Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #237
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest      Sunday, September 15 1996      Volume 01 : Number 237

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 00:00:05 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Gnome Bussiness

Habeous Corpus wrote:
> On Saturday,  14 Sep 96,  /dev/joe wrote:
> | > RFC
> | > No Business Like Gnome Business
> | > Guy Fawkes (Robert Shimmin)
> | 
> | I like this.
> 
> If so,  why did you vote against Jeremiah,  it did basically the same
> thing,  with some weighting added for monetary consideration.

Two reasons:

1. Jeremiah had that preamble that was going to end up as a separate
rule and have to be repealed (but as has since been noticed, we had
quite a few of those already).

2. Although I didn't say it, I meant that I liked it as an alternative
to the existing Gnome rule.  In general, I don't really want to have
any additional random votes being thrown around.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 21:08:53 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Last Chance To Bid 

This will be my last post before releasing the Auction Results.  The
previously posted bid of A$135, by IdiotBoy still stands.  When placing any
bids between now and the close of the auction,  be sure to account for the
possibility of bids by other players, and raise your bid accordingly.

Also, it has been brought to my attention that the closing time of the
auction I posted earlier may have been correct.  The auction will end at
23:54 (-9), which is 11:54 PM in Alaska.  Please make the proper conversion
for your timezone.

Chief Cheese
who is not too big to admit when he makes a mistake

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 96 1:22:31 EDT 
From: [email-masked] ()
Subject: Ackanomic: Proposal 1243

Proposal 1243 - Sun Sep 15 01:22:31 EDT 1996
Change of Hunting Season from Gnomes to Geese
Malenkai  (Randy Hall)

{{[This proposal missed by one vote last time.  I don't give up that
easily.  At the very least, the effects of these rule changes shall be
to reduce bandwidth usage, in serval ways.  I also plan to propose an
amendment that gives the Goose to any criminal who checks into the
Cow Town Hotel (as that rule is too weak now), and have something else
in the queue that will have it flying around.  But don't let those things
sink this proposal, they are seperate amendments.

This rule also gives incentive for score improvement.

BTW, I rewrote the R 219 part to define the term "Paradox Win CFJ", and
to codify CFJ 280, so vote for it for that part :)]}}
 
- ------------------------------------------------------------

Repeal R 355, "The Voting Gnome"

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

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

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

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

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

Conditions upon which the Goose is transferred:

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

2) Upon a verdict on a Paradox Win CFJ being overturned to TRUE, the
Goose goes Somewhere Else, if and only if the player possessing it was
the initiator of the CFJ in question. If this judgement is not overruled,
then the player who called for judgement is declared the winner of the
cycle; the win occurring at the time it becomes illegal to appeal the
CFJ under the current rules.

All of the following actions must be announced publically if they are
performed, and the time of such post establishes the time when these
actions occur:

3) A player who has possessed the Goose for at least 7 days may pay
A$200 to the Treasury and cause it to go Somewhere Else.

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

5) A player who possesses the Goose may pay A$350 to the Treasury and
transfer it to any other active player of their choice.  The receiving
player may not decline the transfer.

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

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

Amend R 219 to read in full:

If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the
legality of some action cannot be determined with finality, or if some
action appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may call for
judgement on a statement to that effect. 

Such a call for judgement must contain in its reasoning a statement to
the effect that the initiator is claiming a win in accordance with R 219,
on a verdict of True.  Such a CFJ is called a "Paradox Win CFJ".  No CFJ
may be called a Paradox Win CFJ, except as designated by the Rules.
 
If the statement is judged True, and the judgement is not overruled, then
the player who called for judgement is declared the winner of the cycle; 
the win occurring at the time it becomes illegal to appeal the CFJ
under the current rules.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 09:44:27 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1243

On Sun, 15 Sep 1996 [email-masked] wrote:

> Proposal 1243 - Sun Sep 15 01:22:31 EDT 1996
> Change of Hunting Season from Gnomes to Geese
> Malenkai  (Randy Hall)
> 

Replacing old entities with new ones is not a bad idea. I may be missing
something, but than than being transferred, I'm not clear on what is it
that the Goose does. 
Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 00:46:33 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Auction Result 

Ackanomians,

The auction for the Vending Machine has been completed, but the results are
unclear.  It appears that the High Bid belongs to Guy Fawkes, who has bid
H+1 A$, where H is the magnitude, in A$, of the highest bid less than 305
A$ submitted by a player other than Guy Fawkes.  I have submitted a CFJ on
this bid to determine it's legality.  The total bid in this case would have
been A$146 because...

Habeous Corpus bid A$145 and will be the proud owner of the Vending Machine
should the court find that Guy Fawkes is not.

In any event, wll the financier please not my A$15 commission on this sale?

frozenwaterdiety
inventor

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** *
IdiotBoy is The Authority on the PFBond market.  The mention or lack of mention
of a particular bond in IdiotBoy's quotes can send a bond up or down.  Get your
bond listed on IdiotBoy's latest quotes page, just ask him how.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 01:18:19 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: It Might Interest You To Know 

It might interest you to know that...

Since July 22 (The last time I purged my mail) I have recieved 2,576 (give
or take a couple hundred) message with the subject line Acka: or
Ackanomic:, which take over  5 Megabytes of diskspace to store.

When I printed out my newest hardcopy of the rules today (managed to keep
the computer from crashing for more than five minutes) it filled 98 single
spaced pages, printed in 10 point palation.

frozenwaterdiety
has too much time on his hands

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 96 13:40:00 BST
From: R Shaw <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1236 

> From [email-masked] Sat Sep 14 18:08 BST 1996
> Sender: [email-masked]
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 12:10:15 -0500 (CDT)
> From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
> X-Sender: [email-masked]
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1236
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > TEXT/PLAIN> ; > charset=US-ASCII> 
> Content-Length: 450
> 
> 
> 
> > > Proposal 1236 - Fri Sep 13 17:19:11 EDT 1996
> > > Scam deterrance
> > > Robin Hood  (R Shaw)
> 
> What does it mean exactly, if the old org and the new one are the same?  
> Let's say, for instance, that Honor Among Theives passes, and the Underworld 
> disbands and reorganizes as the Brotherhood of the River Styx.  It's 
> rather ambiguous whether being "identical" as per this proposal would 
> mean that the old rule applies to the new org.
> 
> Guy Fawkes
> 
> 
Under this proposal the party would have gained at most
an alias. Underworld would still exist because the new party would
have done everthing Underworld did, including taking that name.
Since one of the parties names would still be Underworld 'Honour 
among thieves' would still apply to them.
  
 The rule is aimed at catching parties trying to evade obligations
or gain additional freebies.

 Robin Hood

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 09:25:38 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomic: Proposal 1243

Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 15 Sep 1996 [email-masked] wrote:
> 
> > Proposal 1243 - Sun Sep 15 01:22:31 EDT 1996
> > Change of Hunting Season from Gnomes to Geese
> > Malenkai  (Randy Hall)
> >
> 
> Replacing old entities with new ones is not a bad idea. I may be missing
> something, but than than being transferred, I'm not clear on what is it
> that the Goose does.

A player with the Goose may not win the cycle.  Its like a "hot potato".

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 09:28:52 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: It Might Interest You To Know

Phil Ackley wrote:

> (managed to keep the computer from crashing for more than five minutes)

You're not making a very convincing argument for getting a mac.

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 09:51:46 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 285 (ThinMan)

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

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 285
  Subject: Algebraic Auction
Initiator: frozenwaterdiety
    Judge: ThinMan (selected Sep 15, 1996, 09:56h New York Time)
Judgement:

Statement:

Guy Fawkes bid of H+1 A$ (where H is the magnitude, in A$, of the highest
bid less than 305 A$ submitted by a player other than Guy Fawkes) in the
auction for the Vending Machine was a legal bid.

frozenwaterdiety's Reasoning:

I do not care either way, I just wish to see this resolved.  Included is
the reasoning that Guy Fawkes sent to me with his bid.

>Hey, nowhere does it say an algebraic expression is an invalid bid.  All
>the rules say is that a bid must be an amount equal to or less than the
>amount the player making it possesses.  Any set of bids containing a bid
>less than 305 A$ made by a player other than Guy Fawkes contains a valid
>H, and the set of bids in this auction is such a set.  Since a set of
>bids containing a valid H results in a bid from me of H+1, which must be
>305 A$ or less, this bid is valid for any set of bids containing a valid
>H, and this bid is valid.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 10:29:57 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 286 (Techno)

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

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 286
  Subject: Gadget Precedence Paradox
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Techno (selected Sep 15, 1996, 10:32h New York Time)
Judgement:

Statement:

The legality of the owner of the Green Tomato gadget (made from the
Blueprint for a Green Tomato, described below), should such things exist, 
trading that gadget after the owner of a Scroll of Crumble has attempted
to destroy that particular Green Tomato gadget via the Scroll of Crumble,
cannot be determined with finality.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

Now that I have a little more time, digging through the problems gadgets
and blueprints have, once again (the pseudo-rule problem).  Also, more
incentive to vote YES and bring that Chartreuse Goose on-line!  I believe
this one is pretty solid however.

Sorry for the Byzantine statement, but there are a few legal requirements
of R 589 and R 219 to comply with.  A better statement might have been:
"There exists a paradox in Gadget precedence", and that is the gist of
this paradox CFJ claim; that if two gadgets have conflicting behaviour
or specifications, there is no way to determine with finality which 
specification shall hold sway.  Trust me, that is what the statement
says :).

The Blueprint for a Green Tomato:

The Green Tomato is indestructable.  Its owner may use the title "Willy
Nilly" by publically announcing that they are doing so. This is the last
sentence of the Blueprint for a Green Tomato.

From the Blueprint archive, the Blueprint for a Scroll of Crumble:

> The owner of a Scroll of Crumble may Read it by announcing its text
> (which the player may make up) publicly. Upon doing so that player must
> indicate some existing gadget. That gadget is then destroyed. If the
> gadget was indestructible, three points are deducted from the score of
> the Scroll of Crumble's owner. Lastly, if the Scroll of Crumble still
> exists, it is destroyed, too. 

The Green Tomato makes explicit that it is indestructable.  The Scroll
of Crumble makes explicit that it destroys the target gadget (Green
Tomato).  Which holds precedence?  Is it destroyed?  It cannot be 
determined with finality, therefore we do not know if the owner retains
the Green Tomato, therefore its tradability cannot be determined with
finality.  

I note that the Scroll of Crumble specifies a penalty for destroying an
indestructable gadget, but that sentence does not explicitly say in
such case that the target will not be destroyed; in fact, it implies the
opposite with the word "was" when referring to the [alledgedly] destroyed
gadget.  No way out there.

In other notes, I note that the Green Tomato is a hypothetical Blueprint.
I have some question about doing that, but it is the exact same case as
the hypothetical contract in CFJ 256.

I have submitted a proposal to fix this problem, for what it is worth.

Upon a verdict of TRUE which is not appealed, the initiator wins the 
cycle in accordance with R 219.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 10:55:04 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Phoebe (Robin Hood)

Mellon failed to report what Phoebe said, and is fined 3 points for
carelessly losing the matchbox.

Sep 15 10:55 EDT: -3 Mellon: Carelessly losing Phoebe's matchbox

Robin Hood has the luck of finding it this time.

Malenkai
Speaker
Officer in charge of random things if P 1200 passes

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 11:07:08 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 282 (Bash)

Brinjal failed to respond.

Sep 15 11:09 EDT: -10 Brinjal: Failed to respond to CFJ 282

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

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 282
  Subject: Proposal Bribery and Money Scrolls
Initiator: fnord
    Judge: Brinjal (failed to respond)
2nd Judge: Bash (selected Sep 15, 1996, 11:09h New York Time)
Judgement:

Statement:

Proposal 1218 ("Scroll of Money") is an invalid proposal according to
Rule 793 ("No Proposal Bribery").

fnord's comments:

Rule 793 states that "a proposal is invalid if the rule change or resolution
discriminates in any way between players based on the way they vote on that
proposal."

Proposal 1218 creates an Ackanomic entity that would contain a list of
who "...voted for the proposal that created..." it.  The entity would then
transfer money from the Treasury to the players on that list.  This is most
certainly discrimination based on the way players may vote.

It may be pointed out by some that the phrase "vote for the proposal"
could be translated simply as any who voted on the proposal, whether
they voted "YES" or "NO".  This however, still discriminates against
those who abstain (either on purpose or through inaction) or chose not
to vote for Quorum reasons, both of which are certainly valid "ways
to vote".

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 14:40:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: robert gene shimmin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: festival query

During the current festival, it is forbidden to distribute proposals for 
voting.

Does submitting a proposal to the promoter count as distributing it for 
voting?

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 11:39:09 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: It Might Interest You To Know 

>Phil Ackley wrote:
>
>> (managed to keep the computer from crashing for more than five minutes)
>
>You're not making a very convincing argument for getting a mac.
>
>Malenkai

ah but it's the first (and only) times I've ever had problems like this
with a mac.  The thing is my new system takes up much more of my ram, and
is squeezing it to the limits.  And I have to special order RAM for this
particular model, so I won't be able to upgrade it till at least tuesday :(

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 11:45:05 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Re: Acka: festival query 

>During the current festival, it is forbidden to distribute proposals for
>voting.
>
>Does submitting a proposal to the promoter count as distributing it for
>voting?
>
>Guy Fawkes

No, It is perfectly acceptable to submit it to the promoter.  It is his
job, and his alone, to distribute proposals for voting

frozenwaterdiety

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** *
IdiotBoy is The Authority on the PFBond market.  The mention or lack of mention
of a particular bond in IdiotBoy's quotes can send a bond up or down.  Get your
bond listed on IdiotBoy's latest quotes page, just ask him how.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 12:24:04 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Official: Internomic 

This just came across the wire - voting results for the latest internomic
proposals.  By the way, I have had a couple of proposals submitted to me
for internomic submission, I will send those in tomorow.  If any one else,
has any proposals pass them alaong...

>Sender: [email-masked]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>From: [email-masked] (Andre Engels)
>Subject: Results Proposals 303-306
>To: [email-masked] (internomic mailing list)
>Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 21:29:40 +0200 (MET DST)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>
>Here are the results for Internomic Proposals 303-306.
>Those of 303-305 are late, those of 306 early.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Proposal 303
>Proposed by Ackanomic
>
>--------
>
>Amend Rule 215 to read:
>
>The voting members in this Nomic are: AckaNomic, Agora, Thring and Imperial
>Nomic 14 and Imperial Nomic 18.  There are no nonvoting members.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Proposal 304
>Proposed by Ackanomic
>
>--------
>
>A nomic game may become a member of internomic by submitting a request to
>the moderator.
>
>A valid request must include the name of the nomic game, the name of it's
>liason, an email adress for the liason, and whether the nomic game wishes
>to enter as a voting or nonvoting member.
>
>The moderator may deny entry to any nomic game he does not feel is qualified.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Proposal 305
>Proposed by Ackanomic
>
>--------
>
>Amend the rule intially numbered as Rule 215 to read:
>
>It is the duty of the moderator to maintain a list of all voting and
>nonvoting member nomics.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Proposal 306
>Proposed by: Thring
>
>--------
>
>Whenever a proposal is accepted, the member nomic that proposed it
>gains two points.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Results:
>
>I don't think Thring has voted, but it might be it's my fault instead
>and I lost their vote.
>
>                303 304 305 306
>Fascist 14      FOR FOR FOR FOR
>Ackanomic       AGA FOR FOR FOR
>Agora           AGA AGA AGA FOR
>Thring          --- --- --- ---
>
>On Proposals 303-305 Agora still had Quorum problems.
>
>Ackanomic's AGAINST on 303 was because of problems with the procedure
>of having to change rule 215 every time membership changed.
>
>No other activity apart from these proposals has been going on the past few
>weeks.
>
>Moderator Andre

frozenwaterdiety
ambassador

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 12:58:22 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: T-Shirts 

Per R115, I have found a stack of 27 unprotected T-shirts, that have
existed since the begining of time (apearantly, for I did not create them),
or at least since the beginning of ackanomic.  I can only attribute it to
providence (thank you golden frog) that I have located them at a time when
they are so appropriate.

In any event, I am selling the t-shirts (which read "I Survived the PF
Email Blizzard of '96") for A$10 a piece.

frozenwaterdiety
pushing it

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

Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 00:05:19 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: My timezone - no longer on daylight savings

FYI,
Approx. an hour ago daylight savings time ended over here, so now I am on
EET - that's GMT +2.
The time stamp on my out going mail says that as well - I've just checked
that.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 00:12:06 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: festival query

On Sun, 15 Sep 1996, robert gene shimmin wrote:

> 
> During the current festival, it is forbidden to distribute proposals for 
> voting.
> 
> Does submitting a proposal to the promoter count as distributing it for 
> voting?
> 
> Guy Fawkes
> 
No. But any proposals you submit to the promoter will only distributed
after the festival.

Since distributing proposals for voting is the duty of the Promoter, the
restriction directly affects the Promoter.

bear in mind that submitting many proposals during the festival might
add to the work load of the promoter once the festival is over.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 14:43:55 -0800 (AKDT)
From: "Phillip R. Ackley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Official: (NoneYet)

In accordance with the decision of the members of (None Yet), I am the 
new swinger for (None Yet). tinan's confirmation should make this official.

frozenwaterdiety
who has no .sig on PINE

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Only IdiotBoy will scam hard to make your bonds worth more!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

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

Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 00:58:03 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official: (NoneYet)

On Sun, 15 Sep 1996, Phillip R. Ackley wrote:

> In accordance with the decision of the members of (None Yet), I am the 
> new swinger for (None Yet). tinan's confirmation should make this official.

I'm gonna have to wait for tinan's message to make this official. Once I
get the message, I'll update the information where necessary

Niccolo Flychuck

Registrar
Chess-Umpire

> 
> frozenwaterdiety
> who has no .sig on PINE
>

This space has been intentionally left blank and ad free.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 15:34:09 -0900
From: [email-masked] (Phil Ackley)
Subject: Acka: Ambassador: Official 

It is my belief that internomic P306 passed, creating a new rule.  I CFJ'd
this in internomic.  Internomic Rule 209 tells us that:

     A proposal passes if and only if all votes cast on it are in favor.

Proposal 306 recieved three votes.  The nomics of Ackanomic, Agora, and
Fascist 14 all voted FOR.  Thring abstained, and therefore did not *cast* a
vote.  The only possible interpretation that the rules allow tells us that
P306 was accepted.

frozenwaterdiety

Ackanomic Ambassador - Liason to Internomic - President
Inventor - Former Senator (seat a)  - Heretic (4 times!) - Former CSRR
Priest, Church of the Markovian Dream - Member, None Yet
Wearing a prosthetic forehead - Fighting Forehead Discrimination

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** *
IdiotBoy is The Authority on the PFBond market.  The mention or lack of mention
of a particular bond in IdiotBoy's quotes can send a bond up or down.  Get your
bond listed on IdiotBoy's latest quotes page, just ask him how.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 19:49:22 -0400
From: "Matt Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: PFBonds New Quotes

Buying:

PFHabeous (20 @ A$130)
PFbreadbox (25 @ A$50)
PFTechno  (20 @ A$120)
PFThinMan (10 @ A$75)

Selling:

PFIdiotBoy (30 @ (A$300 || 30 PFWayne || 50 PFGuy))
PFMalenkai (10 @ A$180)

Not much commentary today, this being the day the Hot Tips Newsletter comes
out-
IdiotBoy
- --
Matt Miller
[email-masked]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 20:41:29 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Too much time on my hands

The following needs to be done:

1) Tim and Sam choose a name
2) Whamiol activated for Sam:
Sep 14 04:06 EDT: +15 Habeous Corpus: Whamiol for Sam Peterson
3) ThinMan: why is Tim's starting money so far below the average?
4) ThinMan: Sam's starting balance
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have finally joined the 20th century and started to automate some of
my jobs (but I'll *never* get rid of rolling a real die for randomization).

It also seems that its the speaker's duty to keep track of who has what,
at least in terms of entities, gadgets, and stuff, so I re-did the yellow
pages thing for internal use, and then figured I'd put it on the web.
snowgod has agreed to do icons for new gadgets, SVHs, and stuff.
The Registrar, or anyone else, is welcome to download, use, ignore, or
do what they want with it, if it helps.

I have also added A$ balance and bond holdings to the player records, but
these are accurate as of ThinMan's last post only.  The yields are do
tomorrow, so I can update it then, and then will keep it up to date as
transactions happen.

I also intend to add scores on each players record eventually,
when I automate stuff more.

I'm trying to create one-stop shopping for player info, and no matter
how you slice it, you are covering the territory of 3 or 4 officers.
No intent to step on anyone's toes.

I still haven't decided on a background for the page, but got sorta tired
of the yellow.  I don't mind it so much, its just that <HR>s don't show
up on it in my browser, so I'm still thinking about it.

Below I've listed all the entity changes that have gone by, and updates
to the page, please let me know if I missed anything.  I know for one,
I have no memory of who has the magic potato, and I don't believe its
on the Registrar list.  I'll just update it when we get a new one
(BTW Niccolo, I get *treble* the odds :))

The URL is http://www.itw.com/~malenkai/ackayp.htm if anyone is interested,
its not much different.

Changes:
- ---------------------------------
Bascule: vacation 9/12, on ice 9/15
Bash: mad hatter for mr cwm
Bash: member of underworld
breadbox: gnome buddy
/dev/joe: gold stripe
/dev/joe: officer of the Blue Cross
Geezer: SVH
Guy Fawkes: member of FUN
Guy Fawkes: member of CoMD
Habeous Corpus: Trombone
Habeous Corpus: Whamiol activated
IdiotBoy: member of underworld
Malenkai: silver stripe
Malenkai: little lamb
Malenkai: mentor for fnord
Niccolo Flychuck: mentor for Guy Fawkes
Pascal: on vacation 9/4
Robin Hood: has phoebe
snowgod: mentor for tim
snowgod: added end of prez term
ThinMan: acting justice
ThinMan: has bronze torch

Did I miss anything?

1) added Tim and Sam at the end until they choose a name
2) sorted list alphabetically by player name, and made that key (that will
help me alot)
3) sort of standardized on the order stuff appears.  When I fully automate
this, that will help
4) on wins, added link to the CFJ, or whatever, that established the win
5) added all other mentors
6) standardized all times to eastern, and made them accurate/complete,
when not so.

Malenkai
Speaker
all around good guy
likes a festival :)
Selling 10 PFMalenkai @ 175

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 21:00:23 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Retractions

I am retracting proposals 1226 and 1227.

Sep 15 21:03 EDT: -4 Malenkai: Retract P 1226 & 1227

Malenkai
benign loophole surfer

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 20:13:32 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 286 (Techno)

> Call For Judgement 286
>   Subject: Gadget Precedence Paradox
> Initiator: Malenkai
>     Judge: Techno (selected Sep 15, 1996, 10:32h New York Time)

> Statement:
> The legality of the owner of the Green Tomato gadget (made from the
> Blueprint for a Green Tomato, described below), should such things exist, 
> trading that gadget after the owner of a Scroll of Crumble has attempted
> to destroy that particular Green Tomato gadget via the Scroll of Crumble,
> cannot be determined with finality.

This is a good try, but I think the rules just barely cover this problem,
by preventing the situation from ever occurring.

Rule 786 says (in part):
  If a Gadget's Blueprint exists, the Gadget behaves in the manner defined
  by the Blueprint, and may be manipulated in accordance with it.

Since the blueprint for the scroll of crumble says it can destroy a gadget,
the one Scroll of Crumble in existence can do so.  This basically gives
blueprints the force of rules (and the precedence value of this section
of Rule 786), limited to describing the nature and behavior of their
gadgets, when a gadget for that blueprint exists.  I don't believe any
rule gives any legal force to blueprints whose gadgets don't exist.

Rule 594 says (in part):
  When a Blueprint is judged to be in conflict with one or more Rules,
  the Blueprint is destroyed, as are any extant Gadgets made from that
  Blueprint.

A blueprint such as this hypothetical one Malenkai suggests:

> The Green Tomato is indestructable.  Its owner may use the title "Willy
> Nilly" by publically announcing that they are doing so. This is the last
> sentence of the Blueprint for a Green Tomato.

is in conflict with rule 786 if any Scrolls of Crumble exist, so by
rule 594 as quoted above, the blueprint is destroyed before it is ever
possible to create a Green Tomato.  If somehow the blueprint and the
gadget came into existence at the same time, such as by a rule creating
this blueprint and creating a gadget based on that blueprint, then both
blueprints would be in conflict with rule 786, and both blueprints (and
both gadgets) would be destroyed.

Thus there is an implicit mechanism for handling blueprint conflicts:
  If two blueprints conflict and neither gadget exists, there is no
  resolution of the discrepancy but there need not be, simply
  because of the fact that the gadgets don't exist.  If a gadget
  exists for one blueprint, then the other is destroyed.  If gadgets
  somehow exist for both blueprints, then *both* blueprints and all
  gadgets based on those blueprints are destroyed.

Furthermore, I note that *any* blueprint that says its gadget is
indestructible is in conflict with rule 594, which describes some
conditions under which a gadget may be destroyed.  However, there
may be other possible types of blueprint conflicts, so this is
certainly a case that must be considered.

> In other notes, I note that the Green Tomato is a hypothetical Blueprint.
> I have some question about doing that, but it is the exact same case as
> the hypothetical contract in CFJ 256.

I have been considering this problem, too (also in regards to CFJ 281).
CFJ 256 asks about hypothetical actions which can take place in an instant.
There is precedent for CFJ's on such actions -- it goes back at least
to CFJ 124.  However, CFJ 286 has some degree of delay involved, because
Gadgets cannot be made so quickly; in effect, it asks the judge to consider
what the rules will be some time after the construction of the gadget is
completed.  Since it cannot be certain that the rules won't be fixed
before such a gadget could ever possibly be completed, it is possible
that R589 requires a judgement of Invalid, due to the statement not
being clear.  

This goes back to my recent discussion of the game custom of interpreting
the rules in effect at the time a CFJ is submitted, versus at the time a
judgement is returned, or in particular, my comment that if a CFJ's
statement specifies some event occurring at some other time, that the rules
in effect at that time (rather than at the time the CFJ was submitted) must
be considered.

CFJ 286 and CFJ 281 refer to hypothetical events that cannot occur
until some time in the future.  In particular with CFJ 281, where two
different proposals which would fix the problem have already been
submitted, it is possible that the problem in the rules will be fixed
before the condition in the CFJ's statement can ever be satisfied.
A CFJ statement which requires the judge to guess about future events
certainly seems to qualify as unclear, and thus meets one of the
conditions in CFJ 589 warranting a judgement of Invalid.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 21:10:30 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Harfmeister

I am declaring the following harfy:

P 1237
P 1240

P 1194 is harfy from a previous life, and will remain so for a while

Malenkai
Harfmeister

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 20:29:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Too much time on my hands

Malenkai wrote:
> The following needs to be done:
> 2) Whamiol activated for Sam:
> Sep 14 04:06 EDT: +15 Habeous Corpus: Whamiol for Sam Peterson

Oops.  I have updated this.  This happened after all the proposal results
so HC still had a valid claim to the trombone.

> It also seems that its the speaker's duty to keep track of who has what,
> at least in terms of entities, gadgets, and stuff, so I re-did the yellow
> pages thing for internal use, and then figured I'd put it on the web.
> snowgod has agreed to do icons for new gadgets, SVHs, and stuff.

One thing about that page that I always thought would be nice is to put
all the icons for the various things on one line after all the text
associated with a player.  When I was updating it by hand, however, this
was too much trouble for things like vacation, phoebe, the gnome, etc.
which move around a lot.  If you are automating this you might be able to
do it, though.

> Bascule: vacation 9/12, on ice 9/15

Bascule's mail is bouncing; I will move him to the digest list, and I don't
guess there's much else I can do, since he's already on vacation.

> Did I miss anything?

The list of observers needs to be updated.  Bill Ingram stopped observing
and Michael Thomas became player fnord.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 21:42:42 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Too much time on my hands

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:

> One thing about that page that I always thought would be nice is to put
> all the icons for the various things on one line after all the text
> associated with a player.  When I was updating it by hand, however, this
> was too much trouble for things like vacation, phoebe, the gnome, etc.
> which move around a lot.  If you are automating this you might be able to
> do it, though.

Do you mean in addition to the way it is now, or instead of?  I actually
like the way you originally did it, but will prototype them at the
bottom.

> 
> > Bascule: vacation 9/12, on ice 9/15
> 
> Bascule's mail is bouncing; I will move him to the digest list, and I don't
> guess there's much else I can do, since he's already on vacation.

You may have to check the rules to see if it changes his expected
duration, as the act still may "place him on vacation".

> 
> > Did I miss anything?
> 
> The list of observers needs to be updated.  Bill Ingram stopped observing
> and Michael Thomas became player fnord.

I just looked at the page, and they were gone.  I remember doing that,
anyway, fnord has his own player record.  Did you look at the right
page ? :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 21:50:49 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 279 Verdict

CFJ 279 has been judged TRUE.

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 279
  Subject: Temporal Justice
Initiator: Guy Fawkes
    Judge: Niccolo Flychuck (selected Sep 09, 1996, 19:58h EDT)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

If a CFJ is submitted, and before a verdict is reached, the
rules pertaining to that CFJ are changed, the CFJ must be judged under
the ruleset under which it was subitted.

Guy Fawkes' Comments:

With the way CFJ is bouncing about in the midst of rapid-fire
proposals, I was just curious.  R 215's "then in effect" (when in effect?)
and R 589's "current ruleset" (current at submission or deliverance?) are
rather ambiguous.

Niccolo Flychuck's Reasoning:

Guy Fawkes is correct  is stating that R215 and R589 are ambigous. Due to
this ambiguity I have to rely on game custom. In the past, it has been
customary to judge CFJs according to the rules in effect at the time the
CFJ was invoked. Hence, "then" has always been interpreted as "when the
CFJ was invoked". This does raise a question as to the customary
interpretation of the phrase "current ruleset" , which we can either
interpret as "current at the time of submission" which would be consistent
with the custom as to the interpretation of R215, or "current at the time
of deliverance".  Again, the same game custom suggests that it is the
former which guided us thus far. (One might argue precedence here, but we
are dealing with game custom, and I feel that precedence might be too weak
an argument, if at all applicable).
The above reasoning, IMO, suffices to support a judgement of TRUE.

I can present additional customs that support this. The thread splitting
custom, started by Malenkai, I believe, allows us to 'rewind' some
actions, back to the time the CFJ was invoked, depending on its outcome -
this is a clear indicator that the game state at the time the CFJ was
submitted, part of which is the ruleset, is the one that has guided us in
judgements so far.
(this is a good place to make a refference to that article about
retractable errors, but I had already the next paragraph and discovered
that I neglected to do so. If I did remember to make that refference -
this would be the spot.
   
I think that the problem arises partially from the fact the Suber
originally conceived the game as a turn based game played around a table.
In a turn-based nomic, under the initial ruleset, at least, game play
stops until a CFJ is decided.  Thus Game State is 'frozen' and there is no
question which ruleset to consider, there is only one ruleset.  If such  a
nomic were to change the rules to a non turn based game, where many things
happen simultaneouly, like in e-nomic, then such problems would certainly
plague that game as well.
The CFJ concept has been adopted pretty much in its entirety - but in time
we found many creative ways to make it work for us, and we'll probably
continue to make adjustments - all part of the fun of nomic.

This would be a good place to stop - I could go on for hours about how the
medium affects the character of nomic, and so could most other players
here.

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #237
*******************************