Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #209
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest      Thursday, September 5 1996      Volume 01 : Number 209

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 18:29:25 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 268 Verdict

CFJ 268 has been judged FALSE.

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 268
  Subject: Coup I
Initiator: /dev/joe
    Judge: Malenkai (declined to judge)
2nd Judge: Wayne (failed to deliver verdict)
3rd Judge: breadbox (selected Sep 02, 1996, 22:01h New York Time)

Statement:

If proposal 1141 is rejected, and then one of proposals 1142-1150 is
accepted, the 'proposal entitled "Coup I"' referred to in the accepted
proposal will be proposal 1152.

/dev/joe's reasoning:

        [none - CotC]

breadbox's reasoning:

First, I note that rule 703/5 categorically exempts proposals from the
requirement of entities having unique names. Furthermore, if proposals
were not exempt, the procedure it outlines to determine if two names
are the same would conclude that proposals 1141 and 1152 have the same
name.

/dev/joe claims that after proposal 1141 had been rejected, the term
'proposal entitled "Coup I"' would refer, unambiguously, to proposal
1152. But proposal 1141 continues to exist after it has been voted on.
It does not stop being proposal 1141, thus neither does it stop being
a proposal entitled "Coup I". The conclusion, therefore, is that from
the time of the creation of proposal 1152, the term 'proposal entitled
"Coup I"' is an ambiguous statement. If any of the proposals 1142-1150
had been accepted, it would have to be considered an indeterminate
rule without a CFJ, or a falling back on game custom, or some other
such mechanism to satsfactorily resolve its meaning.

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 18:47:16 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Vacation

As I'm leaving for college this weekend, I'm going on vacation until my 
network connection is working. I really have no idea how long it'll take, 
but I guess my expected duration of vacation is a week. I'll be able to 
read and send mail before then, but it won't be convenient because it'll 
be in a lab or at a kiosk.

I'll be around for another day or so, but I don't know how often I'll be 
able to check my mail.

this is not a name

- --      Mike Epstein            
    [email-masked]        "Life is a long lesson in humility."
  *                      *                       --James M. Barrie
http://www.bozosoft.com/mike/   

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 18:49:04 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 277 (Robin Hood)

tinan declined.

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

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 277
  Subject: Suspending the Suspended Sentence
Initiator: /dev/joe
    Judge: this is not a name (declined to judge)
2nd Judge: Robin Hood (selected Sep 05, 1996, 18:51h New York Time)

Statement:

The "sentence" part of the penalty assigned to this is not a name
by IdiotBoy in CFCJ 113 is not one of the allowed classes of penalties
for a CFCJ, so this part of the penalty should be ignored.

Reasoning:

That penalty was:

  A SENTENCE of 2 days in the Gaol for this is not a name, suspended until
  such time as another CFCJ judgement or TRUE is returned against this is
  not a name.
 
Rule 710 allows for a sentence in Gaol to be given as a penalty on a
CFCJ judged TRUE, but it specifically defines when the sentence should be
carried out.  No rule allows for a "suspended sentence" to be given.

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 18:53:56 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

this is not a name wrote:
> 
> As I'm leaving for college this weekend, I'm going on vacation until my
> network connection is working. I really have no idea how long it'll take,
> but I guess my expected duration of vacation is a week. I'll be able to
> read and send mail before then, but it won't be convenient because it'll
> be in a lab or at a kiosk.
> 
> I'll be around for another day or so, but I don't know how often I'll be
> able to check my mail.

I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.

Malenkai
Speaker

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 02:00:54 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RFC - fix the whole Swinger thing

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, this is not a name wrote:

> Niccolo Flychuck wrote:
> >This RFC solves the problem of playability of PartyChess. If you want to
> >give parties the option of not playing, I suggest you propose an
> >ammendment to Party-Hall that will not require a Party to have a Swinger.
> >I will oppose it.
> 
> Why should having a delegate in Party Hall obligate a party to play party 
> chess? Party chess is just an activity for the swingers.

Acka voted for this to be this way. This is the current situation.
Swingers represent their Parties in Party Hall, Parties benefit from the
actions of Swingers.
My FRC fixes the game so that it would be playable. It does not change the
role of Party-Hall, or the activities of the Swingers in it.

Look, if a Swinger goes on Vacation, and leaves pieces on the board, an
there is no provision to take care of such a situation, then everyone
could start racing to catpure that Swinger's pieces. This rule protects
the Swinger from excessive abuse of this possibility. (it allows some
abuse, but then, he did abandon his pieces)

The rules says that the Party should appoint a Swinger, but it also
provides for a case that the Party does not appoint a Swinger.

It has nothing to do with the issue of whether Parties should be allowed
to choose whether to participate in Party-Chess or not. That is a
different issue. This RFC simply does not address the issue, and leaves it
the way it was voted for by Acka.

If you want to change that, go ahead. Propose an ammendment to change
that. But such an ammendment should be done properly. It should be done at
the place which will cause the least problems.

My RFC fixes problems, it does not cause them. Following your suggestion
before this RFC is submitted and accepted will leave us with many
unresolved problems. Accepting will allow you to propose your ammendment,
without affecting the integrity of PartyChess.

I can only re-iterate this point:
The thing you oppose has nothing to do with my RFC. My RFC simply leaves
that issue untouched.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 02:04:30 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> this is not a name wrote:
> > 
> > As I'm leaving for college this weekend, I'm going on vacation until my
> > network connection is working. I really have no idea how long it'll take,
> > but I guess my expected duration of vacation is a week. I'll be able to
> > read and send mail before then, but it won't be convenient because it'll
> > be in a lab or at a kiosk.
> > 
> > I'll be around for another day or so, but I don't know how often I'll be
> > able to check my mail.
> 
> I am appointing Techno as Acting (NoneYet) swinger.
> 
> Malenkai
> Speaker
> 
The Registrar has noted the tinan's Vacation, and both the Registrar and
the Chess-Umpire have noted Techno's appointment for acting Swinger.
However, since both are terribly sleepy, and have to get up in five hours.
Expect the relevant web pages to be updated a couple of hours after that.
We apologize for the inconvenience.

Niccolo Flychuck
Registrar
Chess-Umpire
Vulcan Swinger (hey I'm an oxymoron!)

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 19:05:53 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

>I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.

Techno is not a member of (None Yet). That's ridiculous. I come back from 
vacation until you decide to appoint a member of (None Yet) as acting 
swinger.

- --      Mike Epstein            "If I were two-faced,
    [email-masked]         would I be wearing this one?"
  *                      *                 --Abraham Lincoln
http://www.bozosoft.com/mike/   

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 19:07:00 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Acka: PFBonds

Malenkai wrote:

>[email-masked] wrote:
>> 
>> Does anyone else feel that PFBonds are useless?  I wish to sell all of my
>> PFBonds to the highest bidder.  Please send me a bid.

>The never had the intended effect, which I believe was to allow players
>to speculate on the score improvement (skill) of other players.  
>However, they are the only real source of positive cash flow for players;
>without them, we'd go broke eventually.
>
>Malenkai

I've been thinking about the PFBonds.  As Malenkai stated, it allows
a player to speculate on the change in score of another player.  But
there is no speculation if everyone keeps thier own bonds.

If Player A thought that his score was about to rise, I don't think
he would want to sell his bonds.  If the player thought his score was
going down, who else would want to buy them?  I thought about a rule
that would not allow a player to own thier own bonds.  This might cause
a little more action.  But I don't know if I am sure that this would be a
good idea.

So I am trying to sell my bonds to see what action I can scare up.
Maybe I'll have to Propose to repeal all PFBonds rules
Wayne

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 19:10:08 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1185

Proposal 1185 - Thu Sep 05 19:10:08 EDT 1996
Legacy Deck
Niccolo Flychuck  (Uri Bruck)

A Legacy Deck of Cards has four suits:
 Spades (S), Hearts (H),Diamonds (D), and Clubs (C), 
and 13 ranks: Ace (A), King (K), Queen
(Q), Jack (J), 10, 9, 8,7, 6, 5, 4, 3, and 2. 
Spades and Clubs are black. Hearts and Diamonds are red. 

There are also two jokers in this Deck (?1, ?2). Jokers have no suit, rank
or color.

{{[This is in a description of the standard deck of cards - many people
are more comfortable with those. Personally, I like the Eleusis Deck, but
that's no reason for everyone to use it]}}

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 19:09:32 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

this is not a name wrote:
> 
> >I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.
> 
> Techno is not a member of (None Yet). That's ridiculous. I come back from
> vacation until you decide to appoint a member of (None Yet) as acting
> swinger.

All the members of (None Yet) are on vacation.  If I appointed one of
them, eventually I would have to appoint a non (None Yet) player
anyway.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 19:13:43 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

this is not a name wrote:
> 
> >I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.
> 
> Techno is not a member of (None Yet). That's ridiculous. I come back from
> vacation until you decide to appoint a member of (None Yet) as acting
> swinger.

I am calling a Politeness Moon on this is not a name.  I do a hell of 
alot of work for this game, and in light of the fact that all of 
the (None Yet) is on vacation, and CFJ 275 is to be reassigned in 4 hours,
and Techno has shown interest in party chess, I find that the appointment
was not "ridiculous", but the above reply is.

Send votes to [email-masked].  Voting lasts 3 days.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 19:52:18 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

>I am calling a Politeness Moon on this is not a name.  I do a hell of 
>alot of work for this game, and in light of the fact that all of 
>the (None Yet) is on vacation, and CFJ 275 is to be reassigned in 4 hours,
>and Techno has shown interest in party chess, I find that the appointment
>was not "ridiculous", but the above reply is.

The fact that Techno has shown interest in party chess does not even 
begin to justify appointing a non-member of a party as its swinger. There 
can be no possible justification for that. My message was not rude. There 
is no rule stating that you have to assign an acting swinger (as far as I 
know), and appointing someone in acting capacity in an office e cannot 
legally hold is truly absurd. No one is denying the fact that you do a 
lot of work for the game, Malenkai; however, the amount of work you do is 
no justification for a bad decision.

I will not go on vacation unless mr cwm or Bascule comes back. And if 
Techno wants to play party chess, he should form a party or try to 
impeach the NAP swinger. And if Malenkai wants to get offended whenever 
someone criticizes his decisions, he should resign from any offices that 
require making decisions.

this is not a name
Fight autocracy: Vote "NO" on the Politeness Moon

- --      Mike Epstein            "The generation of random numbers
    [email-masked]         is too important to be left to chance."
  *                      *                         --Robert R. Coveyou,
http://www.bozosoft.com/mike/            Oak Ridge National Laboratory

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 19:13:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: help observer with term

I am planning to become a registered user quite soon, but the term RFC 
confuses me.  There exists only one reference to it in the Rules, and 
that reference merely states that it is a "commonly used acronym".  What 
does it stand for (my best guess is "referendum (resolution?) for 
change), and exactly what rules cover it?  Although it appears to take 
the form of a proposal, the rules state that proposals shall be 
distributed by the Promoter, and most of the RFC's I've seen have come 
from the Registrar.  And if not a proposal, what power or potential for 
changing Rules does it have?

				Guy Fawkes
				(Robert Shimmin)

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:15:26 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Politeness

this is not a name wrote:
 
> The fact that Techno has shown interest in party chess does not even
> begin to justify appointing a non-member of a party as its swinger. There
> can be no possible justification for that.

Who, from (None Yet), do you propose that I appoint?

> There is no rule stating that you have to assign an acting swinger
> (as far as I  know), and appointing someone in acting capacity in an
> office e cannot legally hold is truly absurd.

It was not possible for there to be a legal appointee when you went on
vacation.  The moment you did, an illegal acting swinger existed for
(None Yet).

The rule states that the Speaker, in this case, a member of the FUN Party,
is the Acting Swinger.  Techno has shown more interest in Party Chess than
I have.  Is it any less ridiculous that I be the swinger by default? 

> the amount of work you do is no justification for a bad decision.

Rather than call my work a "bad decision", please offer an alternative.

I did not use the amount of work I do to justify a decision; but to
justify thinking that your pot shot was impolite enough, with no
alternative proposed, to call a Politeness Moon.

I do not appreciate working 3 hours a day on a game to have my work called
"ridiculous", unless it is actually "ridiculous".  If you feel my work is
ridiculous, then you should impeach me.
 
> I will not go on vacation unless mr cwm or Bascule comes back.

Bascule is a member of the FUN party.  How is that relavent?

> And if Malenkai wants to get offended whenever someone criticizes his
> decisions, he should resign from any offices that require making
> decisions.

The other alternative is a Politeness Moon, which is the appropriate
response.  I am not offended, just pissed off.  There is a big difference.
I would be offended, possibly, if it was actually a bad decision, which it
was not, considering the facts and the rules.

If people find it necessary to criticize the work of others while offering
no work of their own in their offices, nor offering constructive
alternatives in their criticism, or not analyizing the facts or rules
before being critical, what can I say?

> Fight autocracy: Vote "NO" on the Politeness Moon

I am not sure what was autocratic.  The issue is politeness.  Even if 
my action was autocratic, it cannot justify your rude post.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:19:43 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: help observer with term

robert gene shimmin wrote:
> 
> I am planning to become a registered user quite soon, but the term RFC
> confuses me.

RFC stands for "Request for Comment", and I stole it from Internet
termonology, where all proposals to modify TCP/IP standards are called
RFCs (even after they are adopted, actually).

The rule which explains the term has been rewritten.  I guess the best
translation is "Protoposal", or "pre-proposal".

Its a good way to let others review potential rule changes for problems,
or for a rule writer to guage potential support for a proposal.

Malenkai

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 03:24:56 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, this is not a name wrote:

> >I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.
> 
> Techno is not a member of (None Yet). That's ridiculous. I come back from 
> vacation until you decide to appoint a member of (None Yet) as acting 
> swinger.
There is no rule that says he has. But it is in my RFC :)

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 03:27:56 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka:official - new player

observer Robert Shimmin has decided to become a player
He has chosen the ackanomic name  Guy Fawkes
his e-mail  is [email-masked]

Niccolo Flychuck
Registrar

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 03:30:20 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: help observer with term

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> robert gene shimmin wrote:
> > 
> > I am planning to become a registered user quite soon, but the term RFC
> > confuses me.
> 
> RFC stands for "Request for Comment", and I stole it from Internet

I'd say borrowed. Otherwise, no comment. New player Guy Fawkes has just
been sent  the player welcome package.

Niccolo Flychuck

> termonology, where all proposals to modify TCP/IP standards arecalled
> RFCs (even after they are adopted, actually).

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:29:04 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RFC - fix the whole Swinger thing

Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> RFC
> Fix Swingers
> Niccolo flychuck
> 

> I.Append the following text to R726
> "When any Swinger except for the NAP Swinger goes on Vacation, it is the
> duty of the Swinger's Party to appoint another member of the Party as
> acting Swinger. When the NAP Swinger goes on Vacation it is the duty of
> the Speaker to appoint a non-aligned player to be acting Swinger.
> If the Speaker is non-aligned, and no other player appointed the role
> of acting Swinger, then the Speaker is the acting Swinger.
> If the Speaker is a Party member, and no player has been assigned the
> role of acting NAP Swinger, and there is at least one volunteer from
> among the non-aligned players for that position, then the Speaker must
> appoint one of the volunteers as acting NAP Swinger.
> If a Swinger's Office remains vacant for more than 6 days then
> the Chess-Umpire declares the Office to be a Warm Office, until such time
> as it is no longer vacant.

The last clause implicitly handles the case where the entire party is on
vacation, but you may want to provide for an explicit procedure.
 
> This rule takes precedence over R457."

This is still not necessary.  R 457 will win a precedence conflict anyway,
and it defers to rules such as this that provide alternatives to
R 457's appointment method.
 
> If a Swinger Office is checked while it is Warm, then he is considered
> to have Surrendered.

I don't like this.  At least give them the 4 days to become un-warm, and
deal with the situation.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:32:28 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PFBonds

[email-masked] wrote:
> 

> I've been thinking about the PFBonds.  As Malenkai stated, it allows
> a player to speculate on the change in score of another player.  But
> there is no speculation if everyone keeps thier own bonds.

That is true.  The thing I like about PFBonds are that they offer 
incentive for score improvement.  Not much else in the game does.  If
you change PFBonds, I would still like to retain something that offers
incentive for personal score improvement.

Malenkai

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 03:40:16 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RFC - fix the whole Swinger thing

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> Uri Bruck wrote:
> > 
> > RFC
> > Fix Swingers
> > Niccolo flychuck
> > 
> 
> > I.Append the following text to R726
> > "When any Swinger except for the NAP Swinger goes on Vacation, it is the
> > duty of the Swinger's Party to appoint another member of the Party as
> > acting Swinger. When the NAP Swinger goes on Vacation it is the duty of
> > the Speaker to appoint a non-aligned player to be acting Swinger.
> > If the Speaker is non-aligned, and no other player appointed the role
> > of acting Swinger, then the Speaker is the acting Swinger.
> > If the Speaker is a Party member, and no player has been assigned the
> > role of acting NAP Swinger, and there is at least one volunteer from
> > among the non-aligned players for that position, then the Speaker must
> > appoint one of the volunteers as acting NAP Swinger.
> > If a Swinger's Office remains vacant for more than 6 days then
> > the Chess-Umpire declares the Office to be a Warm Office, until such time
> > as it is no longer vacant.
> 
> The last clause implicitly handles the case where the entire party is on
> vacation, but you may want to provide for an explicit procedure.
As I started pointing out in an unsent reply. 
I'm not sure it's necessary, but I might.
Perhaps something along the lines of - "If all members of a Party are on
vacation then no acting Swinger is appointed for that Party. "
I think this would be sufficient.

 > 
> > This rule takes precedence over R457."
> 
> This is still not necessary.  R 457 will win a precedence conflict anyway,
> and it defers to rules such as this that provide alternatives to
> R 457's appointment method.
I like making precedence explicit. 
> 
> > If a Swinger Office is checked while it is Warm, then he is considered
> > to have Surrendered.
> 
> I don't like this.  At least give them the 4 days to become un-warm, and
> deal with the situation.

I find this acceptable. 
I shall await further comments before I actually submit the rule.

> 
> Malenkai
> 
Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 03:43:35 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> this is not a name wrote:
> > 
> > >I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.
> > 
> > Techno is not a member of (None Yet). That's ridiculous. I come back from
> > vacation until you decide to appoint a member of (None Yet) as acting
> > swinger.
> 
> I am calling a Politeness Moon on this is not a name.  I do a hell of 
> alot of work for this game, and in light of the fact that all of 
> the (None Yet) is on vacation, and CFJ 275 is to be reassigned in 4 hours,
> and Techno has shown interest in party chess, I find that the appointment
> was not "ridiculous", but the above reply is.
> 
> Send votes to [email-masked].  Voting lasts 3 days.
> 
> Malenkai

While I agree that tinan's reply is ridiculous, especially since my RFC
provides a solution precisely for that problem (in the above case, where
all Party members are on vacation, there would no one to appoint the
acting Swinger, and the Office would remain vacant, eventually becoming
Warm)

However, I don't think this warrants a Politeness Moon. This calls for
interpretation of the law. Currently, appointment of acting Swingers is
flawed, for several reasons. I have RFCd a fix. 

I don't think I can vote either way on this.

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 16:53:43 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation 

>this is not a name wrote:
>>
>> As I'm leaving for college this weekend, I'm going on vacation until my
>> network connection is working. I really have no idea how long it'll take,
>> but I guess my expected duration of vacation is a week. I'll be able to
>> read and send mail before then, but it won't be convenient because it'll
>> be in a lab or at a kiosk.
>>
>> I'll be around for another day or so, but I don't know how often I'll be
>> able to check my mail.
>
>I am appointing Techno as Acting (None Yet) swinger.
>
>Malenkai
>Speaker

Oh, Come on.

You could at least appoint a member of (None Yet) to swing for it's party.

snowgod
still in gaol

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

Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 03:54:53 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, this is not a name wrote:

> >I am calling a Politeness Moon on this is not a name.  I do a hell of 
> >alot of work for this game, and in light of the fact that all of 
> >the (None Yet) is on vacation, and CFJ 275 is to be reassigned in 4 hours,
> >and Techno has shown interest in party chess, I find that the appointment
> >was not "ridiculous", but the above reply is.
> 
> The fact that Techno has shown interest in party chess does not even 
> begin to justify appointing a non-member of a party as its swinger. There 
> can be no possible justification for that. My message was not rude. There 
> is no rule stating that you have to assign an acting swinger (as far as I 
> know), and appointing someone in acting capacity in an office e cannot 
> legally hold is truly absurd. No one is denying the fact that you do a 
> lot of work for the game, Malenkai; however, the amount of work you do is 
> no justification for a bad decision.

Malenkai's decision is perfectly legal. 
btw- tinan, you might try to keep track of the members of your own Party.
Bascule is the Vacationing FUN Party Swinger, and is not a member of (None
Yet), your compatriots are mr cwm and snowgod.
If you want acting Swingers to be from the same Party, I'd like to point
out that the RFC to which you objected with the words"Party Chess is just
an activity for the Swinger" fixes this problem.
In fact, your objection to Malenkai's action implies, that you see
PartyChess as an activity a Swinger engages in on behalf of the Party.
Every word you typed here support that notion, and consequently, my RFC.

 > 
> I will not go on vacation unless mr cwm or Bascule comes back. 

Just be advised that should the game begin, and you will be out of reach,
you might lose a turn this way.
 
>And if 
> Techno wants to play party chess, he shouldform a party or try to 
> impeach the NAP swinger. And if Malenkai wants to get offended whenever 
> someone criticizes his decisions, he should resign from any offices that 
> require making decisions.
> 
> this is not a name
> Fight autocracy: Vote "NO" on the Politeness Moon

Vote YES on Fixing the Whole Swinger Thing (once it's on the queue)

Niccolo Flychuck

I like this. tinan has been my Bilam (I'll check out the proper English
pronunciation later)

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:54:59 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

Uri Bruck wrote:

> However, I don't think this warrants a Politeness Moon. This calls for
> interpretation of the law. Currently, appointment of acting Swingers is
> flawed, for several reasons. I have RFCd a fix.

The fact that the rules are flawed does not obviate me from the
responsibility of following them.  If an entire party goes on vacation,
it seems to me that the acting swinger shall be from another party,
until such times as the rules are changed.  

The rule "Speed" does not permit me to wait until the rules are changed,
regardless of how well intentioned such rule changes are.  That rule also
has a clause which says "Officers shall make a good faith attempt to
keep the game moving along".  

As I personally do not have the time to commit to Party Chess (I'm holding
out for Eleusis :)), and would simply pass as an acting swinger. Appointing
a player who has shown an interest in the game to take my place seemed
"a good faith effort to keep the game moving along".

The Chess-Umpire has stated his intent to run the game in the CFJ 275
FALSE thread; I cannot see any reason whatsoever why my appointment of
Techno was inappropriate, nor has anyone else offered one, and I challenge
anyone to do so, as we can all learn.

tinan's response to my attempt to follow the rules, in good faith, was
inappropriate, IMHO.

Malenkai
trying to follow the rules

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:00:35 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PFBonds 

>If Player A thought that his score was about to rise, I don't think
>he would want to sell his bonds.  If the player thought his score was
>going down, who else would want to buy them?  I thought about a rule
>that would not allow a player to own thier own bonds.  This might cause
>a little more action.  But I don't know if I am sure that this would be a
>good idea.

I would support a rule that would make it impermissable for a player to own
more than 10 of thier own bonds.  That seems fair, and could be fun.

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:04:08 -0800
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Vacation 

I am returning from vacation.

I will serve as acting swinger for (None-Yet) so tinan may go away to
college, if the speaker chooses to appoint me (and If I may be appointed
while in Gaol?).

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 21:07:35 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> I am returning from vacation.
> 
> I will serve as acting swinger for (None-Yet) so tinan may go away to
> college, if the speaker chooses to appoint me (and If I may be appointed
> while in Gaol?).

You may not play Party Chess in Gaol.  I will appoint you if and when
tinan goes on vacation, but I will not appoint a vacationing player 
until someone justifies doing so.

And why didn't you guys do this before jumping down my throat for following
the rules?

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 21:43:02 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Politeness

>The rule states that the Speaker, in this case, a member of the FUN Party,
>is the Acting Swinger.  Techno has shown more interest in Party Chess than
>I have.  Is it any less ridiculous that I be the swinger by default? 

You should have remained acting swinger and not done anything, because it 
was your duty to do the job, at least perfunctorily. It was not Techno's 
duty to do the job. You should not have appointed anyone.

>> I will not go on vacation unless mr cwm or Bascule comes back.
>
>Bascule is a member of the FUN party.  How is that relavent?

Whoops, I meant snowgod. My fingers were too quick.

>The other alternative is a Politeness Moon, which is the appropriate
>response.

No it isn't, because I wasn't impolite. I was pointing out a really bad 
decision. I didn't say anything rude.

this is not a name
Fight cults of personality: Vote "NO" on the Politeness Moon

- --      Mike Epstein            "The nice thing about being a celebrity
    [email-masked]         is that when you bore people, they 
  *                      *       think it's their fault."
http://www.bozosoft.com/mike/                         --Henry Kissinger

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 22:06:57 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Politeness

this is not a name wrote:

> You should have remained acting swinger and not done anything [...]

The action you advocate is a violation of the rule "Speed", in particular
the clause:

"Officers, in good faith, shall do all tasks presented to them as quickly
 as possible to keep the game moving along." 

You call my action, which is in accordance with the rules and a good 
faith attempt to keep the game moving, a "really bad decision", yet
advocate one which breaks the rules, and stalls the game.  I have no
further response than this to this flame war, so we can all save 
bandwidth.

If you were so concerned about this, why didn't you suggest this action
at the time, or ask someone in your party to come off of vacation, or
resign as swinger and take the 7 days to appoint another one?  Instead,
you leave something you care very much about to someone elses judgement
without comment, recommendation, or advice, and flame the decision.

Malenkai
flamed for following the rules
done flaming now

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 21:15:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Official

1. Map-Harfer-ness.

I have given the house formerly known as Dr McSpong's house to Guy
Fawkes, and the land it sits on.  The house is thus renamed Guy Fawkes's
house until he changes the name.  Dr McSpong was one of the two players
who left the game after the houses were given out, but before the
undead rules went into effect, so his house is not haunted and if he
rejoins the game, he will be considered a new player.

I note that this one sentence in rule 839 has been interpreted as giving
away existing land but creating houses on previously undeveloped land
at the same time:

   "Each player who has not previously been granted land by application
    of this rule shall be granted 1 kaa of urban land and a building of
    small size as their legal residence."

Since the same wording is used for the granting of the land and the house,
I interpret the rule as being able to give away existing, unowned,
unhaunted houses.  Similarly, I interpret it as being able to create new
land, which may become necessary before long if we keep getting new players.

I have only updated the text below the map; I will update the map itself
later.

2. Scorekeeperness

Habeous Corpus's amazing Whamiol has given him another 15 points.

3. Unperformed jobs

The financier needs to calculate the appropriate amount of money to be
given to Guy Fawkes, and in order to do so he needs to calculate the bond
yields at the end of the bond cycle this past Monday.  I sent him a
set of scores for the end of the bond cycle (identical to the scores I
posted Sunday after the results of proposals through 1159, except that
Habeous Corpus scored 15 points from the Whamiol another time when
IdiotBoy joined the game).

The registrar needs to select a mentor for Guy Fawkes.

/dev/joe
Map-Harfer
Scorekeeper
Didn't intend for the Undead rules to create haunted houses

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 21:26:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

Being a brand new player, I do not claim to know whether Techno's 
appointment to acting swinger was appropriate or not, and having no base 
to see what else has warranted a politeness moon, I do not claim to know 
whether the term "ridiculous" is really so insulting as to warrant 
official action.

However, I do see a compromise.  If this is not a name will simply 
publically amend his statement to say that he meant to say "silly" (not 
in the context of R728), which he will find listed as a synonym for 
"ridiculous" in most thesauri but which I believe to be generally 
complimentary in Ackanomia, and if Malenkai will accept being called 
silly (again, not in the context of R728) in exchange for encouraging all 
players who have not yet voted in the Politeness Moon to vote "Yes, he was 
polite," since there is no provision for retracting of Politeness Moon 
once launched, then this is not a name can be pacified by bearing the 
title Jazz JackRabbit for three days, and Malenkai can boast that in the 
middle of an argument, his adversary called him silly.

Of course, if forgivenss doesn't work in Ackanomia, preserve what little 
free speech we have left after the Witchunts, and vote "Yes, he was 
polite," anyway.

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 22:33:02 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: MapHarfin' Across the Universe

I would like to rename to Nomic entity currently known as "IdiotBoy's House"
to "FunkyTown"

IdiotBoy
- --
Matt Miller
[email-masked]

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

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 22:35:57 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Vacation

robert gene shimmin wrote:

> I do not claim to know whether the term "ridiculous" is really so
> insulting as to warrant official action.

That is actually what the vote is for.  Any term can warrant offical
action, its up to the electorate to determine if it was *really*
warranted.

> Of course, if forgivenss doesn't work in Ackanomia, preserve what little
> free speech we have left after the Witchunts, and vote "Yes, he was
> polite," anyway.

Forgiveness works, and I'm sure we forgive each other.  We've both been
around a long time (in Acka terms) and have been through flame wars
before.  I'm happy to say to any new players that flame wars are rare 
in Acka nowadays.
 
As for being "silly", this whole swinger thing is getting silly, and
should be fixed shortly.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 21:46:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RFC Games & Contests

On Fri, 6 Sep 1996, Uri Bruck wrote:

> RFC
> Creation of  Games & Contests
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> 
> 1. There exists a class of entities known as Games & Contests (singular - 
> Game or Contest)
> 2. Games & Contest are listed on the Games & Contest web page which is 
> maitained by the GamesMaster
> 3. The GamesMaster is a Functional Officer.
> 4. A listing for a Game or Contest consists of the name of the Game or 
> Contest, the name of its author or authors, and a link to a full 
> description which may be maintained on a seperate page.
> 5. 
> a.The Games & Contest web-page has a General Equipment Section, which 
> specifies entities that may be used with any of the Games & Contest on 
> the list. 
> b. Entities from the General Equipment section have no influence 
> on any Ackanomic entities other that than what is specified by this rule 
> and by the specific game in which they are being used.
> c. Equipment for a Game or Contest is implicitly created when the Game 
> start, and destroyed when the game is over.
> d. It is permissible to create legal Decks, according to R1155. 
> 6. Each Game or Contest  has a legal ackanomic name.
> 7. The description for each Game or Contest may specify the following things:
> a. Entities from the Genral Equipment section which are used in the 
> specific Game or Contest
> b. A list of entities specific to the Game or Contest, that can be used 
> as part of the Game or Contest. Section 5, subsections b-d are applicable 
> to the Game or Contest specific entities described in this section.
> c. Upper and lower limits on the number of participants in the specific 
> Game or Contest
> d. Rules for the Game or Contest.
> e. Conditions for winning the Game or Contest
> f. any additional information necessary to play that specific Game or 
> Contest.
> 8. Games & Contest have no direct influence on Ackanomic. They may not 
> manipulate any Ackanomic entity, with the following exceptions:
> a. Games & Contest may specify transfer of currency between participants 
> in the specific Game or Contest, as entry fees, rewards or penalties.
> b. Games & Contests may specify a transfer of currency from the Treasury 
> to the Game or Contest, with an upper of limit of A$50 per instance of a 
> Game or a Contest
> c. Games may add or subtract points from the score of a participating 
> player. The maximum number of points added or subtracted in any specific 
> instance of a Game or a Context is 12.
> 
> 9. Adding a listing to the Games & Contests web-page
> There two ways to add a listing to the Games & Contests home page
> 
>  a.By sending a  description of Games & Contests, or Entities for the 
> general equipment section are sent to the GamesMaster, who distirbutes 
> the description publically. If at least 5 Active Players, or 10% or the 
> Active Players endorse the description, then it is added to the Games & 
> Contest web-page, to the appropriate section.
> 10. Removing a listing of a Game or Context, or an entity from the 
> General Equipment section from the Games & Contests web-page.
> - A Game, a Context or a an entity from the General Equipment section can 
> be removed by a proposal whichi has been submitted and accepted according 
> to the rules.
> 11. Participation in Games and Contests is voluntary. No player may be 
> forced to take part in a Game or a Contest.
> 
> {{[These games and contests things should be fun, sort of diversions. 
> Since they have such little effect on Ackanomic, except for some small 
> effect on the actual participants, I see no reason to require the regular 
> majority for adding a listing to the Games & Contests home page. This has 
> several advantages:
> 1. The descriptions will not 'litter' the rule set.
> 2. If you don't want to play something, nobody is forcing you. You can 
> ignore the whole thing if you like. 
> 3. If people are really opposed to some game, they can remove using a 
> normal proposal.
> 
> 
> btw- this will not the tool for proposing Eleusis - which I will do in the
> next few days, because Eleusis can potentially involve more than A$50, I
> intend to propose both Eleusis versions. One is closer to the original and
> time consuming, the other is adapted to e-mail, but might prove to be more
> complex ]}}
> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> 
> 
> 

I would suggest the following:
1.  Establish a maximum number of games or contests that could exist at any 
one time.  This will prevent the Games and Contest page from being 
flooded with games that few players play yet not the required number of 
players really want to get rid of yet.

Perhaps more importantly, it will avoid diluting the players interested 
in the Games and Contests page across too many activities.  Imaging being 
able to muster only one or two players each for hearts, super babel, or 
haggle when one good game could be played if everyone pooled their interest. 

2.  Specifically limit the powers of game or contest rules to create 
entities that affect the outside reality of AckaNomic.  The "other 
than..." clause of 5b is simply too large of a loophole to take a risk 
on, despite the section 8 limits on how a game may not affect the outside 
world.  Imagine game rules for AckaJacks (if a player fails to catch the 
Big Red Bouncy Ball, and it is the third Tuesday of the month, then the 
Big Red Bouncy Ball escapes this game and begins bouncing through the 
streets of AckaNomia, causing damage as follows to a random 3 buildings, 
which the player guilty of not catching the Big Red Bouncy Ball must pay 
for from his own account...")  Of course, a CFJ would likely overturn the 
damages, but think of all the poor AckaCitizens sitting in the ruins of 
their homes waiting to see whether or not the Big Red Bouncy Ball really 
did damage them.  Just a thought.

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #209
*******************************