Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #221
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest     Wednesday, September 11 1996     Volume 01 : Number 221

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 01:02:20 -0400
From: this is not a name <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Cashing in on bondmania

Anyone care to bid higher than
>All Three Lots (60PFthis) @ $A225
>Individual lots (20 PFthis)@ $A75 

?

Going...going...

- --      Mike Epstein            "[The Air Force is pleased with the
    [email-masked]         performance of the C-5A cargo plane,
   [email-masked]        although] having the wings fall off
http://www.bozosoft.com/mike/    at 8,000 hours is a problem."
                                      --Maj. Gen. Charles F. Kuyk Jr.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 01:16:22 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Cashing in on bondmania

[email-masked] wrote:

> Let's cut to the chase then.
> 
> All Three Lots (60PFthis) @ $A225
> Individual lots (20 PFthis)@ $A75

These prices are starting to get more reasonable.  Perhaps I'll
add supply to the market soon.

BTW, to the Financier:  Is there a more recent account standing than
the one on the web page, dated 8/19?

In tracking down the e-mail lag, this message is timed 18:38, indicating
that the time zone in techno's mailer (+0000) is incorrect.  Looks 
like I received it 3 hours after it was sent.  Unusually heavy night
tonight, I suppose.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 01:12:11 EDT 
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: PFbonds

Habeous Corpus is out of the market.  No more PFhabeous will be offered
for original sale until further notice.  I want to concentrate on some of
the upcoming Proposals.

Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 01:12:11 EDT 
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: PFBonds

>I'm sure the Financier is wise enough to note the >actual sale is to Guy
Fawkes.

Please accept my appologies on the above transaction. Idiotboy is indeed
right,  the sale was intended for Guy Fawkes.  I was so engrossed in
Idiotboy's trading,  I mistyped.

Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 12:28:09 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Church: New Member 

Malenkai has joined the Church of the Markovian Dream and has been ordained
as a priest.

snowgod

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 1:59:23 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka : P1202 & 1203

Apparently some players have had trouble recieving some proposals.
P1202 and 1203 for some reason did not propigate to everyone.

Of course you can always use the nomicbot to retrieve the proposals.

#get 1202
#get 1203
These commands would send you the proposals in question.

Wayne

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:10:17 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1194 problems

On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> > Just to paraphrase a phrase often used by Malenkai. I've shown my version
> > of Party Gravity, what's yours?
> 
> I said if its broke.  Obviously its not intended to work that way.
Obviously?
What way?
You are making sweeping generalizations without a shred of supporting
argument.

What do you think was intended?

> 
> As for my version, I was actually going to neuterthe swing votes for a
That's a simple ammendment to make. 

> period of time to see how their accumulation worked, and see if party
> chess was playable and playtest it a little before giving something like
> a vote as a reward.  I cannot find an amendment I can live with, so I
> am going to propose its repeal.
> 
> Malenkai

I see a double standard here, Malenkai. Your most common refute to
opposition is "I've given my solution, what's yours?"  Yet you do not
demand the same from yourself.
(this is not intended to be offensive, merely an observation)

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 2:12:42 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1208

Proposal 1208 - Wed Sep 11 02:12:42 EDT 1996
Weightless
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Repeal R 1116, "The Law of Party Gravity"
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
{{[I thought about neutering it to see how votes *would* accumulate,
but I am bothered by a rule which dispenses votes based on an untested,
complex, heretofore buggy game.

I would like to see party chess playtest *alot* before giving away
votes.  I went in to tinker with party gravity, saw a paradox, saw
how a split underworld party could abuse the system, etc.  Lets
just playtest this thing first]}}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 2:12:54 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1209

Proposal 1209 - Wed Sep 11 02:12:54 EDT 1996
One less thing for the Financier to do
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 666 to remove section f).

{{[given the bull market in bonds, this unnecessary clause creates
extra work for the Financier]}}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 2:13:11 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1210

Proposal 1210 - Wed Sep 11 02:13:11 EDT 1996
Writer's Block this Month
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

This is a Modest proposal.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Amend R 451 to append the following text at the end of the rule:

The following shall be considered to be spelled correctly, even if
they do not appear in the Official Dictionary, with the indicated
meanings:

	1) 'iff' meaning 'if and only if'
	2) Spivak pronouns with their generally accepted meanings

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:44:15 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  PFBond market

On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> Furthermore.... I am placing 25 PFsnow's on sale.  Make offer.  Score has
> remained low for the previous cycle (due to FUN proposals) but i've got
> some good stuff coming up, and I see the value of these bonds scyrocketing!
> 
> snowgod
>
I'll give A$50 for those

Niccolo Flychuck

btw- please include a note to the Financier on the subject only on
messages in which a transaction actually takes place.
 
> 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:33:31 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Party Gravity 

Malenkai has once again his psychic powers.  He knows what we think, even
before we think it :)

On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> I have proposed the repeal of R 1116, Party Gravity, and encourage a
> YES vote for the following reasons:
> 
> The Party Gravity/Party Chess system seems to be built on the assumption
> that Party Chess is a competetion between parties.  I submit that this

No. There has never been such an assumption on my part. Chess has a
competitive element in it, however , any multi-player variant clearly has
some co-operative elements. 

> foundation is perhaps fallacious.  Given the discussion over P 1199, and
> some of the rather vocal opposition, it seems that party splits may
> occur anyway, such as in the case of Underworld 1 and Underworld 2.
> Thus your competition premise may be compromised.  Could the parties
> cooperate in Party Chess, one throwing pieces to the other in order
> to manipulate swing score?  I did not find any checks or balances that

Cooperate - sure, why not?
However such cooperation does not prevent Swingers from checking each
other, cooperation has its limits.

> would *prevent* such abuse, and while abuse in itself isn't necessarily

What abuse?  Cooperation between players can be part of the game.

> bad, this potential, IMO, is not fun or good for the game, especially
> with votes as the reward.  It can take some of the competitive fire out
> of the game of chess.
> 
> Furthermore, Party Chess itself is complex and untested, and has had 
> some deficiencies.  Again, I personally do not want the reward for
> play of such a game to be votes.  

The only fire is emanating from Malenkai

> 
> Also, it contains at least one minor paradox, and is currently unuseable
> anyway, at least as I read the rules.
> 
> Malenkai
>

Go ahead, repeal it. I can rack more points on a another Law of Party
Gravity than on ammendments anyway.

Shouldn't take more than a couple of days to RFC that.  

There is a major problem, though, with waiting for the game to develop
before we create its effect on the game.  

This is nothing but a political scam.

Whatever proposal will be suggested is bound to be supported or opposed
based on the current standing of Swingers in the game at the time of the
vote, and how that proposal affects them at that moment.

This is clearly a scam. Just a few days ago Malenkai suggested that all
Party Chess related messages and discussion be posted to acka-chess. Which
is more than reasonable.  This is clearly a PartyChess related  message,
yet he posts it to the main list,  in clear contradiction of his own
request.     

I can only applaud Malenkai for thinkink up such a grandiose political
scam, and would love to see how he manages to wrap it all up.

Niccolo Flychuck - even more amused than ever.

 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 00:08:54 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka:  PFBond market 

>Phil Ackley wrote:
>
>> and I see the value of these bonds scyrocketing!
>
>If you see the value skyrocketing, why would you want to sell?
>
>Malenkai
>ex-Acting Financier
>waiting for the speculative excess to clear out of the bond market

Shh!  No need to point out excess hype to the hypmeisters...  :)

snowgod
foiled again

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:11:46 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Registrar - new player

We have a new player in the game
his e-mail address is 
[email-masked]
his is Tim Carter 
he has not picked an Ackanomic name yet.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 01:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Chewing the Gumball

Unable to keep my mind on my research any longer, and noting that more
than enough time has lapsed, I leave the Library and rush about
Ackanomia, hither and yon, until I find: the Gumball.

I am now chewing the Gumball.

Calmer now, I return to the Library to resume my research. When the
noisy voices of my fellow Ackanomians rises in volume, I take no
notice. For I am at peace; I have chewed the Gumball of Ackanomia.

b

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:17:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  The Machine

breadbox has indeed made a valid point.  I retract P1194.  It would 
indeed be better to resubmit an improved version at the cost of 2 points 
than to try to ram through an amendment, assuming it passes the first time.

Thank you.

Guy Fawkes.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:22:30 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PFBond market

If the transaction hasn't yet taken place, I'll offer $75 for the lot.

Guy Fawkes

On Wed, 11 Sep 1996, Uri Bruck wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:
> > 
> > Furthermore.... I am placing 25 PFsnow's on sale.  Make offer.  Score has
> > remained low for the previous cycle (due to FUN proposals) but i've got
> > some good stuff coming up, and I see the value of these bonds scyrocketing!
> > 
> > snowgod
> >
> I'll give A$50 for those
> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> btw- please include a note to the Financier on the subject only on
> messages in which a transaction actually takes place.
>  
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:26:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1194

Thank you for believing me theologically sound.  I accept your offer.

On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:

> Guy Fawkes Wrote (wislely):
> 
>  But in the end, if this game of
> >rules comes down to nothing but anally-tight constriction of rules, it
> >will have lost the fun of the game.  And if it must crush all enthusiasm
> >to make things more neat and orderly, it will have lost the very
> >silliness that distinguishes it from other nomics (don't think I didn't
> >join this crazy game without tracking down all the other nomics I could
> >and checking out their rules, too.)  And if everything must be right the
> >first time, this game will be reduced to nothing but the firing back and
> >forth of minute amendments, an illusion of innovation in a realm utterly
> >devoid of creativity, sitting in a dungheap and calling moving a turd
> >from one's right hand to one's left progress.  Even its worst critics
> >call P1194 cool in concept, and unless they're just pretending to
> >partially agree in order to get people who genuinely like the idea to
> >listen to them, I think there's some amount of approval for it in
> >everyone.  I'll confess, and already have, that I should have RFC'd it,
> >but don't kill a good idea because of a mortal's oversight.  I call
> >upon all Acka to answer this question, to yourselves alone, because only
> >to yourselves does it really matter:  Do you like P1194 enough to improve
> >it, or is Acka really mob rule in the guise of democracy, where only the
> >perfect and the unscrupulous can survive?
> 
> I am publically inviting Guy to join the Church of the Markovian Dream and
> be ordained as a priest.
> 
> snowgod
> High Priest
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:05:10 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Registrar - new player

Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> We have a new player in the game
> his e-mail address is
> [email-masked]
> his is Tim Carter
> he has not picked an Ackanomic name yet.

Welcome aboard!

To the Registrar:

It would be genuinely helpful if you could put the new player infromation
on the Yellow Pages, specifically for Guy Fawkes, fnord, and Tim.  I use
this list for the CotC random judge determination.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:08:54 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: Re: PFBonds 

>On  10 Sep 1996,  Guy Fawkes wrote:
>
>>I offer 50 A$ for 30 PFHabeus
>
>>Guy Fawkes
>
>Habeous Corpus accepts.  I'm not as greedy as Niccolo,  nor as confident
>in the maintenance of my score.  I've got a couple of Proposals coming up
>that may drastically change my fortunes.  8-0
>
>Financier,
> please Trnasfer 30 PFHabeous to IdiotBoy, and A$50 from
>IdiotBoy's account to mine.
>
>Habeous Corpus

So noted.

ThinMan
Financier

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:13:29 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka:  PFBond market -- Financier, lookit this one, too. 

>> I'll pay A$20 for 20 PFIdiotBoy, I have no desire for anymore than 20 and
>> that's the price I'm offering.
>>
> 
>Considering your standing as my former mentor, I will, in fact, cut you the
>deal you suggest.  The Financier will, kindly,  report a transfer of 20
>PFIdiotBoy from IdiotBoy to Niccolo Flychuck, and a transfer of A$20 from
>Niccolo Flychuck to IdiotBoy.

So noted.

ThinMan
Financier
Present and Likely Future Holder of 100 PFThinMan

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:11:49 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka : P1202 & 1203

[email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Apparently some players have had trouble recieving some proposals.
> P1202 and 1203 for some reason did not propigate to everyone.
> 
> Of course you can always use the nomicbot to retrieve the proposals.
> 
> #get 1202
> #get 1203
> These commands would send you the proposals in question.

I failed to receive these proposals, as well as P 1207.  I am perfectly
willing to do the #get command, put perhaps there is a problem at the
server end than can be cleared up.  Also the problem remains where 
a proposal on the *end* of the list may not have been distributed, so
you're not sure whether to do the #get command.

For example, the last proposal I received was 1210.  Is there a 1211?

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:20:06 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka:  PFBond market -- Financier, you know the drill. 

>>To summarize for the Financier:
>>A$25 & 25 PFTechno transfer from Techno to Idiotboy 
>>50 PFIdiotBoy transfer from IdiotBoy to Techno.
>
>>IdiotBoy
>>No advertisement
>
>This is to show the Financier my acceptance of the above transaction.
>
>Techno

So Noted.

ThinMan
Financier

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:19:15 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 281 (snowgod)

Habeous Corpus declined.

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

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 281
  Subject: Party Gravity Paradox I
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Habeous Corpus (declined to judge)
2nd Judge: snowgod (selected Sep 11, 1996, 9:20h EDT)
Judgement:

Statement:

The legality of a Swinger trading a SwingVote after the Round Count is
incremented to a number that, when divided by RoundFreq, results in an
integer, for the first time, cannot be determined with finality.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

SwingVotes are protected, therefore can only be acquired in accordance
with the Rules.  Therefore, before the first time the Round Count is
incremented to a number that, when divided by RoundFreq, results in an
integer, all swingers have 0 swing votes (or at least did in this case,
as no used Malenkai's loophole acquire any, as we are good sports).

The first time (and each subsequent time) such incrementation and division
occur, the following is relavent, per R 1116:

> a. When ever the Round Count is incremented to a number that, when
> divided by RoundFreq, results in an integer, SwingVotes are distributed
> according to the following scheme

> The number of SwingVotes received by each Swinger= the largest integer
> smaller than [(the Swinger's SwingScore / (RoundFreq * number of
> Swingers)) +0.4]

The condition in the paragraph labelled a. is met, thus SwingVotes are
distributed in accordance with the schedule in the next quoted paragraph.
But what is that schedule?  I quote from R 545, in full:

> A left square bracket in a rule or other text begins a note, which ends
> with the next following right square bracket, or the end of the rule or
> body of text, whichever comes first. [This means that notes do not nest.]
> In the Ackanomic language, notes have no semantic meaning, whatever
> their lexical content.

Thus the content in the schedule in [brackets] has no semantic meaning.
Therefore the swinger receives swing votes in accordance with the following
schedule:

> The number of SwingVotes received by each Swinger= the largest integer
> smaller than

Smaller than what?  It is indeterminate.  They receive, by rule, some
integral number of SwingVotes smaller than [?].  It may be 10, it
may not be 10, who the heck knows?.  Thus the number of SwingVotes received
by the Swinger is indetermine.  Thus we do not know if they have zero
or a non-zero quantity, thus we do not know if they have any to trade.
Thus we do not know the legality of the swinger trading one, because we
cannot know if e has any!  A verdict of TRUE is indicated.

I note that SwingVotes are explicitly tradeable, in accordance with R 1116,
so that is not a counter argument.

The initiator wins the game in accordance with R 219 on a verdict of TRUE.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:03:22 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  PFBond market PFsnow

> Furthermore.... I am placing 25 PFsnow's on sale.  Make offer.  Score has
> remained low for the previous cycle (due to FUN proposals) but i've got
> some good stuff coming up, and I see the value of these bonds
scyrocketing!
> 
> snowgod
> 

I would be interested in paying A$60 for 25 PFsnow.

Still buying-
IdiotBoy

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:09:53 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Keep the Bond Market healthy

> From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
> For a **very** small commission, I would be willing to keep your
> bid, asked, and last trades on a web page.  I will let you put your
> ads there as well :)
> 
> Malenkai
> have web, will travel

I would be very interested in this, if I could update the page frequently
via email or ftp.  I am going to work in the next few Ackanomic days to
create a consortium of Bond Traders, so we can lower our costs and create
wealth for everyone.

IdiotBoy

Advertisement:
Here in FunkyTown, the word is that "trickle-down" economics works.  Support
your local economy:  vote YES on P1207.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:16:45 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Keep the Bond Market healthy

Well, I hadn't recieved it in my mailbox, either.  When I asked the nomicbot
for my current votes, there it was.  I figured I had missed the original
posting, somehow.

As a sidelight, are the proposals considered promoted when Wayne puts them
in the nomicbot queue, or when they show up on the public forum?

IdiotBoy

> From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
> This is a test.  This post is timed 21:26 EDT.  I recevied it at about
> 23:00 EDT.  I still have not seen P1207, but I do not believe this is
> a typo, as I submitted a proposal tonight that bond traders would favor.
> 
> It is now 00:26 EDT.  Is the server lagging, or is it my ISP?  
> Is there a P 1207?
> 
> Malenkai
> we live in barbaric times

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:22:00 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Cashing in on bondmania

> From: [email-masked]
> Let's cut to the chase then. 
> 
> All Three Lots (60PFthis) @ $A225
> Individual lots (20 PFthis)@ $A75 
> 
> Techno
> "Don't learn the tricks of the trade, learn the trade."

Don't go using your Extranomic Hollywoodisms on me.  I, naturally, have a
counter offer.

All three lots (60PFthis) @ A$245
Individual lots (20PFthis) @ A$80 each

By the way, I have a new quote--

25 PFTechno @ A$125

IdiotBoy

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:25:48 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PFbonds

> From: [email-masked]
> Habeous Corpus is out of the market.  No more PFhabeous will be offered
> for original sale until further notice.  I want to concentrate on some of
> the upcoming Proposals.
> 
> Habeous Corpus

I want to buy as much PFHabeous as is currently available in the market.  I
am paying up to A$4 per PFBond.

IdiotBoy

Advertisement:
Worried about price fixing and false rumors creating false interest in
PFBonds?  Let IdiotBoy direct you thru this increasingly complex PFBond
market. 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:29:10 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PFBonds

> From: [email-masked]
> Please accept my appologies on the above transaction. Idiotboy is indeed
> right,  the sale was intended for Guy Fawkes.  I was so engrossed in
> Idiotboy's trading,  I mistyped.
> 
> Habeous Corpus

Man, given my new bullish position on PFHabeous, I shoulda tried to wrangle
those bonds into my portfolio.

IdiotBoy

Advertisement:
Sometimes it appears that I miss market trends, that because I'm busy taking
care of my clients' money. 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:31:34 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Registrar - new player

> From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
> To: Ackanomic Mailing List <[email-masked]>
> Subject: acka: Registrar - new player
> Date: Wednesday, September 11, 1996 4:11 AM
> 
> 
> We have a new player in the game
> his e-mail address is 
> [email-masked]
> his is Tim Carter 
> he has not picked an Ackanomic name yet.
> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> 
So his bonds aren't named yet, either?  ;)

Welcome aboard, [email-masked]
IdiotBoy

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 17:13:52 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Registrar - new player

On Wed, 11 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> Uri Bruck wrote:
> > 
> > We have a new player in the game
> > his e-mail address is
> > [email-masked]
> > his is Tim Carter
> > he has not picked an Ackanomic name yet.
> 
> Welcome aboard!
> 
> To the Registrar:
> 
> It would be genuinely helpful if you could put the new player infromation
> on the Yellow Pages, specifically for Guy Fawkes, fnord, and Tim.  I use
> this list for the CotC random judge determination.
> 
> Malenkai
> 
Will do.
Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:21:27 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  IdiotBoy Marketing.

I have decided to expand my successful marketing campaign to include the
.sig files of other posters to the Public Forum.  I, hereby,. offer snowgod
A$30 for 7days of exclusive rights to advertise in eir .sig file.  snowgod
will be required to include an advertisement for my Bond Trading and
Investment Counselling services in all of eir messages to the Pubic Forum. 

In addition, snowgod will be required to produce said ads (a minimum of 1 ad
per day for the length of the campaign).  Once an ad has been created for
the day, e may use that in all eir messages that day.

Send me your rate cards, if you'd like to sell that unused space at the end
of your messages-
IdiotBoy

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:01:15 +0200
From: Niklas Mellin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka : P1202 & 1203

[email-masked] wrote:
>
> Apparently some players have had trouble recieving some proposals.
> P1202 and 1203 for some reason did not propigate to everyone.
>
> Of course you can always use the nomicbot to retrieve the proposals.
>
> #get 1202
> #get 1203
> These commands would send you the proposals in question.

I just want to point out that these proposals is also missing on the
web page. Using the web is for me the most convenient way of getting
the info, since it is a lot faster than the mail gateway on my end.

Mellon

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 17:28:45 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Game variants (P1194 problems)

On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, robert gene shimmin wrote:

> 
> 
> Niccolo--
> 
> Have you read R. Wayne Schmidtberger's "New Rules for Classic Games"?  
> Party Chess seems to show its influence.
> 
> Guy Fawkes

I haven't read that specific work, but I have read quite a bit about
new variants for classic games. Some of it was in the context of
mathematical games columns such as Gardner's.

I am also a regular browser of the Chess Varinats home pages (there's a
link from my home page). At least one piece I proposed, the Camel, exists
in several other chess variants.  

Sorry to take your scoop, snowgod, Bascule, but the news should be made
public. The Chess Variants home page now has a link to Ackanomic
PartyChess. There is a currently the article on the chess variant server
is still identical to the one on my web space. Should there be any
changes, I will update my copy, Hans Bodelaender, keeps links to both and
the PartyBoard itself.

Sorry journalists, I will make myself available for interviews to any
ackanomic publications who will contact me.

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Malenkai wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > >As for its similarity to Eleusis,  Niccolo did not invent Eleusis, nor did he
> > > invent chess.  There is nothing wrong with that, and no slap against Niccolo.
> > > Creative adaptions of either system seem perfectly reasonable, and I agree that
> > > Eleusis, the Machine, and Party Chess can all exist as subgames.  For that
> > > matter, we didn't invent Nomic.  Should we not play it or adapt it?
> > 
> > Well said. Those are both adaptations (although Party Chess includes a lot
> > of original and creative material) and the Machine also contains some
> > elements of existing games, although I would say that the Machine is far
> > close to a new game than eiter of my adaptations. May I reffer all who
> > qulams with Guy Fawkes's originality to Hofstadter's "Variation's on a
> > Theme as the Crux of Creativity"
> > 
> > Niccolo Flychuck
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:35:25 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Whamiol.

It is the belief of those who reside in FunkyTown, that the Whamiol has just
about worn out its ability to produce good returns.  IdiotBoy is willing to
take said Gadget off the hands of HC.

IdiotBoy

Advertisement:
Take control of your financial future:  vote YES on P1207 and P1209.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 10:55:42 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Acka : P1202 & 1203

From all of the responses I've gotten, it's obviuos that some of these
proposals didn't get distributed.  Did anyone get the proposals? 
/dev/joe, did they get to you, are they in the archives?

==
I'm not sure how they could have not been sent out.  When I recieve a
proposal, I save it in a file.  Then I edit the file by adding a
#proposal line, and sometimes give it a title.  I also have to delete
a .sig if there is one there. 
Once all that is done, I run np (new proposal).  It fixes up all of the
Proposal Headers, gives it the next number, timestamps it, then mails
it out to the list.  If something was wrong there, I would see an error.

I am going to resend 1202, 1203 and 1207.  Are there any others that I
may have missed?

Wayne

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 10:56:04 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: P1202

Proposal 1202 - Mon Sep 09 23:33:12 EDT 1996
More Work for the Map-Harfer
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend Rule 895, "Map-Harfer", to read:

      The Office of the Map-Harfer is a Functional Office. 

      The duties of the Map-Harfer are:	
	a) to create and maintain the Map of Ackanomia, as governed by
other rules. 
	b) to maintain and make publically available a list of the 
locations of all entities, including players, for which location is
known or specified.

{{[it makes more sense for the map-harfer to do this, rather than the
speaker]}}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 10:56:20 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: P1203

Proposal 1203 - Mon Sep 09 23:33:42 EDT 1996
Why Me?
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

Amend R 592, "Protection" to add the following text after the fourth
paragraph of the rule:

Manipulation of a protected entitiy is permissable if such manipulation
is not explicitly regulated by the rules, and such manipulation would
not have a material effect on the game.  In other words, the game
state must be the same after the manipulation as it would have been
had the manipulation not occurred.

For the purposes of the above paragraph, discussion of the manipulation
is not considered a material effect on the game.  Nor is the initiation,
or the effects, of a CFJ or CFCJ alledging or indicating the manipulation
was illegal, unless said CFJ or CFCJ is judged TRUE.  It is recognized
that deciding whether a particular manipulation materially affected the
game state is a matter that often can only be decided by judgement alone.

{{[I just want to drink some Right-Handed Grapefruit Juice, or bonk
Supreme Court Justices over the head with a Bronze Torch, and not go
to Gaol like snowgod did.]}}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 10:57:52 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1211

Proposal 1211 - Wed Sep 11 10:57:52 EDT 1996
Repeal 432
IdiotBoy  (Matt Miller)

This proposal, if enacted, will repeal R432 ("Consecutive NO Votes").

{{[<-- Them brackets are COOL!  R432 is an archaic rule, which merely serves
to subjugate the will of the players]}}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 10:59:00 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Acka: P1207

Proposal 1207 - Tue Sep 10 16:56:10 EDT 1996
Underworld Payoff
Wayne  (Wayne Sheppard)

{{ Each Active Player who is a member of Underworld when this proposal
passes shall be granted A$300 each, payable from the Treasury. }}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:13:38 -0400
From: Randy Hall <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Party Gravity

This is long, but I would appreciate its reading, as it
underscores serious problems, which seem to be being lost
in the rhetoric.

I'm not sure what Niccolo's response to my party gravity discourse
means, but I shall present yet another rational argument as to
why Party Gravity is a bad rule, and why it should be repealed.
I can humbly ask, of those who support it, to counter with the
same level of rational discussion.

This time I will use an example, P 1207, the gist of which gives
every member of the Underworld Party A$300.  Another of these 
no-brainer proposals that has no chance to pass?  Lets count
the votes:

underworld + unity: 5
Tammany + gnome: 2
4 tools votes: 4

11 votes under control of the Underworld party, assuming they
get the Gnome, and Wayne has shown his aptitude and willingness
to do so in the past.  11 votes is often enough to get something
through.  This does not count the odd 2 or 3 votes from
Mellon and other players who attempt to vote against the
trend to acquire points.  Expected votes, based on
previous patterns and expected strategy: 13.5

Cost of the above votes: A$600.  Return A$1200.  Not bad for
a week's worth of work.

What does this have to do with Party Gravity?  Party Gravity 
is another scheme that gives parties votes.  As I understand
the concept, a party can acquire up to 3 votes this way.

The Underworld Party has indicated its willingness to split
if P 1199 fails, and they acquire 2 more members.  P 1199
shouldn't fail, because it does no harm and adds value, but
who knows...

They, or anyone else, could split anyway to possibly persue
the following scam, which I think is wholly different from
"cooperation" as alluded to in Niccolo's response.

UW1 simply, and intentionally, throws all their pieces to
UW2, in order to give them the highest weight, and get the
most swing votes.  This is not competetion, or cooperation,
it is a scam.  Not the intent of Party Chess in my opinion,
as I have stated previously, but I do admit this is peculation
(wholly different than the claim of being a psysic, however).

I do not have the rules in front of me, so I don't remember if
all swing votes can be used on a single proposal by the party,
but even if they cannot, UW2 can give one of them to UW1,
thus they can cast 2 more in the above senerio.  Expected
votes under this scheme, given the assumptions, which are not
at all remote: 17.5, probable passage.  What if it was like
P 1141 ?  Thus a party of 6 members casts 15 votes!
[17.5 = 2 swing + 2 more tools + 13.5 from above].

The thing is, this scam could be perpetuated forever.  Each
such proposal could bankroll more tools and tammany votes,
and purchases of additional chess pieces to sacrifice. *Then*
P 1141 comes in after the Treasury has been cleaned out!

On top of this, again as I have stated previously, the votes
are awarded based on performance in a complex, untested,
patched, and heretofore buggy game.  Again a little peculation,
but you cannot be certain how it is going to play out and
how these things, or how many, are going to be distributed.
If you could look that far ahead, you could be a master chess
player yourself.

I have already demonstrated a glaring bug in how swing votes
are calculated (qv CFJ 281).  Fortunately, this bug neuters
the rule.  If it is patched, I cannot say with finality
what other bugs exist.  There is at least one other proposal
in the queue to fix other bugs in the rule.

I admit, also in this analysis, that the Tools rule also
needs to be examined, but that was there apriori, before
party gravity.  My math indicates swing votes, which cost
noting and have no associated financial risk, would put a
proposal in this senerio over the edge.

In summary, and in the absence of a logical counterargument,
the above hopefully will be convincing enough to support
me in repealing this potentially dangerous rule.  If not, it
is neutered and can just take up space in the ruleset, for now.

As for Niccolo's comments to my previous discourse on Party
Gravity, and why it should be repealed, I did find them 
offensive, and non-constructive in solving the problem.
I only ask that Niccolo read the charter of his own party,
and consider my arguments, before such replies in the
future.

As for P 1207, the indicated strategy is ABSTAIN for all
non-underworld party members.  The extra votes will not
count towards quorum.

Malenkai
repeal party gravity

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:18:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka : P1202 & 1203

Wayne asked:
> From all of the responses I've gotten, it's obviuos that some of these
> proposals didn't get distributed.  Did anyone get the proposals? 
> /dev/joe, did they get to you, are they in the archives?

I did not receive P1202, 1203, or 1207 until Wayne re-sent them, just after
sending the message quoted above.  They are not in the archive.

Last night, there were apparently some connection problems on the internet
somewhere.  When Malenkai was discussing the time of mail being sent &
received, there were 18 messages in the outgoing mail queue on wilma,
all being sent to some ackanomic mailing list.  All of them had yet to
be delivered to addresses in northern europe -- I recognized Bascule's,
Robin Hood's, and Mellon's addresses, and observer [email-masked].
A smaller number of messages had yet to be sent to other players.
Currently, the mail queue is empty.

/dev/joe
Postmaster

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:38:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Pf mania

'twould be ironic, wouldn't it, if IdiotBoy were to corner the market on 
PF's, only to see them rendered practically useless by a rule change.

No threat indended, no suggestions implied, merely a musing.

Guy Fawkes.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 11:40:01 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Re: Acka: Party Gravity

> This time I will use an example, P 1207, the gist of which gives
> every member of the Underworld Party A$300.  Another of these 
> no-brainer proposals that has no chance to pass?  Lets count
> the votes:
> 
> underworld + unity: 5
> Tammany + gnome: 2
> 4 tools votes: 4
> 
> 11 votes under control of the Underworld party, assuming they
> get the Gnome, and Wayne has shown his aptitude and willingness
> to do so in the past.  11 votes is often enough to get something
> through.  This does not count the odd 2 or 3 votes from
> Mellon and other players who attempt to vote against the
> trend to acquire points.  Expected votes, based on
> previous patterns and expected strategy: 13.5

There are fifteen players who are not members of Underworld.  Even if
3 of them voted for 1207 and 3 more abstained, that still leaves 9 votes
against, not counting any possible Unity Votes.  We would have to muster
up 18 For votes to counter that.

> Cost of the above votes: A$600.  Return A$1200.  Not bad for
> a week's worth of work.

Party Chess stuff deleted....

> I do not have the rules in front of me, so I don't remember if
> all swing votes can be used on a single proposal by the party,
> but even if they cannot, UW2 can give one of them to UW1,
> thus they can cast 2 more in the above senerio.  Expected
> votes under this scheme, given the assumptions, which are not
> at all remote: 17.5, probable passage.  What if it was like
> P 1141 ?  Thus a party of 6 members casts 15 votes!
> [17.5 = 2 swing + 2 more tools + 13.5 from above].

As I've noted before, just 9 Votes Against still render this
strategy useless.  Malenkai might be trying to use scare tactics
to get his adgenda through, as shown in the following paragraph:

> In summary, and in the absence of a logical counterargument,
> the above hopefully will be convincing enough to support
> me in repealing this potentially dangerous rule.  If not, it
> is neutered and can just take up space in the ruleset, for now.

I don't really care for PartyChess or Party Gravity myself, but
some Underworld members are keenly interested in it.  So we might
as well try to win and pick up some Extra Votes.

I've personally tried to make this a one person-one vote system before.
I've tried to repeal the Gnome and Tammany before.  But it is apparant
that the current group of players support these Rules.  So Underworld
will try to do it's best to take advantage of them.

Speaking of P1207, I will personally pay for each YES vote by a non-UW
member.  You should get your share as well.

Wayne

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #221
*******************************