the rules. CFJ 113 set the precedent of
>Rule 115 regulating the acceptable uses of entities. Therefore this is the
>logical, although absurd, conclusion to that CFJ. I suggest that before more
>people fall victim to this dread violation that some legislation is passed
>clearing up the relationship between Rule 115, CFJ 113, and regulated
>entities.
>
>Suggested Penalty: 15 days in Gaol and a score deduction of 3 points.

ROTFL!!!

But I not that Coke Is It! was repealed today.

snowgod

Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Acting Senator (seat c)
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

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

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:36:28 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Re: P 1029

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Here are the voting results for : 1029
>   Proposal 1029 - Tue Jul 23 00:28:18 EDT 1996
>   On Ice
>   Malenkai  (Randy Hall)
> 
> Proposal PASSES

> 2 ABSTENTIONS:
>   snowgod                (None Yet)
>   Kelly Martin           Nobs

I understand why Kelly did not vote.  But we cannot afford *any* 
abstentions, as Brinjal is probably *really* on vacation for the
next set,  and that includes the fix to R 457.  This proposal made
quorum exactly.

In general, though, I'd like to thank everyone who could for voting.
Not a single proposal, by my count, failed due to quorum.  Hopefully we
can pass the fix to 457.

Malenkai
Speaker - sentenced to Gaol - unlike snowgod, admitting guilt :)

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 14:33:12 GMT
From: Simon Clarke <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: RFC Ackanomic Age

This idea came to me when wondering what "setting a player to 36" 
meant. Years of Age perhaps. Probably not, but the concept of Age
might be of value.

The Ackanomic Age of each player in years is equal to the number of
proposals they have had accepted. The three oldest current players 
are referred to as the Elders. [Perhaps they could be automatically
given seats on the Supreme Court, or some other privilege?]
Upon reaching some specific venerable age, a player is "reborn". The 
number of lifetimes service given to the game by a player would of 
course be a significant measure of prestige.

OK, the idea needs fleshing out. 
It also cuts across the existing medals
system. There is (or should be) some resistance to discarding the
traditions built up regarding Blue Crosses etc. But if these are being 
reworked anyway, then I think this idea is worth looking at. It could
provide a more elegant way to determine one element of prestige within
the game. 
The formula for calculating Age could be extended to include Judgements
made or Terms of Functional Office perhaps, so long as it does not get
too complicated.
I haven't put too much thought into this yet, but would welcome
comments on whether it is worth pursuing. 

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:39:36 GMT
From: Simon Clarke <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Returning from Vacation?

I'm back from vacation - or not, as the case may be. Hopefully
proposal 1043 will pass and help clear things up. 

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 15:44:21 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: Re: P 1029

>
>> 2 ABSTENTIONS:
>>   snowgod                (None Yet)
>>   Kelly Martin           Nobs
>
>I understand why Kelly did not vote.  But we cannot afford *any*
>abstentions, as Brinjal is probably *really* on vacation for the
>next set,  and that includes the fix to R 457.  This proposal made
>quorum exactly.
>
>In general, though, I'd like to thank everyone who could for voting.
>Not a single proposal, by my count, failed due to quorum.  Hopefully we
>can pass the fix to 457.
>
>Malenkai
>Speaker - sentenced to Gaol - unlike snowgod, admitting guilt :)

Oops, I apologize.  Every once in a while i accidently erase a couple of
proposals while doing a cut-and-paste job for the nomicbot.  Didn't notice
I did that.  Sorry.

snowgod

Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Acting Senator (seat c)
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

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

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 18:44:17 -0500
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal) 

>>Suggested Penalty: 15 days in Gaol and a score deduction of 3 points.
>
>ROTFL!!!
>
>But I not that Coke Is It! was repealed today.

And a sad day it is...

Robert Sevin,
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:56:41 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official

By R 362, pTang1001001sos and The Great Old One have been removed from
the game.  They have not responded to a message I sent to them over
48 hours ago, and were placed on an involuntary vacation.

I regret I had to do this, and it was done only in light of the R 457
situation, and was initiated 2 days ago.  For the math to work out, an
even number of players needed to be removed (I did not know Kelly was
having e-mail problems).

I knew pTang wouldn't mind, and the Great Old One was chosen as the player
who had been on vacation the longest, of those eligible. Hopefully they
will both be back soon.

I note that assuming this action is effective the time of this post, the
proper undead will be haunting their possessions, including pTang's
Blue Cross (he did have one, didn't he, it wasn't on the web page).

Anyway, get out and vote

Malenkai
Speaker - what a thankless job

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 20:18:58 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: AFP (/dev/joe)

In accordance with R 711, I hereby make an Appeal for Pardon to
President /dev/joe, to waive the penalty of CFCJ 106.

The sentence, a full 300% of the suggested sentence, is hardy
fitting for the crime, especially when we are all probably guilty
of the same crime.

I note that I am not the same class of criminal as snowgod, and surely
it is not appropriate for the likes of me to be seen in the same Gaol
at the same time with such riff-raff.

Furthermore, I note that a Presidental election is just around the 
corner, and every vote counts.  I happen to have a long memory.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 16:35:53 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: AFP (/dev/joe)

At 8:18 PM 7/29/96, Malenkai wrote:
>In accordance with R 711, I hereby make an Appeal for Pardon to
>President /dev/joe, to waive the penalty of CFCJ 106.
>
>The sentence, a full 300% of the suggested sentence, is hardy
>fitting for the crime, especially when we are all probably guilty
>of the same crime.

Obviously, a well though out penalty.  I for one, am not guilty of such a
heinous crime, for I do not partake in carbonated beverages.  I am a water
drinker.  Furthermore, understang the audacity of the crime, I would never
intentionally commit such a horrible act (unlike Malenkai who appearently
did it with intent)

>I note that I am not the same class of criminal as snowgod, and surely
>it is not appropriate for the likes of me to be seen in the same Gaol
>at the same time with such riff-raff.

True.  I have been railroaded for commiting a righteous act (the burning of
witches) while your crime was commited for a more selfish reason.  You are
the worst kind of criminal.  One that commits his crime solely for the
pleasures of the flesh.  Greed, and thirst.

Malenkai deserves the smallest possible cell the Gaol can provide,
preferably sticky with the residue of carbonated beverages.  I on the other
hand, if I am required to serve at the same time as Malenkai, deserve a
much bigger and nicer cell, one where I can enjoy the smell of burning
witchflesh outside of the gaol as it comes wafting in.

>Furthermore, I note that a Presidental election is just around the
>corner, and every vote counts.  I happen to have a long memory.

So do I.  I remember which President it was that railroaded me in the first
place.  I remember which president it was was who tried to make all of acka
dormant and I certainly won't vote for that president.  Of course, by
granting me an appeal for pardon, or denying Malenkai's he may be able to
persuade me to reconsider.

snowgod

Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Acting Senator (seat c)
Inventor -Senator (seat a) - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Founder, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

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

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 01:36:47 +0000
From: Bascule <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: AFP (/dev/joe)

Malenkai grovelled, cajoled and threatened:

> In accordance with R 711, I hereby make an Appeal for Pardon to
> President /dev/joe, to waive the penalty of CFCJ 106.
> 
> The sentence, a full 300% of the suggested sentence, is hardy
> fitting for the crime, especially when we are all probably guilty
> of the same crime.

Actually, some of us *law-abiding* citizens stopped drinking coke as
soon as it became illegal to do so. If we are to prevent the
breakdown of law and order in this wonderful country, despicable
criminal acts cannot be allowed to go unpunished. A spell in Gaol may
be just what Malenkai needs, to show him the error of his ways, so
that he is not tempted to manipulate food and drink (by eating or
drinking), as these entities have also become protected by the
passage of R990. I urge the President to let justice run it's course.

Bascule
Hard-line Justice

 

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 20:56:33 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: AFP (/dev/joe)

Bascule wrote:
> 
> Malenkai grovelled, cajoled and threatened:
> 
> > In accordance with R 711, I hereby make an Appeal for Pardon to
> > President /dev/joe, to waive the penalty of CFCJ 106.
> >
> > The sentence, a full 300% of the suggested sentence, is hardy
> > fitting for the crime, especially when we are all probably guilty
> > of the same crime.
> 
> Actually, some of us *law-abiding* citizens stopped drinking coke as
> soon as it became illegal to do so. If we are to prevent the
> breakdown of law and order in this wonderful country, despicable
> criminal acts cannot be allowed to go unpunished. A spell in Gaol may
> be just what Malenkai needs, to show him the error of his ways, so
> that he is not tempted to manipulate food and drink (by eating or
> drinking), as these entities have also become protected by the
> passage of R990. I urge the President to let justice run it's course.

It doesn't look like I'll be able to submit a pro-Malenkai editorial
under the psuedonym Jazz Jackrabbit in either snowgod's or Bascule's
newspaper now :(

Malenkai
Manipulating Protected Entities

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:00:20 +0000
From: The Day Today <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: The Day Today

SHAME OF EX-JUSTICE IN SECRET LIFE OF VICE SHOCKER

By A. Liar, court correspondent

  Ackanomia today was rocked by the news that Malenkai, former Justice
and a pillar of the community, has been leading a seedy double life
as an illicit Coke drinker.

  Malenkai admitted guilt for his heinous crimes when he submitted CFCJ
106 against himself. At the time, he cheekily recommended for himself
a paltry penalty of just ONE DAY in Gaol. 

  After Judge Sevin delivered his verdict and sentence, Malenkai was
removed from the courthouse by the back door, to avoid the crowd of
protestors who had gathered outside the main entrance, waving
placards and shouting "HANG HIM! HANG HIM!" 

  Former colleagues of Malenkai are distancing themselves from the 
hardened criminal tonight. Justice Bascule, who served on the Supreme 
Court with the disgraced lawbreaker, said to The Day Today, "I'm 
saddened to see such a well respected member of the community 
brazenly flouting the rules. I only hope he isn't found guilty of 
dealing."

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 96 21:02:55 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: AFP (/dev/joe)

>The sentence, a full 300% of the suggested sentence, is hardy
>fitting for the crime, especially when we are all probably guilty
>of the same crime.

Absolutely not! I would never DREAM of illegally manipulating a certain 
beverage.

:)

- --      Mike Epstein           "When one door closes another door opens;
      [email-masked]          but we so often look so long and so
  *                      *      regretfully upon the closed door, that
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/   we do not see the ones which open for us."
                                                 --Alexander Graham Bell

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 96 21:08:29 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Acka: Tammany

I'm still playing with the formats.  I just started adding it at the end.
I'm about to redo the whole report, as it can't count the number of players
accurately.

Wayne

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 21:12:27 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: AFP

Phil Ackley wrote:
> 

> So do I.  I remember which President it was that railroaded me in the first
> place.  I remember which president it was was who tried to make all of acka
> dormant and I certainly won't vote for that president.  Of course, by
> granting me an appeal for pardon, or denying Malenkai's he may be able to
> persuade me to reconsider.

You must first grovel, and *make* the appeal before you can be granted
one.  I note the P 1043 is scheduled to pass (if it passes), Thu at 02:02
EDT, and we will get our real Gaoler back, who can describe to us freebirds
how puny snowgod's cell is, and entertain bribes. 

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 21:19:20 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official: IP

The following IP has been filed by this is not a name:
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------

I hereby call an IP on chess piece face in his role as Senator, giving
the same reasoning as the impeachment of fon (namely, leaving the game
for months while holding onto his office).

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

Impeachements are regulated by R 613.  A quorum of 50%, including
vacationers, is required.  Voting ends 3 days from the date of this
post. Send votes to [email-masked]. Please put "IP" in the subject
line.

I note that with the passage of P 1024, this silly step of sending it
to me first is no longer necessary (save this form though, reuseable :))

Assistant Tabulator

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 21:46:51 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CotC stuff

P 1017 passed Friday, which means, among other things that:

1) only 4 days are allowed to appeal a case to the supreme court

2) the appeals for CFCJ 107 and 108 do not carry the 5 point penalty.

3) It caused some adjustments to when things are due, but they are
minor.  I did not "retroactively" adjust any due dates from before
Friday.

4) All changes are on the CotC page.

Clerk of the Courts

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:36:19 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 242 (ThinMan)

chess piece face failed to respond to this CFJ.

Jul 30 00:35 EDT: -10 chess piece face: failed to respond to CFJ 242

ThinMan has been chosen for the following, and  has 3 days to respond.

Clerk of the Courts

Call For Judgement 242
Subject: Last Party Chess Paradox, I promise
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: chess piece face (failed to respond)
2nd Judge: ThinMan (selected Jul 30, 1996, 00:35h New York Time)

Statement:

The first instance of the text, sequentially in the rules, that defines
the Party Chess Piece named King cannot be determined with finality;
thus the legality of actions that manipulate said King cannot be
determined with finality.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

I quote from the infamous R 990, section 3.H:
 
> The King is defined in a seperate section of this rule.

The Rules, by definition, are True. There is no such thing, in nomic, as
a False rule. The best you can do is show how, amongst seemingly
contradictory rules, that one has precedence, or failing that, show how a
rule or rules is paradoxical, as in CFJ 184, or as in obvious cases such
as "this statement is False".

It matters not if they appear False in "real life". For example, we have
a rule (R 729) that states "The earth is flat". If we were to have another
rule which stated: "If the earth is flat, all players receive exactly
one Blue Cross, provided they do not have one", then "Real Life" Truth
would not matter, only Ackanomic Truth.

If we allow the assumption, or the power, to determine that rules can be
False, the game will crash instantly.

Thus, given the Truth of the above rule, what can we say with finality?
That the King is defined somewhere in R 990, but not in section 3. That
is all. There is more to the rule than section 3, so said text is defined
elsewhere in R 990. It cannot, however, be determined with finality what
that text is, exactly. I challenge the Judge to do so, from R 990.

Now, to clean up loose ends in regards to the CFJ's statement:

1) There is no text in the rules before R 990 that even mentions the
Party Chess Piece named King, thus there is no text prior to 990 which
defines it; thus the indeterminite definition in R 990 is the "first
sequentially" in the rules.

2) The King is possibly Protected by R 592:

> All entities and actions in Ackanomic are Protected by default, unless
> the rule(s) which specify or define their behaviour *explicitly*
> state otherwise.

Since the text is indeterminite, there may be no way to tell whether the
definition of the King *explicitly* states otherwise, thus we are done
because we don't know if

> [The King] may not be [...] manipulated except as specified by the Rules.

Thus the legality of certain actions of manipulation are indeterminate.

3) Even if we take a leap of faith and assume it is Protected (and you
certainly can't assume it is *not* Protected, because nothing about
Protection is *explicitly stated*), then you arrive at a similar deadlock:

> [The King] may not be [...] manipulated except as specified by the Rules.

The specification of the King, however, is indeterminate, therefore you
do not know if any action (manipulation) is being done "as specified by
the rules", because that specification is indeterminate.

A verdict of TRUE constitutes a win for the initiator by R 219.
A verdict of FALSE should be accompanied by the text of the definition
of the King from R 990, or the text from a lower numbered rule.

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #144
*******************************