Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #160
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Wednesday, August 7 1996       Volume 01 : Number 160

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

Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:21:22 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 256 Verdict

Malenkai wrote:

>John Bollinger wrote:
>> 
>> I hereby appeal CFJ 256 to the Supreme Court.
>> 
>> Call For Judgement 256
>>   Subject: Contractual Paradox
>> Initiator: ThinMan
>
>[lots of arguments snipped]
>
>It seems like ThinMan's agrument hinges on the fact that the "conflicting"
>language is in seperate numerical sections of the rule, as opposed to
>the same paragraph or sentence, or joined with a word such as "unless"
>or "except".

My argument in no way depends on the language being in seperate sections.
The same argument would hold if the two provisions were successive sentences
in the same section.  My argument _is_ that an "unless," "except," or the
like is necessary for the Rule to function as it was (probably) intended.

>That is unfortunate, as it seems like I will soon have to write nomic
>rules like management reports or legal documents.

From some perspectives, Ackanomic rules *are* legal documents.

>The issue of precedence within a rule has not yet been addressed, and I
>never thought it would need to be.  In any case, this case is an 
>opportunity to possibly set a precedent.

The issue of precedence within a rule is a matter of Game Custom.
Specifically, there is no internal precedence.  Consult CFJ 191.  The
fact that neither your reasoning there or mine allows for internal
precedence shows (not establishes, shows) that it is custom that all
provisions of a Rule have equal weight with regard to precedence.

>I personally find myself agreeing with Niccolo in this dispute, as it is
>obvious that section (iii) is a qualifier or exception.

That is not _obvious_.  In fact, without language that makes section (iii)
a qualifier, it is not one.  It was likely intended to be a qualifier, but
we cannot viably base our rule interpretations on something so ephemeral as
intent.

>  I wish ThinMan
>had been consistent and used the same strict-constrution of the language
>when judging CFJ 213 as he is putting forth here :)

I think my judgement on CFJ 213 was fully in conformance with the level
of strict-construction that I am putting forth here.  You're just sore ;-)

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 19:32:18 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Invoking R 563

I wish to invoke R 563 in the matter of CFJ 256.  Furthermore, I wish to
make this reasoning public.  This reasoning, shall read, in full:

Throught the argument in the public forum after the verdict has been
handed down, it has been established that the rules are silent, and/or
unclear on the matter of resolving the internal precedence conflict of
R 514.  The issue of extant game custom has come up, and there has been
some question as to what, if any, such custom exists.  I wish to bring
to the Court's attention implicit game custom established in the reasoning
of CFJ 240 by Judge ThinMan:

> In my judgement, it is in the Spirit of the Game that a reasonable
> reading of the Rules that does not produce a paradox is preferable to
> an otherwise similarly reasonable one that does.

My only request is that the Court consider this implicit game custom, in
accordance with R 215, when reaching a verdict.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:24:05 -0800
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Beer and Spirit at Festivals 

In an earlier post, I promised that if elected I would legislate free Beer
and Spirits at all Festivals and Witch Burnings.  I now regret posting such
a rash statement.

What I meant to say was this...

If I am elected President, free ackanomic beverages will be available for
everyone at all public gatherings.  All Parades, Witch Burnings, Festivals,
etc will be catered by Frobozz Magic Beverage Company (A subsiderary of
Frobozz Magic Metal), who will provide fine Ales, Wine, Mixed Drinks, and
non-alchoholic beverages for those who are so inclined.  Of course, I will
request that COKE not be served anywhere within the boundries of Ackanomic.

I will personally Bank Roll this beverage service, so that the treasury is
not drained by paying for the liquid refershment.

All of this is just a small part of my program to provide more fun than you
can shake a stick at for every single player of ackanomic.  If at any time
a player is unsatisfied with any fun recieved, I will refund their vote,
which they may then use to vote against me in any future election.  So what
have you got to lose???

VOTE SNOWGOD FOR PRESIDENT!

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 20:28:30 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Beer and Spirit at Festivals

Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> In an earlier post, I promised that if elected I would legislate free Beer
> and Spirits at all Festivals and Witch Burnings.  I now regret posting such
> a rash statement.
> 
> What I meant to say was this...
> 
> If I am elected President, free ackanomic beverages will be available for
> everyone at all public gatherings.  All Parades, Witch Burnings, Festivals,
> etc will be catered by Frobozz Magic Beverage Company (A subsiderary of
> Frobozz Magic Metal), who will provide fine Ales, Wine, Mixed Drinks, and
> non-alchoholic beverages for those who are so inclined.  Of course, I will
> request that COKE not be served anywhere within the boundries of Ackanomic.

These entities are still Protected.  Throw him in Gaol for just 
*mentioning* them!

Phoebe for President !

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 21:10:01 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: vote for ME!

Tired of frivilous paradox CFJs every 3 minutes?  Vote YES for for the
Chartreuse Goose!  It won't eliminate them, it'll just make 'em more
fun!

Tired of a scoring system that only rewards those who write mountains 
of proposals with little chance of failure?  In so doing, stifles 
creative (risky) proposals, and encourages frivilous paradox CFJs every
three minutes as an alternative (only) chance to win.  

Vote YES for Syzygy! Will it be easy? No, but its an *alternative*.
Support alternative ways to win, give people a long term winning objective
to strive for!  Open the door for alternative winning conditions!

Malenkai
Campaigning (hey, where's *my* campaign manager?)

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 21:57:15 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 254 Verdict

CFJ 254 has been judged FALSE

Clerk of the Courts

Call For Judgement 254
  Subject: Gaolgod
Initiator: snowgod
    Judge: De'ghew (declined to judge)
2nd Judge: Habeous Corpus (selected Aug 05, 1996, 19:17h New York Time)

Statement:

snowgod was released fromthe Gaol as soon as the Supreme Court overturned
CFCJ 107

snowgod's reasoning:

[none - CotC]

Habeous Corpus' reasoning:

The first to hit me was that the Acting Gaoler did not have the authority
to release snowgod early,  even with the Supreme Court ruling or even if
the president had pardoned em. Rule 712 states that one of the priveleges
of the Gaoler is to release prisoners early.  It does not state whether
this privelege is tied to bribes or any other reason to release a
prisoner before eir sentence is completed.  Sinc Rule 609 says that an
Acting Gaoler has NO priveleges granted the Gaoler,  e cannot release a
prisoner early.  Period.

The next thing that struck me  over the head was,  to the best of my
recollection,  that while the Supreme Court did overturn the guilty
verdit {TRUE},  there was no mention in the ruling about releasing
snowgod.  As the Gaol is a Protected Entity,  I'm not sure that such
wording in the ruling would have had any validity anyway.

Therefor,  I find that the statement is FALSE.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 20:57:57 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: CFJ 256 Verdict 

Malenkai wrote:

>Throught the argument in the public forum after the verdict has been
>handed down, it has been established that the rules are silent, and/or
>unclear on the matter of resolving the internal precedence conflict of
>R 514.  The issue of extant game custom has come up, and there has been
>some question as to what, if any, such custom exists.  I wish to bring
>to the Court's attention implicit game custom established in the reasoning
>of CFJ 240 by Judge ThinMan:
>
>> In my judgement, it is in the Spirit of the Game that a reasonable
>> reading of the Rules that does not produce a paradox is preferable to
>> an otherwise similarly reasonable one that does.
>
>My only request is that the Court consider this implicit game custom, in
>accordance with R 215, when reaching a verdict.

Malenkai makes an excellent observation, and I urge the Court to give it
due consideration.  It is my firm opinion, however, that Mr. Flychuck's
reading of R 514 is not as reasonable as mine by some distance, thus the
implicit game custom, or at least game spirit, that Malenkai points out
is not, in my judgement, relevant to the case.  Indeed, even Malenkai
refers to the situation as a precedence conflict, which is not consistent
with Mr. Flychuck's written remarks (although it is consistent with his
verdict, as I have pointed out elsewhere).

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 22:46:44 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CotC

I have moved the CotC page to:
 
http://www.itw.com/~malenkai/ackacotc.htm

It has not changed.  Since it is probably at the top of your
bookmark list, you will have to change your links :)

I have asked /dev/joe to relink the link on the main page to
the new location.  Right now there is a stub that will lead to the
new location.

I wonder if there will ever be a single day where there are no CFJs
in the queue?

Clerk of the Courts

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 23:34:57 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 261 (Brinjal)

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

Clerk of the Courts

Call For Judgement 261
  Subject: Scientific Inquiry
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Brinjal (selected Aug 06, 1996, 23:30h New York Time)

Statement:

If a Blueprint is judged to create a Gadget who's behaviour could
*potentially* break the Rules (or it could *possibly* be used to break
the rules), the Blueprint is destroyed in accordance with R 594.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

R 594 is not clear. I think it should be. In particular, the rendering
of "conflict" in R 594 (ii) should be clarified.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:49:36 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 261 (Brinjal)

> Call For Judgement 261
> Statement:
> If a Blueprint is judged to create a Gadget who's behaviour could
> *potentially* break the Rules (or it could *possibly* be used to break
> the rules), the Blueprint is destroyed in accordance with R 594.

I had been wondering a little about that too.  More extreme, though, is a
possible situation with the Really Big Blue Thing That Doesn't Do Too Much,
Really.  What happens if the really big blue thing is used on a player
named fon when fno, ofn, nof, onf, and nfo are all illegal names (even
if 3 letter names are allowed, which they aren't currently)?  The
blueprint says it changes any player's name to another name that is an
anagram of the original, but it is possible for all other such names
to be illegal.  For that matter, what happens if it is used on a player
named ffff?

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 23:50:42 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 261 (Brinjal)

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> > Call For Judgement 261
> > Statement:
> > If a Blueprint is judged to create a Gadget who's behaviour could
> > *potentially* break the Rules (or it could *possibly* be used to break
> > the rules), the Blueprint is destroyed in accordance with R 594.
> 
> I had been wondering a little about that too.  More extreme, though, is a
> possible situation with the Really Big Blue Thing That Doesn't Do Too Much,
> Really.  What happens if the really big blue thing is used on a player
> named fon when fno, ofn, nof, onf, and nfo are all illegal names (even
> if 3 letter names are allowed, which they aren't currently)?  The
> blueprint says it changes any player's name to another name that is an
> anagram of the original, but it is possible for all other such names
> to be illegal.  For that matter, what happens if it is used on a player
> named ffff?

Exactly.  But I wanted to wait until AFTER the auction to bring that
specific case up :(

Malenkai
Chief Cheese (commission going downhill)

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

Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 23:54:31 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 261 (Brinjal)

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> > Call For Judgement 261
> > Statement:
> > If a Blueprint is judged to create a Gadget who's behaviour could
> > *potentially* break the Rules (or it could *possibly* be used to break
> > the rules), the Blueprint is destroyed in accordance with R 594.
> 
> I had been wondering a little about that too.  More extreme, though, is a
> possible situation with the Really Big Blue Thing That Doesn't Do Too Much,
> Really.  What happens if the really big blue thing is used on a player
> named fon when fno, ofn, nof, onf, and nfo are all illegal names (even
> if 3 letter names are allowed, which they aren't currently)?  The
> blueprint says it changes any player's name to another name that is an
> anagram of the original, but it is possible for all other such names
> to be illegal.  For that matter, what happens if it is used on a player
> named ffff?

I also point out, as a followup to my previous post, that I don't 
believe the Gadget is destroyed, once the Blueprint is.  At least I
didn't see where the rules say that.

I have submitted the fix.

Malenkai
Comittee of Scientific Enquiry and Integrity

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #160
*******************************