Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #188
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Thursday, August 22 1996       Volume 01 : Number 188

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 08:59:08 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Blue Crosses

On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> 
> 5) I am awarding Niccolo Flychuck a Blue Cross.
> 
> As snowgod pointed out, Niccolo's hard work on Party Chess has finally
> paid off.  All we need is a Chess-Umpire.  I also thought the Oztma
> cards were cool, and am anxiously awaiting Eleusis.
> 
> Malenkai
> ProConsul
>
Thanks,
As far as Eleusis is concerned. I have not forgotten it. Previously I
tried to create some playing cards first. Then I came up with the Games&
Contests thing because I thought the duels would need it (both to be RFCd
adain real soon), and eventually will probably create a variant or two of
Eleusis that way.
The funny thing is, that my ackanomic life is beginning to look a lot like
my extra-nomic life, medium to long range projects that overlap somewhat -
I wonder what the singnificance of that is.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 09:17:37 +0200
From: Niklas Mellin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1138

[email-masked] wrote:
> Proposal 1138 - Tue Aug 20 23:41:38 EDT 1996
> Jeremiah,  The Rather Average Looking Bullfrog
> Habeous Corpus  (Ed Graham)

[etc.]

In the next mail he also wrote:
> 
> Proposal 1138 - Tue Aug 20 23:41:55 EDT 1996
> Fixing a Loophole I almost Surfed but thought better of
> Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

[etc.]

Now we have 2 proposals with the same number, can you please
clearify.

Mellon,
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 03:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Dear Diary (Day 1) ...

And so I woke up today in an unfamiliar but comfortable bed, and
looked around to find myself in a small, sparsely furnished, but
nevertheless cozy little cottage. "It's really happened," I thought:
"here I am, in my new house, in Ackanomia." I sprang from the bed and
walked out the front door. It was a beautiful, crisp morning, and I
was suddenly filled with a sense of purpose.

"I think first I should decorate the place a little - and choose a
name for it, perhaps. But wait: I see I already have some mail." Two
official-looking envelopes with red borders were peeking out of my
mailbox. "Hmmm. Well, those can wait for today. But, I think now the
*first* thing I should do is thoroughly read the current set of rules
and make sure I really understand them. And then maybe I'll take a
little walk: get some air, maybe see if anything's going on at the
Market. That sounds like a good plan."

Hours later, the sun was starting to descend, and I had yet to leave
my cottage. Instead, I was seated at the dining room table. The table
was covered in sheets of canary-yellow paper containing scrawled notes
in an increasingly cramped hand. The floor around me was littered with
Coke cans, their emptiness attested to by the bleariness of the gaze
that I frequently directed at the massive tome that contained the
current ruleset, perched on the far end of the table so as avoid
splattering its pages with the flecks of ink that were occasionally
propelled from the now-roughened nib of my fountain pen (with which I
was currently attempting to draw a hierarchy flowchart on the back of
a flyer advertising portraitures).

By the time the light started growing dim, and I realized that I had
yet to locate the light switches in my new home, I stopped and laid
down my pen. I considered my chaotic notes for a moment, and then
gathered them up, stuffed them in my fireplace, and lit a match. By
the brief light of the flames I was able to locate the telephone. I
picked up the receiver, dialed zero, and said:

"Hello, operator? Could you please get me a mentor?"

- -- 
breadbox
[email-masked]
Wearing a Look of Confusion

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 09:56:19 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Jason Reed) 
Subject: [none]

>> >What is going on here? Why are you describing the Swedish language, and
>> >why do you call it Harfish? :-)
>>
>> Er, this is similar to sweedish? I wasn't aware of that. I just picked some
>> of my favorite phonemes from english, latin, esperanto, etc. Harfish is
>> from 'Harfy', a term introduced by a really really old proposal that tried
>> to make certain rules 'harfy'.
>> Are you saying that you don't know Swedish? Everyone knows Swedish!
>If you don't know Swedish, try to find some channel that has reruns of good
>old Muppet Show. Remember that Swedish Chef? He'll be glad to teach you :-)
Oh, _that_ Sweedish. Although I am familiar with it, it still doesn't
resemble harfish much to me. Oh well.

>Mellon,
>Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

Bork bork bork..

- ---Pascal---
Wearing A Silly Vacation Hat.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 10:03:32 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Jason Reed)
Subject: Harfish Linguistic argument 

Niccolo Flychuck wrote:
>> >One comment, which I might have made earlier had I not been RFCs at the
>> >time :)
>> >You've got grammar and vocabulary mixed up.
>>
>> Have I? I was under the understanding that grammar was a description of how
>> words were constructed and used, and vocab amapping from a language to
>> another. Admittedly the list of phonemes and graphemes isn't much of the
>> grammar yet, but it doesn't seem to fit under the vocabulary.
>
>That part fits under neither. The description of prefixes and suffixes I
>wouldn't place under vocabulary though. I'll have to loog up more formal
>definitios before I can comment extensively - either way, something seems
>terribly mixed to me.

True, true... the alphabet and pronunciation should be its own section, I
suppose. The prefixes still make sense to me in the vocabulary, since I
still find such things in english-esperanto dictionaries in the main list
(in addition, often, to a separate page listing them), esperanto still
being so heavily dependant on prefixes and suffixes.

It can always be amended, if and when it passes. Since the rule doesn't
really alter the game drastically (yet), I hope such minor things as these
wouldn't cause someone to vote NO.

>Niccolo Flychuck

- ---Pascal---
Wearing A Silly Vacation Hat.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 11:35:57 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Mentor (Bascule)

Bascule is chosen as the mentor for breadbox.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 11:57:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Mad Hatter (this is not a name)

this is not a name was chosen as the Mad Hatter for De'ghew.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 12:58:29 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: Official 

breadbox' initial account is credited with A$ 537 and 100PFbreadbo.

ThinMan
Financier

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:07 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1141

Proposal 1141 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup I
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 581, "Required Number Of Votes", to read:

For the purposes of this rule, the "player named Malenkai" refers
to the Acka player whose name was Malenkai on July 4, 1996.

The required number of YES votes for a proposal to be accepted is
1, if the player named Malenkai legally cast a YES vote on the proposal
within the prescribed voting period. 

The required number of YES votes for a proposal to be accepted is 
100% of the total number of YES and NO votes legally cast within the
prescribed voting period, if the player named Malenkai did not legally
cast a YES vote on the proposal within the prescribed voting period. 

Quorum is defined to be 0.000001 % of the active registered players.
This rule has precedence over all other mutable rules.

{{[in good fun.  I don't think I would make a very good dictator, if
this works.  I just want to fix the loophole and a couple of other
things..., of course, the fix exists :)]}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:11 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1143

Proposal 1143 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup III
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:15 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1145

Proposal 1145 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup V
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:17 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1146

Proposal 1146 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup VI
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:05 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1140

Proposal 1140 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Revenge of the Chartreuse Goose
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

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

Repeal R 431

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

Create a new rule entitled "Cheesecake", reading:

{{The player who authored the proposal which created this rule shall
be declared the winner of the cycle.  Authoring the proposal which
created this rule is considered achieving a winnning condition as
described by R 110.}}

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

Create a new rule entitiled "Chartreuse Goose", reading:

Let the Chartreuese Goose exist, it is a unique entity. Initially
it is Somewhere Else. It may only be possessed by one player at a
time.

A player who possesses the Chartreuse Goose may not win the cycle
or game. This clause takes precedence over R 219, R 422, and any other
mutable rule which establishes winning conditions.

The Chartreuse Goose (hereafter called "Goose") is transferred as specified
below. Other rules may specify other ways for it to be transferred.

The term "paradox win CFJ", as used in the following, means any CFJ
with a statement in its reasoning similar to the following: "Upon a
verdict of TRUE, the initiator wins the cycle in accordance with R 219".

Conditions upon which the Goose is transferred:

1) Upon a verdict of FALSE on a paradox win CFJ, the initiator of the CFJ
receives the Goose from wherever it is.

2) Upon a verdict on a paradox win CFJ being overturned to TRUE, the
Goose goes Somewhere Else, if and only if the player possessing it was
the initiator of the CFJ in question. Immediately afterwords, that player
is declared the winner of the cycle.

All of the following actions must be announced publically if they are
performed:

3) A player who has possessed the Goose for at least one week may pay
A$200 to the Treasury and cause it to go Somewhere Else.

4) A player who has possessed the Goose for at least 30 days may pay
A$75 to the Treasury and transfer the Goose to the single player with the
lowest score. The player receiving the Goose receives A$75 from the
Treasury. This option is not available if more than one player has the
lowest score.

5) A player who possesses the Goose may pay A$350 to the Treasury and
transfer it to any other player of their choice.

6) A player possessing a Chartreuse Goose Egg may take the Goose off the
hands of any player who possesses it, provided the Goose owner
agrees to the transaction, and pays a mutually agreed upon amount
of currency (of at least A$50) to the Treasury. The Egg owner will
receive from the Treasury the same amount that the Goose owner payed in,
as compensation.

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

Amend R 219 to read in full:

If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the
legality of some action cannot be determined with finality, or if some
action appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may call for
judgement on a statement to that effect. Such a call for judgement must
contain in its reasoning a statement to the effect that the initiator
is claiming a win in accordance with R 219, on a verdict of true.
 
If the statement is judged true, and the judgement is not overruled, then
the player who called for judgement is declared the winner of the cycle.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:09 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1142

Proposal 1142 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup II
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:21 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1148

Proposal 1148 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup VIII
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:13 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1144

Proposal 1144 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup IV
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:19 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1147

Proposal 1147 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup VII
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:23 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1149

Proposal 1149 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup IX
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:21:02 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: P1141-1148 

A few of the new players may not realize that Malenkai is attempting to
make use of the "Consecutive NO votes" rule in order to get one or the
other of these proposals to pass.  Consult R431.  The wording of R 431
is sufficient that Malenkai might have a case for players being forced
to vote for one or another of these proposals.  I recommend choosing
one of them to vote for at random.  Be aware of your previous voting
record when you make your choice.

ThinMan
Freedom Fighter

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:25 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1150

Proposal 1150 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Coup X
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Create a new rule reading:

{{The rule changed described by the proposal entitled "Coup I" shall
be applied as if that proposal were accepted.  This takes precedence
over all other mutable rules.}}

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 14:50:28 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1151

Proposal 1151 - Wed Aug 21 14:50:04 EDT 1996
Revenge of the Chartreuse Goose (again, one will be retracted)
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

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

Repeal R 431

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

Create a new rule entitled "Cheesecake", reading:

{{The player who authored the proposal which created this rule shall
be declared the winner of the cycle.  Authoring the proposal which
created this rule is considered achieving a winnning condition as
described by R 110.}}

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

Create a new rule entitiled "Chartreuse Goose", reading:

Let the Chartreuese Goose exist, it is a unique entity. Initially
it is Somewhere Else. It may only be possessed by one player at a
time.

A player who possesses the Chartreuse Goose may not win the cycle
or game. This clause takes precedence over R 219, R 422, and any other
mutable rule which establishes winning conditions.

The Chartreuse Goose (hereafter called "Goose") is transferred as specified
below. Other rules may specify other ways for it to be transferred.

The term "paradox win CFJ", as used in the following, means any CFJ
with a statement in its reasoning similar to the following: "Upon a
verdict of TRUE, the initiator wins the cycle in accordance with R 219".

Conditions upon which the Goose is transferred:

1) Upon a verdict of FALSE on a paradox win CFJ, the initiator of the CFJ
receives the Goose from wherever it is.

2) Upon a verdict on a paradox win CFJ being overturned to TRUE, the
Goose goes Somewhere Else, if and only if the player possessing it was
the initiator of the CFJ in question. Immediately afterwords, that player
is declared the winner of the cycle.

All of the following actions must be announced publically if they are
performed:

3) A player who has possessed the Goose for at least one week may pay
A$200 to the Treasury and cause it to go Somewhere Else.

4) A player who has possessed the Goose for at least 30 days may pay
A$75 to the Treasury and transfer the Goose to the single player with the
lowest score. The player receiving the Goose receives A$75 from the
Treasury. This option is not available if more than one player has the
lowest score.

5) A player who possesses the Goose may pay A$350 to the Treasury and
transfer it to any other player of their choice.

6) A player possessing a Chartreuse Goose Egg may take the Goose off the
hands of any player who possesses it, provided the Goose owner
agrees to the transaction, and pays a mutually agreed upon amount
of currency (of at least A$50) to the Treasury. The Egg owner will
receive from the Treasury the same amount that the Goose owner payed in,
as compensation.

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

Amend R 219 to read in full:

If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the
legality of some action cannot be determined with finality, or if some
action appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may call for
judgement on a statement to that effect. Such a call for judgement must
contain in its reasoning a statement to the effect that the initiator
is claiming a win in accordance with R 219, on a verdict of true.
 
If the statement is judged true, and the judgement is not overruled, then
the player who called for judgement is declared the winner of the cycle.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 21:07:14 +0000
From: Bascule <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1141-1150

> A few of the new players may not realize that Malenkai is attempting to
> make use of the "Consecutive NO votes" rule in order to get one or the
> other of these proposals to pass.  Consult R431.  The wording of R 431
> is sufficient that Malenkai might have a case for players being forced
> to vote for one or another of these proposals.  I recommend choosing
> one of them to vote for at random.  Be aware of your previous voting
> record when you make your choice.
> 
> ThinMan
> Freedom Fighter

I'm wondering about the odds of one of these passing. Because there's 
ten of them, if players try to only vote YES on one of them, that 
means one of the middle ones, and increases the chance of a lot of 
players choosing the same one. If we follow ThinMan's advice and 
choose at random, then some players will have to vote YES twice, 
although that shouldn't matter. The other factor though, is cheap 
point snatching, which will increase the chances of one of these 
passing. If a lot of that goes on, I'd say there's an outside chance 
of Malenkai becoming dictator, although the maths (math?) is too 
horrible for me to contemplate

Bascule
Entertained Onlooker

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 16:08:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1141-1148 (actually 1140-1151)

ThinMan wrote:
> A few of the new players may not realize that Malenkai is attempting to
> make use of the "Consecutive NO votes" rule in order to get one or the
> other of these proposals to pass.  Consult R431.  The wording of R 431
> is sufficient that Malenkai might have a case for players being forced
> to vote for one or another of these proposals.  I recommend choosing
> one of them to vote for at random.  Be aware of your previous voting
> record when you make your choice.

Actually, you don't have to vote yes on any of those proposals if you
vote PRESENT sometimes.  It's time for me to reveal one of the loopholes
in R431.  Although it says abstentions don't make a series of NO votes
non-consecutive, it doesn't say the same about PRESENT votes.  So do
as ThinMan suggests, pick 2 to 4 proposals from 1140-1151 to not vote
NO on, but instead of voting YES, vote PRESENT on them.

There's also a curious problem with these proposals that I've addressed
(or should I say exploited) in a proposal I have already submitted.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 20:23:13 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1141-1148

John Bollinger wrote:
> 

> ThinMan
> Freedom Fighter

ThinMan
Spoilsport :)

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 20:29:07 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1141-1148 (actually 1140-1151)

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 

> There's also a curious problem with these proposals that I've addressed
> (or should I say exploited) in a proposal I have already submitted.

I was wondering if anyone was going to think of that!  I actually figured
someone would.  I was just trying to be a good sport and save bandwidth.
You all can end this whole thing by voting for one of the Chartreuse
Geese, which will repeal R 431 :)  

Of course, voting Present will increase my chances.  I purposely waited
until the new cycle to increase my chances of becoming gnome buddy 
along the way, but if /dev/joe's counterattack is what I think it is,
that will not matter.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 20:43:10 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 267 (Brinjal)

Brinjal has been selected, and has 3 days to accept/decline.

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 267
  Subject: Coup
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Brinjal (selected Aug 21, 1996, 20:44h New York Time)

Statement:

The "proposal entitled "Coup I"", as referred to in proposals 1142
thru 1150, is proposal 1141.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

Its obvious.  It can be no other proposal.  Even if another proposal
comes along and claims to be "Coup I", there is no compelling reason 
to select that one over P 1141.  The game custom that currently makes
P 1141 the referrant proposal cannot just be changed like that.

Just trying to anticipate /dev/joe.  This is going to look stupid if
I'm wrong.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 23:13:13 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 267 (Brinjal)

> Call For Judgement 267
>   Subject: Coup
> Initiator: Malenkai
>     Judge: Brinjal (selected Aug 21, 1996, 20:44h New York Time)
> 
> Statement:
> 
> The "proposal entitled "Coup I"", as referred to in proposals 1142
> thru 1150, is proposal 1141.
> 
> Malenkai's Reasoning:
> 
> Its obvious.  It can be no other proposal.  Even if another proposal
> comes along and claims to be "Coup I", there is no compelling reason 
> to select that one over P 1141.  The game custom that currently makes
> P 1141 the referrant proposal cannot just be changed like that.
> 
> Just trying to anticipate /dev/joe.  This is going to look stupid if
> I'm wrong.

Malenkai is right that this was my tactic.  I'm using what I called
"Malenkai's Loophole" against him, although this was an aspect of it
I didn't realize until today.  Loophole Surfers should expect to
have other loopholes used against them, as happened with me and the
Contract mess.  Malenkai's actions with the Bronze Torch established
the game custom that Malenkai's Loophole works.

There is no compelling reason to select 1141 over any other proposal
that is named "Coup I" if and when any of proposals 1142-1150 are
accepted.  Note that proposals are not rules, so what P1142-1150 mean
now does not matter.  Only what the proposals mean at the time their
rule changes are applied matters.

There's one possible reason to choose a later proposal named "Coup I"
over P1141: there is some amount of game custom that proposals cease
to exist once their voting periods have completed and the effects from
their acceptance or rejection have been handled.  P1141's effects
will be handled before P1142-1150's effects, so by this custom the only
proposals named "Coup I" when P1142-1150 are accepted (if any of them
are accepted) will be those submitted after P1150.

Incidentally, I've been working on a proposal to close Malenkai's
Loophole, but it's not easy.  When it looks a little better I'll
put it up for an RFC.

/dev/joe
Loophole Anti-Surfing

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #188
*******************************