Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #198
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Thursday, August 29 1996       Volume 01 : Number 198

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 01:12:43 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Large sums of cash

Its still not too late to vote YES on P 1141-1150.

If I become Dictator, I promise A$10,000 to anyone who voted YES
for the Proposal that made it possible.

Plus, I also promise to make the Gumball non-Protected, and give
everyone a portrait of the Fat Lady, who I will first silence, provided
snowgod is good enough to render it :).

Malenkai
Dictator Wannabee
Anyone want to buy my PF Bonds cheap?

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 11:43:48 +0200
From: Niklas Mellin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Back from vacation

Hello all Ackanomians,
I'm back from vacation, earlier than expected.

Mellon
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 03:07:24 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Large sums of cash 

>Its still not too late to vote YES on P 1141-1150.
>
>If I become Dictator, I promise A$10,000 to anyone who voted YES
>for the Proposal that made it possible.
>
>Plus, I also promise to make the Gumball non-Protected, and give
>everyone a portrait of the Fat Lady, who I will first silence, provided
>snowgod is good enough to render it :).

I would be willing to render a portrait of the Fat Lady, for a reasonable
fee.  Say A$20,000???  Why so much?  Bandwidth charges associated with
transferring such a large portrait of course.  After all, the fat lady is
REALLY fat.

Oh yeah, I'd also request a Vice-Dictatorship :)

snowgod
smiling mischieviously
[as if he was planning something]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 03:17:06 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Forums 

I am intersted in creating a new type of organization called a forum.  A
forum would be a group (non political and non-religious) devoted to
adressing a certain issue.  A player could belong to any number of forums
at the same time.  Blah, blah, blah, the rest is similar to the church or
politcal party rules...

Would everyone suport this if I were to submit it?

If a rule creating "forums" is passed, I am planning to create "The
Ackanomic Design Forum".  The goal of this forum will be to brainstorm and
issue reports of interest to Ackanomic concerning geography, archetecture,
planning and zoning, mapping, and so on and so forth in ackanomic.

One of purposes of the Ackanomic Design Forum will be to draft a detailed
map of ackanomic, with street names, graphical representaions of buildings
and locations.  Furthermore, the Forum will suport legislation which will
formalize the descisions of the forum, if and when they are accepted by the
people in an RFC process.

If anyone else is intersted in this idea, please send me email.  We can
start even before such a thing as forums exist in the rules.

snowgod
forward thinking

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:20:19 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 113 (Pascal)

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

Clerk of the Courts
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Criminal Judgement 113
  Subject:  Those Freeze-Dried Otters
Initiator:  snowgod
    Judge:  Pascal (selected Wed, Aug 28, 1996, 08:21 EDT)

Statement:

this is not a name has broken the Rules

snowgod's Reasoning:

R1130 (Senate Seat Names) requires each senator to rename thier senate seat
to one which is interesting.  It goes on to stipulate that said interesting
name must fulfill the same criterion as a legal Player Name.

R570, which regulates legal Player Names, states:

>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.

this is not a name has, unwisely it seems, given his senate seat the
amusing, though illegal, name of "seven freeze dried otters".  This name
has 25 alphanumeric characters (including the spaces), and is clearly in
violation of R1130.

suggested penalty:

a sentence in the Gaol of 2 days for this is not a name -and- the
transference of A$100 from this is not a name to snowgod

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:09:53 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka: Ambassador; Official

>>> Solutions:
>>> #3) Make internomic votes a political decision by allowing the bored
>>> senators to be the only ones able to cast votes on internomic matters.  In
>>> the event of a tie, the proconsul could vote.  If the president disagrees
>>> with the senates decision, he may VETO it and submit it to the general
>>> populace for a vote.
>>
>>I would vote for solution 3.
>
>How bout it?  Anyone else interested in this solution?  It would give the
>senators something to do, and allow for a system of checks and balances.
>Plus it would be fairly easy to write a system like this into the rules.

Sounds good to me.

ThinMan
Senator

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:11:31 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 112 thoughts 

>Such simple manipulation of these entities can lead to no harm, unless of
>course we are talking about frinking Coke.  We all no where th=E5t leads

snowgod is right.  All you coke frinkers out there had better watch out!

ThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:42:24 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: Forums 

I see no need for rules establishing Fora.  We can and do have such
discussions already, and /dev/joe appears willing to set up mailing lists
for groups that wish to discuss particular topics not of interest to the
citizens at large.

ThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 17:09:48 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Forums

On Wed, 28 Aug 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:

> I am intersted in creating a new type of organization called a forum.  A
> forum would be a group (non political and non-religious) devoted to
> adressing a certain issue.  A player could belong to any number of forums
> at the same time.  Blah, blah, blah, the rest is similar to the church or
> politcal party rules...
> 
> Would everyone suport this if I were to submit it?
I don't see myself opposing this, however, other the non-exclusivity, what
makes this organization different than existing ones?
one might argue that this difference is sufficient to make it interesting.
Anyway, if it does pass, then that would justification enough for me to
submit an RFC for a super-organization.

 > 
Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:06:36 cst
From: [email-masked] (Ed Graham) 
Subject: Acka: Senate

The senate seat formerly referred to as "seat A" is now known as "Rebus
8-{)"

Habeous Corpus
<A radical is a man with both feet planted firmly in the air. - FDR>

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 17:36:25 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Official

Mellon is back from Vacation.
My he wear his Silly Vacation with joy.

Niccolo Flychuck
Registrar

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 10:06:58 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 112 thoughts 

>>Such simple manipulation of these entities can lead to no harm, unless of
>>course we are talking about frinking Coke.  We all no where th=E5t leads
>
>snowgod is right.  All you coke frinkers out there had better watch out!
>
>
>ThinMan

It is Wednesday, August 28, 1996, at 10:05 Alaska Time, and could've just
sworn I saw Bascule duck around the corner of the Hall of Elders and Frink
a little coke when no one was looking :)

snowgod

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 96 12:44:54 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1170

Proposal 1170 - Wed Aug 28 12:44:54 EDT 1996
Internomic Proposals
Habeous Corpus  (Ed Graham)

Ammend Rule 970 by performing the following action:

Delete the phrase:  "but  may only do so once per week" from the end of
the third paragraph.

{{[This should work,  even if Malenkai's Proposal passes.]}}

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 96 12:45:25 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1171

Proposal 1171 - Wed Aug 28 12:45:25 EDT 1996
Mootability II
Habeous Corpus  (Ed Graham)

Perform the following actions,  in order:

1)  Transmute Rule 108 to Mutable.

2)  Amend Rule 108 by adding the following statement to the end of Rule
108:
Mutable Rules may not claim Precedence over Immutable Rules.

3)  Transmute Rule 108 to Immutable

{{[ Respectfully Submitted,

Habeous Corpus
<A radical is a man with both feet planted firmly in the air. - FDR>]}}

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 10:31:57 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1171 

>Proposal 1171 - Wed Aug 28 12:45:25 EDT 1996
>Mootability II
>Habeous Corpus  (Ed Graham)
>
>Perform the following actions,  in order:
>
>1)  Transmute Rule 108 to Mutable.
>
>2)  Amend Rule 108 by adding the following statement to the end of Rule
>108:
>Mutable Rules may not claim Precedence over Immutable Rules.
>
>3)  Transmute Rule 108 to Immutable
>
>{{[ Respectfully Submitted,
>
>Habeous Corpus
><A radical is a man with both feet planted firmly in the air. - FDR>]}}

I would like to see a Mutable rule be able to claim precedence over an
imutable, if that imutable specifically defers precedence.  This proposal
wouldn't allow for that.

snowgod

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:46:57 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Retractions

I am retracting P 1144, 1145, 1146, and 1150, and
acknolwedge the 8 point penalty.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:55:52 +0000
From: Bascule <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112 thoughts

> >>Such simple manipulation of these entities can lead to no harm, unless of
> >>course we are talking about frinking Coke.  We all no where th=E5t leads
> >
> >snowgod is right.  All you coke frinkers out there had better watch out!
> >
> >
> >ThinMan
> 
> It is Wednesday, August 28, 1996, at 10:05 Alaska Time, and could've just
> sworn I saw Bascule duck around the corner of the Hall of Elders and Frink
> a little coke when no one was looking :)
> 
> snowgod

Hey! snowgod ought to check his facts before trying to get innocents 
chucked in gaol - I was frinking _cola_.

Bascule 

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

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:46:52 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Registrar : Two new observers

I'd like to welcome two new observers

Larry Chevres    [email-masked]
yufen Croddy     [email-masked]

Welcome to Ackanomic

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:50:28 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 112

I believe CFCJ 112 has been assigned to me - I accept the assignment. I
shall weigh the matter carefully and decide on a verdict promptly.

Niccolo Flychuck

someone

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:10:21 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112

Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> I believe CFCJ 112 has been assigned to me - I accept the assignment. I
> shall weigh the matter carefully and decide on a verdict promptly.

We are more interested in the penalty than the verdict.  Anything less
than a fortnight in Gaol is "soft on crime", something the defendent
promised to eliminate, if elected president.

I also note that the Judge was a candidate for president, and may be
so again in a few short weeks.  The electorate has a long memory, and
will consider the penaltly laid down by the judge the next time they
hear "tough on crime" campaign rhetoric.

Malenkai
burn the witch
burn the defendent

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:22:53 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 272 (breadbox)

snowgod declined.

breadbox has been chosen, and has 3 days to accept/decline.

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 272
  Subject: Party Chess Purchases
Initiator: Niccolo Flychuck
    Judge: Habeous Corpus (declined to judge)
2nd Judge: snowgod (declined to judge)
3rd Judge: breadbox (selected Aug 28, 1996, 19:24h New York Time)
 
Statement:
 
Robin Hood did not purchase any PartyChessPieces before this CFJ was
submitted.

Niccolo Flychuck's reasoning:

Basically, the same reasoning for CFJ 271. Note that this is not the same
statement as CFJ 271, and it also requests that the judge make a decision
about the situation at the Robin Hood made his declaration. By the the
time this is distributed Robin Hood might well decide again to make a
pruchase, and I only want to clear up the situation one way or another, I
really don't care which way it goes, I just want to be clear on this.

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

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 02:35:40 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112

On Wed, 28 Aug 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> 
> I also note that the Judge was a candidate for president, and may be
> so again in a few short weeks.  The electorate has a long memory, and
> will consider the penaltly laid down by the judge the next time they
> hear "tough on crime" campaign rhetoric.
 
Apparently the electorate memory is not long enough. I never used the
"tough on crime" slogan in my campaign. I promoted a structure of growth,
such structure are inherently discouraging of crime and eliminates any
incentives to unlawful behavior.  This is a result of what we might soon
be able to call "snowgod's dillema" (or not)

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 
> Malenkai
> burn the witch
> burn the defendent
> 

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:51:06 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112

Uri Bruck wrote:

> Apparently the electorate memory is not long enough. I never used the
> "tough on crime" slogan in my campaign. I promoted a structure of growth,
> such structure are inherently discouraging of crime and eliminates any
> incentives to unlawful behavior.  This is a result of what we might soon
> be able to call "snowgod's dillema" (or not)

That is true, but "tough on crime" rhetoric *was* prevelant in the
campaign; in fact, its initiator won the election.  It does seem that
toughness on crime is an issue that the electorate will respond to.

Perhaps the encumbent should comment on a suitable penalty for CFCJ 112.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 15:53:28 GMT
From: Simon Clarke <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ambassador; Official

> #3) Make internomic votes a political decision by allowing the bored
> senators to be the only ones able to cast votes on internomic matters. 
 In
> the event of a tie, the proconsul could vote.  If the president 
disagrees
> with the senates decision, he may VETO it and submit it to the general
> populace for a vote.

Sorry I am one of those who put the internomic proposals to one side
and never got back to them. I too like option 3 above as a way of
dealing with internomic. We seem to have plenty of elected offices
with nothing much to do (as well as a few with an awful lot to do),
and this looks like the sort of thing we could use to give them
some meaning. I presume the liaison would also have a vote (if not
already a senator)!

Keep on liaising!

Brinjal.

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:02:05 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112 

>Uri Bruck wrote:
>>
>> I believe CFCJ 112 has been assigned to me - I accept the assignment. I
>> shall weigh the matter carefully and decide on a verdict promptly.
>
>We are more interested in the penalty than the verdict.  Anything less
>than a fortnight in Gaol is "soft on crime", something the defendent
>promised to eliminate, if elected president.
>
>I also note that the Judge was a candidate for president, and may be
>so again in a few short weeks.  The electorate has a long memory, and
>will consider the penaltly laid down by the judge the next time they
>hear "tough on crime" campaign rhetoric.
>
>Malenkai
>burn the witch
>burn the defendent

I would like to remind the electorate, that I, president snowgod, have
personally urged Niccolo Flychuck to return a verdict of TRUE and a stiff
sentence on this matter, in an effort to be true to my campaign promises.

Let no one say that I, president snowgod, am soft on crime!

However, I believe burning the defendent may go just a bit to far :)

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:02:13 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112 

>Uri Bruck wrote:
>
>> Apparently the electorate memory is not long enough. I never used the
>> "tough on crime" slogan in my campaign. I promoted a structure of growth,
>> such structure are inherently discouraging of crime and eliminates any
>> incentives to unlawful behavior.  This is a result of what we might soon
>> be able to call "snowgod's dillema" (or not)
>
>That is true, but "tough on crime" rhetoric *was* prevelant in the
>campaign; in fact, its initiator won the election.  It does seem that
>toughness on crime is an issue that the electorate will respond to.
>
>Perhaps the encumbent should comment on a suitable penalty for CFCJ 112.

Illegal Gumball Manipulation, on the surface does not appear to be a
horrible crime.  However, one never knows where these things may lead.
First it's a little chewing gum in the armpit, then possibly coke frinking.
Next thing you know, someone may try to eat the little lamb or the magic
potato for dinner.

I, as president, believe we should nip illegal manipulation of acka
entities in the bud before it becomes a serious problem.  We have already
let this problem slide by once, with Malenkai and his scandlous Coke
pardon, and hence, the problem has re-occured.

If preheating the gumball (in your armpit no less) is determined to be an
illegal manipulation, I urge the judge to return a much stiffer verdict
than the A$20 suggested by (obviously soft on crime) tinan.  As a matter of
fact, I would reccomend a sentence of 2 days in the Gaol plus a fine of
A$40.

Let no one say that I am soft on crime come election time!

snowgod

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

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 96 23:08:30 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 112

>Next thing you know, someone may try to eat the little lamb or the magic
>potato for dinner.

I thought you LIKED that dinner!!!

:) tinan

- --      Mike Epstein            "Thank you for sending me a copy of 
      [email-masked]           your book. I'll waste no time
  *                      *       reading it."
http://www.nyiq.net/~epstein/                         --Moses Hadas

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #198
*******************************