Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #145
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Tuesday, July 30 1996        Volume 01 : Number 145

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:13:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Busy Night

It's been kind of a hectic day, for me, as I found out today I wasn't yet
going to be able to move back into the building I normally live in.  I
expected to be able to move back there today.  FYI, they are installing a
new central air conditioning unit, replacing the improperly wired main
electrical box, installing new windows, working on a problem with the gas,
and, oh, I'm sure there's something else I've forgotten...

Anyway, it seems I have work to do as web-harfer, as acting registrar,
as scorekeeper, and even as president.  I will try to get it done as
quickly as possible.

Registrarness:
I note that we lost 3 players today.  Kelly Martin, pTang1001001sos, an
The Great Old One have left the game, and their undeads are happily
haunting their houses.  

Presidentness:
Since the rule (706) which Malenkai violated has been repealed, I will
GRANT Malenkai's pardon.  I realize there is a problem with another rule
that refers to food and drink, but since following the rules strictly in
this case will lead to not having any players left, in the interest of
keeping the game going we should not enforce violations in this case, and
work on fixing the problem.

Web-Harfer-ness:
I was tempted to use the spelling bee to change "food or drink" to
"fools or drunks" but I will refrain from abusing the power in this way.
It would be difficult to argue that R1022 (5a)(c) allows this.

I have a bunch of rules and proposals and CFJs and stuff to update.

Scorekeeperness:
This will be done alongside all the other work.  I have marked some
score changes in the pointlog already.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:41:25 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
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.

Not only that -- it also makes spamming the mailing list the way to do it.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:53:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal)

> >But I not that Coke Is It! was repealed today.
> 
> And a sad day it is...
> 
> Robert Sevin,
> Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

I note that, since you never really came back from vacation (due to
the problem with rule 457), you should not be wearing the SVH.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:56:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official

> 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).

Yes, pTang had a blue cross, and it was noted on the proposals-by-player
page but not in the registrar's report.  My error.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 01:09:56 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal)

> 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.

Regardless of the truth of the reasoning, this statement is true, because
Rule 710 says of CFCJ's:

  3) Its "statement" shall be "Player X has violated R101", where X is 
  replaced with the name of a registered player.

The above statement clearly does not follow that form.

The judge is free to also consider Robert Sevin's reasoning, and to assign
any penalty he feels is appropriate.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 01:20:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Magic Potato (Simon Marty Harriman)

I'm starting to get like Mohammed was, always forgetting the potato on Monday.
Anyway, this week Simon Marty Harriman has the potato, so it's not too likely
to score any points anyway.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:53:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Score Update

Presidentness:
Malenkai has now submitted and had accepted 10 proposals while he
had a Blue Cross (actually, 11 now).  For these 10 proposals:
  912, 914, 922, 924, 944, 1017, 1022, 1023, 1024, 1025
I award Malenkai a Silver Stripe.

Registrarness:
I note that Kelly Martin left the game 3 minutes after "Undead Whoops"
passed, which fixed a glitch in the undead creation rule.  Good timing.

Scorekeeperness:
First, I note that in the results from the witchhunts, the log entries
all show the same time, but the vote results show different times.  I
believe the different times are correct, and the same times are likely
a cut-and-paste error.  This is important, because...

After the first witchhunt, snowgod was at -61 points and his score was
raised to zero.

After Proposal 1015, snowgod became the gnome buddy.  After
the witchhunt results (P1025 was the next to complete its
voting period) Wayne became gnome buddy again.  On P1025 the
gnome's no vote should be a yes vote, but it doesn't change
the results.

I have removed the -5 /dev/joe score for appealing CFCJ 108, since
P1017 passed.

Here are the current scores, and the last scores for some
dead players (actually, not quite current, because some
more proposals' voting periods have ended).

Score	Ackanomic Name   Status  Real Name
- -----	--------------      ---  -------------
149	/dev/joe             A   (Joseph DeVincentis) 
96	Malenkai             A   (Randy Hall) 
65	this is not a name   A   (Mike Epstein) 
42	Techno               I   (Jerome Herrman) 
40	Bascule              I   (Matt Black) 
25	Mellon               I   (Niklas Mellin)
20	mr cwm               A   (Eric Murray) 
15	Robin Hood           I   (R Shaw) 
15	ThinMan              A   (John Bollinger) 
12	Brinjal              I   (Simon Clarke) 
11	De'ghew              A   (John Spickes) 
10	Habeous Corpus       A   (Ed Graham)
0	fon                  V   (Adrian Smith) 
0	Simon Marty Harriman V   (Andy Swan) 
0	Niccolo Flychuck     I   (Uri Bruck) 
- -3	Robert Sevin         V   (Mitchell Harding) 
- -7	snowgod              A   (Phil Ackley) 
- -10	chess piece face     V   (Paul Swan) 
- -24	Pascal               I   (Jason Reed) 
- -33	Calvin N Hobbes      I   (Thierry Joffrain)
- -34	Wayne                A   (Wayne Sheppard) 
10 [%]	Mohammed             D   (Jason Orendorff) 
41 [%]	Kelly Martin         D   (Kelly Martin) 
36 [%]	pTang1001001sos      D   (Mark Nau)   
- -4 [%]	The Great Old One    D   (Sean Crystal) 

Web-Harfer:
I'm tired.  The proposals are marked Accepted or Rejected but the
updating of rules will have to wait until tomorrow.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:33:00 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: AFP

At 9:12 PM 7/29/96, Malenkai wrote:
>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

I will not grovel, nor will I make an Appeal for pardon, because I know the
rightiousness of my "crime" and I am sure that the Supreme Court Will see
the light.  However, even if they don't, I don't need some silly
president's pardon to make me feel better....

What's seven days in a luxurious Gaol cell after being burned at the stake
4 times?

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 00:38:08 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Inventor: Blueprint Destroyed? 

For fear of seeing the the angry citizens of Ackanomic closing in on my
laboratory carrying torches and chanting loudly, I am destroying the
blueprint for the Lovely Green Raincoat.  I will rethink the idea, and
create an even lovlier, possibly greener, raincoat at sometime in the near
future.

If for any reason the blueprint cannot be destroyed, I shall lock it up in
a vault and promise to never build the hideous device.

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 00:55:42 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Ambassador: Internomic 

Okay,

After the loss of Kelly's internomic list, /dev/joe was kind enough to
create a new list for Internomic Play at [email-masked].
Anyone is welcome to subscribe, though only liasons will be allowed to vote
(when the time comes).  Anyone else will have sort of an "observer" status.

for help on subscribing to the internomic list send email to
[email-masked] with help in the body of the message, or ask
the Postmaster.

Hopefully, now that we have this shiny new (and speedy I might add) list
play can actually begin.

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 01:13:21 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Nobs? 

I note that with Kelly and pTang's departure from the game, the Nobs have
become defunt.

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:07:08 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley) 
Subject: [none]

/dev/joe wrote (while likely under the influence of bribery :))

>Presidentness:
>Since the rule (706) which Malenkai violated has been repealed, I will
>GRANT Malenkai's pardon.  I realize there is a problem with another rule
>that refers to food and drink, but since following the rules strictly in
>this case will lead to not having any players left, in the interest of
>keeping the game going we should not enforce violations in this case, and
>work on fixing the problem.

I am formally petitioning the Supreme Court to issue an Act Of Justice
nullifying (sp?) the presidential decision to Grant Malenkai's Appeal For
Pardon.  Such callous, and intentional lawbreaking as Malenkai's should not
go unpunished.  Though the rule that Malenkai was in violation of has been
repealed, it was in full effect when Malenkai partook of his carbonated
beverage.

I believe Bascule said it best when he wrote "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."

snowgod
not afraid to serve time in the Gaol for something he believes in

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:09:17 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Official 

/dev/joe wrote (while likely under the influence of bribery :))

>Presidentness:
>Since the rule (706) which Malenkai violated has been repealed, I will
>GRANT Malenkai's pardon.  I realize there is a problem with another rule
>that refers to food and drink, but since following the rules strictly in
>this case will lead to not having any players left, in the interest of
>keeping the game going we should not enforce violations in this case, and
>work on fixing the problem.

I am formally petitioning the Supreme Court to issue an Act Of Justice
nullifying (sp?) the presidential decision to Grant Malenkai's Appeal For
Pardon.  Such callous, and intentional lawbreaking as Malenkai's should not
go unpunished.  Though the rule that Malenkai was in violation of has been
repealed, it was in full effect when Malenkai partook of his carbonated
beverage.

I believe Bascule said it best when he wrote "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."

snowgod
not afraid to serve time in the Gaol for something he believes in

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 02:14:22 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal)

>> Robert Sevin,
>> Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat
>
>I note that, since you never really came back from vacation (due to
>the problem with rule 457), you should not be wearing the SVH.

Oh goody, I so much enjoyed the Robert Sevins admiration when he "returned
from vacation" the first time, and now we will get to see a second
admiration by the very same Robert Sevin.  The best part is, he get's to
keep his Silly Vacation Hat for longer, just like he wanted, although I
suppose he never really had it in the first place.

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 02:54:33 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Inventor: Making a gadget 

I am building a gadget.  I have choosen the blueprint fro The Reall Big
Blue Thing That Doesn't Do Too Much, Really from my collection, and it is
now being made.  The process will take three days.  Possibly longer
depending on what happens while I am in the Gaol.

snowgod
still working on the better idiot

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 04:50:39 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: IP cpf

In the metter of the impeachment of chess peice face from the office of
senator (which seat, one of mine?) I vote YES!

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 08:51:50 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Scores

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> Scorekeeperness:
> First, I note that in the results from the witchhunts, the log entries
> all show the same time, but the vote results show different times.  I
> believe the different times are correct, and the same times are likely
> a cut-and-paste error.  This is important, because...
> 

This is correct. I note that if my adoption/scoring rewrite goes through,
this confusion can be eliminated, and things will be scored in the 
order they are sent to the public forum (so we can all sit at home 
and speculate in the PFBond market)

Malenkai
Busy night as well - but FREE. Perhaps a tomato vendor should set up a
booth outside snowgod's gaol cell :)

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 04:58:45 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Misc: Scores

>Malenkai
>Busy night as well - but FREE. Perhaps a tomato vendor should set up a
>booth outside snowgod's gaol cell :)

Busy night here too.  Gotta bunch of business to take care of before going
to Gaol.  Tough work saving the entire game of internomic from collapse :).

Tomato vendor, eh?  I don't recall making a tomato add on for my vending
machines.  Maybe I oughta work on that while I'm in Gaol.

snowgod

Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - Going To Gaol for a Week
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 08:24:35 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: Tammany 

Malenkai wrote:
>I note that a couple of the recent proposals had Tammany votes. I would
>like to know the initiator and amount of these bribes, just to see who
>feels the need to buy votes to shoehorn dubious material past the voting
>process.

Wayne did include these data in his Tabulation reports.

>I would also like to make sure the finances are updated correctly.

From the Financier's log:
snowgod made A$ 25 bribes to Tammany on proposals 1015 and 1016.
this is not a name made an A$ 25 bribe to Tammany on proposal 1018.

If there were any other bribes then they slipped past me.

ThinMan
Financier

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:33:45 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 109 (Brinjal) 

>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.

If R 706 were still in force, then this CFCJ might have some weight.  However,
it was repealed, effective yesterday.  I am suspicious that Robert Sevin
waited to submitted his judgement until he saw the voting results.

On the other hand, I agree that the alleged effects of CFJ 113 / R 115 are
absurd.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 11:32:24 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: Festival

When is the Festival over?  I have some proposals that I'm sure people
want to be distributed.

Wayne

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 12:11:34 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 242 Verdict

CFJ 242 has been judged FALSE.

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.

ThinMan's Reasoning:

This court finds Malenkai's arguments that the Rules are "true" to be
unsatisfactory.  The Rules that permit and regulate judgements such as
this one stipulate that Rules may be unclear or contradictory, the
second of which, at least, requires that some rule or part of a rule be
untrue in some way.

Moreover, Malenkai seems to be playing "fast and loose" with what he
considers the scope of his truth argument.  When he relies on precedence
arguments he can only be referring to the truth of the ruleset as a whole;
when he talks about contradictory rules he can only be talking about
individual rules; and when he talks about R 990 he is talking about one
single provision of one rule.

The truth of the Ruleset overall is axiomatic.  When and wherever this axiom
breaks down we have a paradox win.  However, the truth of individual rules
does not necessarilly follow from the truth of the ruleset -- as Malenkai
points out himself, we have rules the preserve the overall truth of the
ruleset by resolving conflicts between individual rules.  It is even more
the case that the truth of individual provisions of rules are not guaranteed
to be true.

Malenkai cites part of R990.3.H in his reasoning.  I think it is appropriate
to supplement that with the rest of R990.3.H: "The only exception to section
3 of this rule is the Party Chess Piece name King."  As it did in CFJ 240,
this court interprets that provision to mean that the King is, in fact, an
exception to R990.3.  The text is unclear on exactly which provisions the
King is an exception to, but CFJ 240 establishes that the King is not an
exception to "The only exception [...] is the [...] King."

Although it seems unusual that the King should be an exception to a provision
that otherwise has no application, this court finds that to be the most
consistent interpretation.  It is the determination of this court that the
King must be an exception to "The King is defined in a seperate section of 
this
rule," as allowed by R990.3.H.  Thus the rules do not require that the King
be defined in R990, and the only definition of the King occurs in R994.  The
statement submitted for judgement is false.

As an added note, this judge acknowledges that he has for the most part
sidestepped Malenkai's argument founded on the "truth" of the rules.  I find
his argument unconvincing, and submit that if there were no language in R 990
allowing the "definition clause" of R990 to be ignored, then there would be
a paradox in that the definition clause would say something untrue about the
rule that contained it.  R 990 clearly does not contain a definition of the
King, and even without the "exception clause," I reject Malenkai's line of
reasoning that demands an indeterminate definition.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 12:30:43 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Festival

According to /dev/joe's interpretation, which has not been challenged,
the Festival started at the time of my post indicating the problem,
which was 07/25, 00:55 EDT, indicating the Festival ended 07/30, 00:55 EDT

Malenkai
Festive (even with False on CFJ 242)

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 12:44:48 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1055

Proposal 1055 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:48 EDT 1996
Coming and Going
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

{{[962.2 largely removes the intent of 859 and renders it useless, except
in regards to 691. 962.2 does not claim precedence to have its intended
effect with regards to 691]}}

Repeal Rule 859, "Fixing Leaving the Game and Coming Back in a Different
		  Cycle"
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Amend R 691, "No Deadbeat Judges", to remove all occurrances of the
following sentence:

"The ex-player may rejoin the game later, if he or she desires, with the
 same score he or she had when he or she left."

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 12:44:51 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1056

Proposal 1056 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:51 EDT 1996
I Should Be Allowed to Think
/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)

Repeal rule 729, "Ackanomic Middle Ages".

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 12:44:45 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1054

Proposal 1054 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:44 EDT 1996
Common Sense for the CSRR
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend Rule 695/2  "Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy"
to replace the text of section (d) with the following: 

      "(d) The CSRR shall distribute CSR's publicly, and assign each one
a unique number. After a CSR is distributed, any player may officially
object to it by publishing his or her objection publicly. If less than
2 players object to the CSR within a 3 day review period immediately
following its distribution, then the changes it suggests will be made at
the end of the review period. The CSRR shall publish a notice that the
changes have been made." 

{{[right now it seems like a CSR is a proposal that requires almost
unamimous support.  Also, I wanted to make it so that a single individual
could not just veto every CSRR.  Putting the period down to 3 days puts
it somewhere between spelling bee and a real proposal, where I believe
it should be. Perhaps people will use it more, rather than just go
for cheap proposal points.]}}

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 12:44:40 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1053

Proposal 1053 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:40 EDT 1996
Gate Money
snowgod  (Phil Ackley)

{{ each player shall recieve 25 points and A$100 once for each occasion
that he was burned at the stake}}

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 13:20:22 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official: Witchhunt

I call a witchhunt on /dev/joe for the following:

>Proposal 1056 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:51 EDT 1996
>I Should Be Allowed to Think
>/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)
>
>Repeal rule 729, "Ackanomic Middle Ages".

It was sent in a public message, although not by /dev/joe, but by his 
direction. In addition, he claims that he should be able to think, even 
when such thinking is Heresy, and thus implies that the earth is not 
Round, when, of course, it is.

(In addition, he's cheesily stealing a song title. :-)

- --      Mike Epstein            "The ships hung in the sky in
      [email-masked]           much the same way that bricks don't."
  *                      *                           --Douglas Adams
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 12:47:58 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: Official: Witchhunt 

this is not a name wrote:
>I call a witchhunt on /dev/joe for the following:
>
>>Proposal 1056 - Tue Jul 30 12:44:51 EDT 1996
>>I Should Be Allowed to Think
>>/dev/joe  (Joseph DeVincentis)
>>
>>Repeal rule 729, "Ackanomic Middle Ages".
>
>It was sent in a public message, although not by /dev/joe, but by his 
>direction. In addition, he claims that he should be able to think, even 
>when such thinking is Heresy, and thus implies that the earth is not 
>Round, when, of course, it is.

It is debatable whether the title assigned to a proposal can be interpreted
in any way whatsoever.  It is also unclear who assigned the title to that
proposal.  It is even unclear whether the distribution of a proposal authored
by /dev/joe can be construed as his stating anything in a public message.
Surely the case is too murky for /dev/joe to be found a witch.

On the other hand, please note the last sentence of the quoted material above.
As tinan clearly states there his belief that the Earth is _round_, I take
great satisfaction in the following:

I call for a witchhunt against this is not a name!

We all knew you were really a heretic at heart, tinan.  "He protesteth too
loudly," I always said.  BURN THE WITCH!

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 13:04:40 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: Classified 

Defunct political party seeks bright-eyed, idealistic new member
for renewed party life.  Lack of education or instinctive
adherence to instruction not a liability.  Keen analytical
abilities, sharp wit, and strong argemtation all plusses.
Nice legs a definate plus.  Contact [email-masked]
or [email-masked] if interested.

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 14:05:10 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1057

Proposal 1057 - Tue Jul 30 14:05:07 EDT 1996
Name Game
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 570, "Player Names", to read, in full:

           {{[this is my third hack at the name rules. I should have done
             all of this the first time, but... Basically, I consolidating
             R 570, R 571, and R 604 into one rule, and making 3 char
             names like fon's legal]}}

           Each player will have an Official Ackanomic Name. The Name must
           consist of at least three, and no more than twenty alphanumerical 
           characters. All nomic business must use the Name when referring to
           a specific player. 

           Players must choose a Name when they register. No player may
           choose a Name that is already in use (or otherwise would be
           in violation of R703). Players without a Name must choose a
           Name within one week.

           A new player may not choose the name of previous player, or the
           previous name of a current player, unless they are the player
           who held that name previously. e.g., no new player could take
           the name pTang1001001sos unless they were really the Mark Nau
           who held that name previously. It is a duty of the Registrar
           to make sure the player's chosen name complies with this Rule,
           and the Registrar has the final right to approve or deny the
           chosen name. This clause takes precedence over any mutable rule
           which would deny the Registrar these duties.

           A player may change his or her Ackanomic Name provided the
           new name complies with the above rules, and any other rule, as
           if the player were choosing the new name as a new player. The
           player must publically announce their old name, new name, and
           real name, with a short explanation. The Registrar shall record
           the change. 

           When a player changes their Ackanomic name, all Ackanomic
           business (for example CFJ's and Proposals) will be changed to
           follow their new name. 
       
           Alphanumerical characters are defined for this rule to 
           include alphanumeric characters and  
           (! @ # $ % ^ & * ' " , . ^ ! : ; / \ | - _ = + space).
           Excluded are the characters < > ( ) { } [ ].

           [This rules justifies the common practice that some players
            have name like Calvin N Hobbes, Robert Sevin and allow names
            like /dev/joe and De'ghew. Yes, the ' ' or space is not an
            alphanumeric character :)]

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

Repeal Rule 571, "Changing Player Names"

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

Repeal Rule 604, "After a Name Change"

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 14:05:55 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1060

Proposal 1060 - Tue Jul 30 14:05:49 EDT 1996
Swingers Wish They Could Play Around III
ThinMan  (John Bollinger)

Rule 992 shall be amended in the following ways:

In Section 1, Part A, the space character shall be removed from
"Chess- Umpire." 

In Section 1, Part B, "Weight=1" shall be replaced with "Weight=0."

[There is a problem with the weight calculation that involves the fact
that a King's material value is undefined.  I will fix that by defining the
King's weight to be zero, but then I don't want a Swinger to lose Weight
simply by placing his King on the Board.  The rule already handles zero
weights, so this will not produce a problem.]

In Section 1, Part C, each instance of "minimum Weight" shall be replaced
with "minimum Absolute Weight."

[This will greatly clarify things.  Upon first reading the rule, I thought
that "minimum Weight" was a quantity whose value would be defined in the
rule.]

Section 3 shall be deleted.

[Section 3 is empty, having contained only double-curly-braced text.  The
numeral was not enclosed in the braces, however, so it is now hanging out
there, all lonely at the bottom of the rule.]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jul 96 14:05:18 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1058

Proposal 1058 - Tue Jul 30 14:05:17 EDT 1996
Swingers Wish They Could Play Around I
ThinMan  (John Bollinger)

Rule 990 shall be amended in the following ways:

The last sentence of Section 2, Part A, shall be replaced with: "Whenever
the rules refer to pieces as being owned by, or property of, a Swinger, the
implied meaning is that they are owned by or property of the Office of the
Swinger."

[As long as I am adressing the more serious problems of R 990, I thought
I would clean up the grammar a little, too.]

The words "this rules" in Section 2, Part A, shall be changed to "this or
other applicable rules."

The words "this rule" in section 2, Part B, shall be changed to "this or
another applicable rule."

[PartyChessPieceDef rules may define methods for capturing pieces other
than those in R 990]

A period shall be inserted directly after the initial "C" of Section 2,
Part C.  The terms "on-board" and "off-board" in Section 2, Part C, shall
each be placed inside double quotation marks [as in this sentence].

Sections 4 and 5 shall be deleted.  [Their functionality is merged into
the rewrite of section 3, below.]

All of Section 3 shall be replaced with the text between the next two "--"
symbols:
- --
3. PartyChessPieceDef rules
 A. A rule is a PartyChessPieceDef rule iff it meets the following criteria:
  i.   It defines exactly one type of piece that can be purchased and used
       in the game of Party Chess.
  ii.  It includes in its title the words "Creation of a PartyChessPiece,"
       followed by the name of the piece it creates.
  iii. It unambiguously defines the legal moves that the piece may make.
       That is, it defines to which empty squares on the board the piece
       may move.
  iv.  It defines a material value for the piece.
  v.   It defines a non-space ASCII character to represent the piece, and
       this character is different from those that represent all the other
       types of pieces.
 B. Unless otherwise stipulated by the relevant PartyChessPieceDef rule, the
    legal moves for each piece are defined relative to that piece's current
    position on the board, and may depend on the positions of other pieces
    on the board.
 C. A PartyChessPieceDef rule may define means different from those defined
    in this rule by which the defined piece may capture opponents' pieces.
    If it does, then this rule defers to that PartyChessPieceDef rule with
    regard to capturing.
 D. A PartyChessPieceDef rule may define conditions under which a piece is
    promoted or demoted.  If it does not, then there are no conditions
    under which the piece it defines is promoted or demoted.
 E. A PartyChessPieceDef rule may define conditions under which a piece may
    skip over other pieces during its movement.  If it does not, then there
    are no conditions under which the piece it defines may skip over other
    pieces during its movement.
 F. Section 3A of this rule defers to the rule entitled "Creation of a
    PartyChessPiece King."  This rule takes precedence over all
    PartyChessPieceDef rules, except where it explicitly defers.

4. Capturing
 A. A Capture may be performed by PartyChessPiece (1) if another piece (2)
    occupies a square on the board to which (1) could otherwise legally move.
    The Swinger that owns (1) performs a capture on his turn by moving (1)
    to the square occupied by (2) and removing (2) from the board, adding (2)
    to his own collection of off-board pieces.  Piece (2) is then said to
    have been captured.
 B. Section 4A notwithstanding, it is forbidden for a piece to capture a
    friendly piece.

5. There are eight directions in terms of which all moves are defined.
 A. Horizontal: A movement from one square to another one in the same row.
    There are two horizontal directions.
 B. Vertical: A movement from one square to another in the same column.
    There are two vertical directions.
 C. Diagonal: A movement from one square to another such that the number of
    rows moved is the same as the number of columns moved.  There are four
    diagonal directions.
 D. A primitive movement is a movement from one square to another in a
    horizontal, vertical, or diagonal direction.
 E. Every legal move must be defined as a combination of one or more
    primitive movements.  When a piece makes a move, it a legal move, it
    follows the path defined by the primitive movements that make up that
    move.

6. Various definitions
 A. In the context of a Party Chess piece, the capital letters R and C
    represent the row and column, respectively, of the square that that
    piece occupies.
 B. The symbols DestR and DestC represent the the row and column of a
    destination square.
 C. The symbol SQn, where n is a positive integer, specifies the square
    n squares distant from a piece's current square in a given direction.
    Which such symbols are meaningful depends on the piece's current position
    on the board.
 D. The symbol dR represents the absolute value of DestR-R.
 E. The symbol dC represents the absolute value of DestC-C, where the
    difference is computed as the difference of the ASCII codes corresponding
    to DestC and C.
 F. The symbols /AND/, /OR/, /XOR/, and /NOT/, in this and all other rules
    governing Party Chess, represent the logical operators AND, OR, XOR, and
    NOT, respectively.

7. All pieces are Protected.

- --

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #145
*******************************