Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #319
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Tuesday, October 29 1996       Volume 01 : Number 319

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:00:13 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Not even an RFC, thinking of algorithms

On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, mr cwm wrote:

> >You eat so you would be well enough to work, and you work so you would
> >have enough money to get food.  Mere survival is a Red Queen's Race.
> >
> 
> Indeed.  Most people in most places throughout history have engaged in
> "mere survival."  I, however, (and I don't think I'm alone) eat far more
> and better than is necessary for me to phyiscally perform my job (to the
> point where I must engage in meaningless exercise).  Additionally, I am
> paid considerably more than is necessary for me to obtain the
> necessecities of life that would keep me able to physically perform my
> job.  (And not all pay is money.  I could probably double my salary at a
> job that I really wouldn't want to do.)  I think your "other things" 
> category is enormously important.  That category is what makes someone
> wealthy (in comparison to subsistance farmers, for example). 

You make an excellent point. _You_ make more than need for survival.
Subsistence farmers don't. In fact, the majority of the popoulation
doesn't. While you may be increasing your own wealth, that would be an act
of creation only if you were a closed system, which you are not.
 > 
> >If you have some kind of miraculous source that does not requireany sort
> >of fuel that drives you, and you are still able to produce something
> >that's in demand, then you may be creating wealth. 
> 
> He doesn't need to use no fuel, etc., to create wealth.  All that's
> necessary is that what he produces be worth moreto someone, if only
> himself, than the fuel, etc., that went into it. 
Part of the etc. being work, which is by no means free, or a thing that
can be done without an investment or cost.

> If you were able to put
> everything (according to whatever definition you choose) that went into a
> loaf of bread in one box, and a loaf of bread in the other box, and let me
> pick one, I'd take the box with the loaf of bread.  Especially near lunch
> time.  From my perspective, the baker has created wealth.

Everything that goes into a loaf of bread includes not only the raw
materials, but also the work that goes into preparing it. The time spent
on it, the energy needed to heat it. When you buy a loaf of bread you pay
for all of things, and that is why they must be included in any list of
'everything that goes into it'. That is why the two boxes you are
describing are identical. Because if you really put into one box
'everything that goes into a loaf of bread' you'd simply have a loaf of
bread.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 23:32:12 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Wanted to Buy

20 PFHabeous

terms nogotiable.  Contact snowgod if you are interested in selling yours.

snowgod
bond collector

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

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 23:42:16 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: More Wanted to buy

20 PFmalenkai
10 PF/dev
Terms nogotiable

Also wanted to buy - A$500 (Will pay A$250)

And finnaly, snowgod will pay for all of your Bond Promisaries... Are you
sick of having dead players bonds on your hands?  Snowgod will pay A$3 for
each and every bond promisary you own...  Contact snowgod with offers.

snowgod

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

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 23:45:06 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: One Time Special Offer

One rock to wind a string around - free to the first person who posts a
request for it containing a 7 sylable word.

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 11:03:20 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: G&C Proposal 103

On Sun, 27 Oct 1996, Matt wrote:

> > 
> > I will endorse the current version.  The problems I pointed out
> > previously don't bother me enough, although it would be nice if
> > we could retract these things like proposals.
> > 
> > need 4.
> > 
> > Malenkai
> 
> 3
> 
> Bascule 
> 
I endorse this as well

2 more
Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:13:42 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: G&C Proposal 103

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Uri Bruck wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sun, 27 Oct 1996, Matt wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > > I will endorse the current version.  The problems I pointed out
> > > previously don't bother me enough, although it would be nice if
> > > we could retract these things like proposals.
> > > 
> > > need 4.
> > > 
> > > Malenkai
> > 
> > 3
> > 
> > Bascule 
> > 
> I endorse this as well
> 
> 2 more
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
Heck, make it one.

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:21:38 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Re: Treasure Hunts

I am, I say I am, embarking on a quest to find the crystal grapefruit, and
I challenge any of you to stop me! Muhahaha!  I feel I am well on my way
already.  heck, I still have my donkey, I havn't flubbed up in chess too
bad yet, and the possiblility of a game of ghost looks immenent.
Malenkai, I don't think you hid that treasure will enough :)

As for treasure 103, if it were really left blank, we wouldn't know about
it, know would we? :)

snowgod
who has always wanted to open a book and find "Though we made a valiant
attempt to leave this page blank, at the last minute we gave into peer
pressure and wrote this notice upon it."

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:46:47 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: This is the subject line of an apologetic message

this is the first sentence, and paragraph entire, of an apologetic message
in which I apologize profusefly for once again delaying the release of the
voting results.

This is the sentence where I tell you, the voters of this great nomic that
I would like to have published the voting results tonight but it appears
as if I may be missing votes from a couple of players (and I know they sen
t them to me.  better yet, I know I have them somewhere, I just have to
find them :)

This is the sentence where I promise, and really mean it, that votes will
be released as soon as aI get off work at 5 tommorow (or today as the case
may be) with all votes intact.

Finally, this is thge paragraph wherin I trnasfer A$10 to you, faithful
voter as my penance.  To accomplish that I post the folowing legal mumbo
jubo:

I am transferring,

A$10 to Habous Corupus
A$10 to ThinMan
A$10 to mr cwm
A$10 to Malenkai
A$10 to /dev/joe
A$10 to Niccolo Flychuck
A$10 to Guy Fawkes
A$10 toFnord
A$10 to breadbox
A$10 to Robert Sevin
A$10 to Calvin N Hobbes
A$10 to Bascule
A$10 to Brinjal
A$10 to IdiotBoy
A$10 to mohammed

and beggin your forgivness.

snowgod
who really wants to do a good job as Acting Tabulator

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:28:02 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: One Time Special Offer

On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:

> One rock to wind a string around - free to the first person who posts a
> request for it containing a 7 sylable word.
> 
> snowgod

Oh, I would like to own a rock that snowgod did not use.
I would quite dearly cherish it; I would not it abuse.
But what, I ask, are its beliefs, and what is its religion?
Does it follow Islam, or Episcopaleanism?

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:49:57 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: One Time Special Offer

snowgod wrote,

>One rock to wind a string around - free to the first person who posts a
>request for it containing a 7 sylable word.

Despite the unmeritoriousness that some might ascribe
to me, I hereby request snowgod's rock to wind a string
around.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:51:41 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: One Time Special Offer

> On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> > One rock to wind a string around - free to the first person who posts a
> > request for it containing a 7 sylable word.
> > 
> > snowgod
> 
> Oh, I would like to own a rock that snowgod did not use.
> I would quite dearly cherish it; I would not it abuse.
> But what, I ask, are its beliefs, and what is its religion?
> Does it follow Islam, or Episcopaleanism?
> 
> Guy Fawkes

I am transfering a Rock to Guy Fawkes, assuming ackage of course.

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:53:51 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: One Time Special Offer

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Bollinger, John C. wrote:

> 
> snowgod wrote,
> 
> >One rock to wind a string around - free to the first person who posts a
> >request for it containing a 7 sylable word.
> 
> Despite the unmeritoriousness that some might ascribe
> to me, I hereby request snowgod's rock to wind a string
> around.

> ThinMan

Wow.  Two good requests, and me with one rock.  Oops.  I am hereby
purchasing a rock from Habeous Corpus vending machine and transferring it
to ThinMan (I know I said the first person, but I am enjoying this :)

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 13:59:41 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Not even an RFC, thinking of algorithms

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Niccolo Flychuck wrote:

>
>
>You make an excellent point. _You_ make more than need for survival.
>Subsistence farmers don't. In fact, the majority of the popoulation
>doesn't. While you may be increasing your own wealth, that would be an act
>of creation only if you were a closed system, which you are not.

I agree that I'm not a closed system, but that doesn't mean that wealth
isn't being created, because wealth is in each person's own evaluation of
a situation. You're not arguing that the exchange of wealth is zero-sum,
are you?

>
>Everything that goes into a loaf of bread includes not only the raw
>materials, but also the work that goes into preparing it. The time spent
>on it, the energy needed to heat it. When you buy a loaf of bread you pay
>for all of things, and that is why they must be included in any list of
>'everything that goes into it'. That is why the two boxes you are
>describing are identical. Because if you really put into one box
>'everything that goes into a loaf of bread' you'd simply have a loaf of
>bread.
>

I certainly intended to include those things, but you'd only have a loaf
of bread if the 'everything that went into it' actually went into it.  If
the energy was an ounce of Diesel fuel, and the time was available only to
watch sunrises, and the work was in the form of dug ditches, it wouldn't
be a loaf of bread. 

I think what's bothering me is that the point you are making doesn't seem
to explain actual behaviour.  If I have a cow and you have a pig, and we
agree to trade, and do so, your argument gives me no idea why we might
have done that.  To me, we each think we've improved our situation (or we
wouldn't have agreed), so we each think we're wealthier than before.
Wealth, which exists only in our own evaluation of a situation, has been
created.  

- -mr cwm

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 13:24:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: One Time Special Offer

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:

> I am transfering a Rock to Guy Fawkes, assuming ackage of course.
> 
> snowgod

Consider it acked.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 14:29:37 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: One Time Special Offer

snowgod wrote:

>Wow.  Two good requests, and me with one rock.  Oops.  I am hereby
>purchasing a rock from Habeous Corpus vending machine and transferring it
>to ThinMan (I know I said the first person, but I am enjoying this :)

Gee, thanks snowgod!  I acknowledge.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 14:01:19 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: *ping*

Today is Tuesday, the 29th day of October, in the Year of Our Lord
1996, and the Machine That Goes *ping* Has Gone *ping* today.  Since I
have been scholar, the Machine has gone *ping* 11 times.

Guy Fawkes
Scholar of *ping*

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 18:45:07 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Poet Laureate request

Michael J. Thomas wrote privately:
 
> Malenkai spake thusly
> >
> > Can you just give me rhyming couplets or abab until my money runs
> > out? :)
> 
> Certainly.  If I remember correctly, you were willing to spend
> up to A$40 for this poem.  I can have your poem done in a week
> (by Monday, Nov. 4.).  If this is acceptable, please announce
> in the public forum that you will pay the amount and the due date.
> 
> fnord

This is acceptable.  Due date 961104.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:00:04 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: More Wanted to buy

Phil Ackley wrote:

> And finnaly, snowgod will pay for all of your Bond Promisaries... Are you
> sick of having dead players bonds on your hands?  Snowgod will pay A$3 for
> each and every bond promisary you own...  Contact snowgod with offers.

Bond promissaries are not tradeable.  Vote yes for proposal 13XX and 
they will be.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:19:45 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Grab-a-Donkey (R7)

Round 7 of Grab-A-Donkey is beginning!  Don't get caught *admiring*
your donkey!  Get your moves in via private e-mail.  The current GAL
is below.

Round Ends Friday, November 01 1996, 21:15 EST

/dev/joe and ThinMan grabbed Guy Fawkes's donkey.  Guy Fawkes covered.

snowgod grabbed ThinMan's donkey, eliminating ThinMan
Habeous Corpus grabbed snowgod's donkey, eliminating snowgod
IdiotBoy grabbed Habeous Corpus's donkey, eliminating Habeous Corpus

Niccolo Flychuck and Calvin N Hobbes admired their donkeys.

Current GAL:
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain) [[email-masked]]
/dev/joe (Joseph DeVincentis) [[email-masked]]
Guy Fawkes (Robert Shimmin) [[email-masked]]
IdiotBoy (Matt Miller + 1 grab) [[email-masked]]
Niccolo Flychuck (Uri Bruck) [[email-masked]]

Malenkai
Wrangler

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:33:19 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 118 (fnord)

fnord has been selected to judge the following, and has
3 days to accept or decline the appointment.

Would the Financier please note Mohammed's A$20 Court Fee.

Clerk of the Courts
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Criminal Judgement 118
  Subject:  More Illegal Publishing
Initiator:  Mohammed
    Judge:  fnord (selected Oct 29, 1996, 21:32 EST)
Judgement:

Statement:

snowgod has broken the rules.

Mohammed's Reasoning:

snowgod published an article in a paper he does not own:  "is".

Rule 482 ("Office of the Financier and Free Market") reads, in part:
- ---
2) An entity is Tradeable if and only if the rules specify that it
is, otherwise it is non-Tradeable. The rules may specify specific
conditions or mechanisms for non-Tradeable entities to be traded or
transferred; this rule defers to any such rules where there is a
conflict. Tradeable entities may only be transferred by methods
described in the rules.
- ---

Rule 891, "The Press", reads:
- ---
     The player that creates a newspaper is said to own that newspaper.
     No player may own more than three newspapers at any one time.
     Newspapers are tradeable. An owner of a newspaper may close it down

[...]
     
     No player may publish articles in a paper she does not own without
     the express permission of the owner.
- ---

Although R891 says that newspapers are tradeable and R482 specifies how
Tradeable entities can be transferred, Rule 891 also says that the player
who creates a newspaper is its owner.

Since snowgod is not the creator of "is", he does not own it, and it is
illegal for him to publish articles in it without permission.

snowgod supposedly managed to purchase the paper from mr cwm, but I believe
that purchase was ineffectual.  Regardless of whether the deal was legal (and
that's a trickly legal point, I guess) it can't have changed the owner of the
newspaper permanently:  R891, I believe, would transfer it right back to mr
cwm.

Suggested Penalty:

I recommend a FINE of A$31 from snowgod to the Treasury and a SENTENCE of
1 day in Gaol for our beloved President.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:39:02 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

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

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 314
  Subject: "What Do I Have To Lose?" Paradox
Initiator: Guy Fawkes
    Judge: mr cwm (selected Oct 29, 1996, 21:39h EDT)
Judgement:

Statement:

As of this writing, the legality of the Brass Monkey climbing
the Gaol following the acceptance of 10 consecutive proposals cannot be
determined with finality.

Guy Fawkes's Reasoning:

If a TRUE verdict is returned, Guy Fawkes claims a win under Rule 219.

First, it needs to be noted that CFJ 312 has no bearing on this CFJ.
Whether or not the Senate approved the Tower of Bandwidth is irrelevant
to this matter -- snowgod has not yet paid for its construction, and so
it does not yet exist, regardless of the Senate's approval or lack thereof.

Rule 841 says that all buildings without towers are less than 35 meters
high; since no towers currently exist, this means that all buildings in
Acka, including the Gaol, are less than 35 meters high.

Rule 824 states that in the event of 10 consecutive accepted proposals,
the Brass Monkey shall climb the highest building in Acka.  If all
buildings in Acka are less than 35 meters high, yet an exact height
cannot be determined with finality for any of them.  It is possible that
the Gaol is the tallest building in Acka -- perhaps it is 34 meters tall
while the rest are only 33; on the other hand it is equally possible that
some other building is the tallest in Acka, or that are the buildings in
Acka are equally tall -- there is no way to determine it with finality.

In this light, the legality of the Brass Monkey climbing the Gaol in
these circumstances really cannot be determined with finality.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 17:43:37 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 118 (fnord)

> [...]
>      
>      No player may publish articles in a paper she does not own without
>      the express permission of the owner.
> ---
> 
> Although R891 says that newspapers are tradeable and R482 specifies how
> Tradeable entities can be transferred, Rule 891 also says that the player
> who creates a newspaper is its owner.
> 
> Since snowgod is not the creator of "is", he does not own it, and it is
> illegal for him to publish articles in it without permission.
> 
> snowgod supposedly managed to purchase the paper from mr cwm, but I believe
> that purchase was ineffectual.  Regardless of whether the deal was legal (and
> that's a trickly legal point, I guess) it can't have changed the owner of the
> newspaper permanently:  R891, I believe, would transfer it right back to mr
> cwm.
> 
> Suggested Penalty:
> 
> I recommend a FINE of A$31 from snowgod to the Treasury and a SENTENCE of
> 1 day in Gaol for our beloved President.
> 

Well I certainlyh admire Mohammed's integrity in keeping newspapers
protected, I find one major fault with this CFCJ.  I foget the rule
number, but one recently passed rul proclaims that if two parts of a rule
conflict with each other, the part that comes later in the rule claims
precedence as is certainly the case here.

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:45:56 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

Malenkai wrote:

> Call For Judgement 314
>   Subject: "What Do I Have To Lose?" Paradox
> Initiator: Guy Fawkes
>     Judge: mr cwm (selected Oct 29, 1996, 21:39h EDT)

Yes, this should be EST.  Cut-n-Paste.

> As of this writing, the legality of the Brass Monkey climbing
> the Gaol following the acceptance of 10 consecutive proposals cannot be
> determined with finality.

I thought of this when I wrote Towers, and it was there before R 841;
the fact that R 841 says all buildings other than Towers are less than
35 meters tall is irrelavent.

It seemed to me like saying: "It cannot be determined with finality
whether the Brass Monkey can lift a 5 kilo dumbbell".

BTW, some people seem to put alot of effort into formatting their
CFJ submissions, and I appreciate that.  If you are going to take the
time to do that, however, use it to format them in the manner in which
I distribute them :)

Malenkai
Clerk of the Courts
Has a Bronze Torch
Eyeing the Purple Robe of Justice

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:55:07 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 315 (ThinMan)

ThinMan's robe has paid off!  He has been chosen, and has 3 days
to accept/decline.

Clerk of the Courts
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 315
  Subject: Grabbing your Donkey
Initiator: Guy Fawkes
    Judge: ThinMan (selected Oct 29, 1996, 21:56h EST)
Judgement:

Statement:

It is legal to grab one's own donkey.

Guy Fawkes's Reasoning:

Personally, I don't care.  I think, however, that this should be false.
Section B of the GAD rule says "grab _another_ player's donkey on the GAL"
is a legal move; it says nothing about grabbing your own.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:05:08 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 118 (fnord)

> Well I certainlyh admire Mohammed's integrity in keeping newspapers
> protected, I find one major fault with this CFCJ.  I foget the rule
> number, but one recently passed rul proclaims that if two parts of a rule
> conflict with each other, the part that comes later in the rule claims
> precedence as is certainly the case here.
	Oh, I forgot about that.  :o)
	But that isn't necessarily the case here.  The judge may still rule
that the Rule isn't self-contradictory, and that in fact the trade was legal
but that the paper was immediately then transferred from you back to mr cwm. 

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:13:24 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> > As of this writing, the legality of the Brass Monkey climbing
> > the Gaol following the acceptance of 10 consecutive proposals cannot be
> > determined with finality.

> It seemed to me like saying: "It cannot be determined with finality
> whether the Brass Monkey can lift a 5 kilo dumbbell".

Actually, I think it can be.  R 823, which defines the Brass Monkey, says 
it has no function unless specified by another rule.  Other rules give it 
functions of climbing the tallest building and making a proclamation, but 
no rule gives it the function of lifting a dumbbell of any mass, so I 
think it follows that the Brass Moneky cannot lift a dumbbell.

Guy Fawkes

Psalm 219
The Goose is my Shepherd; I shall not win.
He makes me to feed him green pastures.
He leads me to count winning as nothing
He deplores my score.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of impossiblity of 
	victory,
I will fear no further evil,
For the Goose is with me.
He cannot threaten me further.
This comforts me.
He prepares a table before me in the presence of those who fear rule 1243.
He annoints my head with cheese; my possiblities overflow.
Surely his protection shall follow me.
For as long as I do not pay him off,
And I shall dwell with the Goose in my house forever.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:14:34 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Proposal 1384

Proposal 1384 -- Tue 29 Oct 10:14 CST 1996
Smooth Transition of Duties
Guy Fawkes (Robert Shimmin)

Amend Rule 612, section (vi) to read

(vi)	Whenever a Functional Office has a vacant Seat, or if the current 
	holder of that Seat publically states an intent to vacate his Seat and 
	requests the President conduct a Nomination to fill it, the President 
	shall conduct a Nomination for that Seat.  After the Nomination, the 
	President shall select an eligible Nominee and announce that Nominee's 
	name publically.  That Nominee shall hold the Functional Office.  If 
	the Nomination was initiated at the Functional Officer's request, he 
	shall be considered to have resigned at the instant the new Officer is 
	announced, if he has not already left the Seat.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:15:17 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Proposal 1385

Proposal 1385 -- Tue 29 Oct 10:15 CST 1996
Swinger ex-parte
Niccolo Flychuck

I.
Append the following text to R726
"
A Party may declare eir Seat to be Warm at any time.

If there fewer than 7 non-Warm Seats at Party-Hall, then additional Seats 
may be created in the following manner:
a. Any player who is not currently a Swinger, and who is not a member of 
a Party, two members of which are currently Swingers may anounce eir 
desire to buy an Office of Swinger.
b. A$600 are transferred from that players account to the the Treasury, 
if e does not have that much money the entire procedure of creating an 
additional Swinger's Office is cancelled.

c. The player names eir Swinger's Office.

Swingers who acquire eir Offices in this manner are known as 
Capital-Swingers.
When a Capital-Swinger goes on Vacation, no acting-Swinger is appointed.
A Capital-Swinger's Office is Tradable. If a Capital-Swinger's office is 
traded, then the previous owner ceases to be Swinger, and the new owner 
becomes Swinger in eir stead.
A Capital-Swinger may anounce eir resignation at any time. In this case 
the Office of Swinger e resigned from is destroyed."

II.
Ammend R985.1 2 D (iv) to read in whole:
"
When a Player purchases a PartyChessPiece e anounces the Office of 
Swinger e is purchasing the piece for, and the piece becomes the propery
of tha Office of Swinger."

delete R985.1 2 D (v)
renumber R985.1 2 D (vi) to R990 2 D (v)

III.
in R985.1 delete section 2 E.
Rename section 2 F to Section 2 E
in R985.2,R985.2 change all refferences to R985.1 section 2 F, to R985.1
section 2 E
{{[R985.2 2 D does the same thing, and is better worded]}}}

IV.
Append to R985.2 2H  the following text:
"
(iii)When there are 7 or more Swingers with on-board pieces, the turn of 
any Swinger who has no on-board pieces is skipped entirely.
"

V.
In section R985.2 2 h replace the phrase:
"It is permissible for a Party with a Warm Office"
with the phrase:
"It is permissible for a Party or a Swinger with a Warm Office"

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:15:40 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Proposal 1386

Proposal 1386 -- Tue 29 Oct 10:15 CST 1996
Bonus Votes
Niccolo Flychuck

{{All extant Bonus Votes are destroyed}}
1. Bonus Votes are Protected.
2. Bonus Votes are Tradeable
3. A player can own at most five Bonus Votes at an given time. If a Player
   who already owns five Bonus Votes receives an additional Bonus Vote, by
   any means, the additional Bonus Vote is destroyed.
4. Bonus Votes are used in the following manner - A Player sends a message
   to the Tabulator that e is using a Bonus Vote on a specific proposal,
   and the legal type of Vote that Bonus Vote represents. Players can 
   only use Bonus Votes that they own. Bonus Votes can only be used once.
   Any Bonus Vote which does not meet these restrictions is not a valid
   vote, and is destroyed.
5. A player can use at most one Bonus Vote per proposal. A Player can use
   at most one Bonus Vote on any string of three consecutive proposals. On
   any single proposal, at most four Bonus Votes are counted. If more than
   four Bonus Votes were sent to the Tabulator on a single proposal, only
   the last four valid Bonus Votes to have arrived before the end of the
   voting are counted, the rest are destroyed.
6. Other rules may specify means by which Bonus Votes are acquired or
   destroyed, subject to the restrictions in this rule.
7. This rule takes precedence over any rule that concerens tradeable
   entities that can be used as Votes.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:16:08 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Proposal 1387

Proposal 1387 -- Tue 29 Oct 10:16 CST 1996
Netscape ate the last line of P 1347
Malenkai (Randy Hall)

This is a Modest proposal.  

Repeal R 1347.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:23:10 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

Guy Fawkes wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Malenkai wrote:
> 
> > > As of this writing, the legality of the Brass Monkey climbing
> > > the Gaol following the acceptance of 10 consecutive proposals cannot be
> > > determined with finality.
> 
> > It seemed to me like saying: "It cannot be determined with finality
> > whether the Brass Monkey can lift a 5 kilo dumbbell".
> 
> Actually, I think it can be.  R 823, which defines the Brass Monkey, says
> it has no function unless specified by another rule.  Other rules give it
> functions of climbing the tallest building and making a proclamation, but
> no rule gives it the function of lifting a dumbbell of any mass, so I
> think it follows that the Brass Moneky cannot lift a dumbbell.

Ok, bad example.  "It cannot be determined with finality whether
the Chartreuse Goose can lift a mass of 5 kg".  You get the idea.  IMO,
a paradox which has no potential effect on the game state should be
invalid.  You cannot specify everything.

In accordance with R 115, I am travelling back in time to 3 days ago,
and I am making the Gaol 25 meters tall, and all other buildings 20
meters tall.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:28:09 -0500 (EST)
From: IdiotBoy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Appreciating the Web-Harfer

I just came to a great realization of why /dev/joe is so quiet on the Public
Forum.  He's /dang/ busy keeping those web pages updated for us.  Since
those Officers don't seem to be getting paid (something I shall have to
propose to correct forthwith), I would like to make the following
transaction:

Transfer 10 PFThinMan from IdiotBoy to /dev/joe

IB
- --
IdiotBoy, as always, dumber than a box of hammers.
[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:30:27 -0500 (EST)
From: IdiotBoy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> Ok, bad example.  "It cannot be determined with finality whether
> the Chartreuse Goose can lift a mass of 5 kg".  You get the idea.  IMO,
> a paradox which has no potential effect on the game state should be
> invalid.  You cannot specify everything.
> 
HEY!  I said that and got shouted down.  People tried to tell me that
Invalid was reserved for poorly worded or unadjudicatible CFJs.

I like having Malenkai agree with me, tho-
IB
- --
IdiotBoy, as always, dumber than a box of hammers.
[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:39:23 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appreciating the Web-Harfer

IdiotBoy wrote:

> Since those Officers don't seem to be getting paid

I believe they are getting paid (at least I am).  What makes
you say that?

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:43:17 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

IdiotBoy wrote:

> HEY!  I said that and got shouted down.  People tried to tell me that
> Invalid was reserved for poorly worded or unadjudicatible CFJs.
> 
> I like having Malenkai agree with me, tho-

I was one of those people.  This is unadjudicatible, IMO.  There have
been Invalids, or talk of Invalids, that *were* adjudicatible, and
the alledged paradox did have an effect on the game state.

To me, this is like the "Cheesy Paradox" of R 115 entities (I forget
the number), since the height of the buildings is covered by R 115.

Remember, changing the heights of the buildings is not a protected
action, nor are the buildings protected in regards to their dimensions,
except in the case of square area.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:46:55 -0500 (EST)
From: IdiotBoy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appreciating the Web-Harfer

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> IdiotBoy wrote:
> 
> > Since those Officers don't seem to be getting paid
> 
> I believe they are getting paid (at least I am).  What makes
> you say that?
> 
> Malenkai
> 
Did you read the sig file?  Apparently I screwed up.   ;)

No bonds for the Speaker or CotC or Count Tabula or ...-
IB
- --
IdiotBoy, as always, dumber than a box of hammers.
[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:49:02 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appreciating the Web-Harfer

IdiotBoy wrote:

> No bonds for the Speaker or CotC or Count Tabula or ...-

Why NOT :(.  I will put any bonds you give me into the treasure
I am building :).

Malenkai
who wishes people would build treasures rather than just give stuff away

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:52:13 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> Ok, bad example.  "It cannot be determined with finality whether
> the Chartreuse Goose can lift a mass of 5 kg".  You get the idea.  IMO,
> a paradox which has no potential effect on the game state should be
> invalid.  You cannot specify everything.

There's a big difference between *should be* and *is*.  I wrote this CFJ 
for multiple reasons, one of which was to illustrate this weakness in the 
current paradox win situation. 

> In accordance with R 115, I am travelling back in time to 3 days ago,
> and I am making the Gaol 25 meters tall, and all other buildings 20
> meters tall.

I am invoking R115 to travel back in time to 1 ns after Malenkai's 
action, and I am causing the height of every building to obey the sine 
function h = 20 + 10 sin (t - a), where h is the height in meters, t is 
the time in seconds since I took this action, and a is a different real 
number for each building.  I am deliberately not specifying the value of 
a for any building. 

Guy Fawkes
this thread has high potential for becoming Mozarella vs. Limberger

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:56:31 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

Guy Fawkes wrote:

> this thread has high potential for becoming Mozarella vs. Limberger

This thread should go to a private list that you, me, and the
judge, and no one else, must subscribe to, to force a prompt verdict :).

Malenkai
who has known about this problem in R 219 for a while, and never bothered
if it is true, it cannot happen again, I believe

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

Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 00:03:17 -0500 (EST)
From: IdiotBoy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> I am invoking R115 to travel back in time to 1 ns after Malenkai's 
> action, and I am causing the height of every building to obey the sine 
> function h = 20 + 10 sin (t - a), where h is the height in meters, t is 
> the time in seconds since I took this action, and a is a different real 
> number for each building.  I am deliberately not specifying the value of 
> a for any building. 
> 
> Guy Fawkes
> this thread has high potential for becoming Mozarella vs. Limberger
> 
Hey, while you're back there, go back just a bit further and post that
*ping* wouldja?

Can't wait to see if the *ping*ing stops happening everyday once we hit Nov-
IB
- --
IdiotBoy, as always, dumber than a box of hammers.
[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:03:33 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> To me, this is like the "Cheesy Paradox" of R 115 entities (I forget
> the number), since the height of the buildings is covered by R 115.
>
> Remember, changing the heights of the buildings is not a protected
> action, nor are the buildings protected in regards to their dimensions,
> except in the case of square area.

Well, depending on how strictly CFJ 113 is being taken these days, the 
moment 841 passed, building heights became regulated -- they were 
all by law less than 35 meters tall, and so they were no longer under the 
auspices of R115.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:10:50 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appreciating the Web-Harfer

> I just came to a great realization of why /dev/joe is so quiet on the Public
> Forum.  He's /dang/ busy keeping those web pages updated for us.  Since
> those Officers don't seem to be getting paid (something I shall have to
> propose to correct forthwith), I would like to make the following
> transaction:
> 
> Transfer 10 PFThinMan from IdiotBoy to /dev/joe
> 
> IB
> --
> IdiotBoy, as always, dumber than a box of hammers.
> [email-masked]

I accept this transaction.

However, I note that functional officers do get paid -- the pay is very
little, though, compared to the amount of work some offices require: A$3
per week.  I easily do as much work for Ackanomic as Web-Harfer in a week
as the Poet Laureate will probably do for Malenkai's offer of A$40, 
although the poet's work requires more creativity.

OTOH, having the Map-Harfer office makes up for it somewhat, as it
requires very little work once I got past the initial setup, and I
get paid the same amount for it.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 00:08:06 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 314 (mr cwm)

Guy Fawkes wrote:

> Well, depending on how strictly CFJ 113 is being taken these days, the
> moment 841 passed, building heights became regulated -- they were
> all by law less than 35 meters tall, and so they were no longer under the
> auspices of R115.

CFJ 113 is toast.  If it were not, the moment buildings were given the
attribute of height (Consecutive Passages, and not Towers) CFJ 113 
would have applied.  The gist of CFJ 113 is the rules must be completely
silent on the issue for R 115 to be permissable.  I think that game
custom is no longer game custom.

Actually, I believe buildings were given height before buildings
existed, if I remember the order that stuff passed :)

Malenkai

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #319
*******************************