Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #398
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest      Thursday, December 12 1996      Volume 01 : Number 398

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:37:49 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Time Check and other stuff

On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Phil Ackley wrote:

> I just changed email clients (I hesitiate to say it was an upgrade until I
> have time to check things out).  Could someone please verify that my
> timestamp is correct, and that nothing else seems amiss?
> 
> Thanks,
> snowgod
> 
> BTW, how do timestamps work? Does my client just take the information from
> my machine and paste it on the message on send, or is it something more
> mysterious possibly involving the server and various cosmic forces? I have
> to admit that I'm clueless about this.
> 
>
You still have the -0900 on your header, and that seems fine.
As for TimeStamps.
The server always puts a timestamp. If you use an off-line mailer, it will
also include a date/time header, using the clock on your PC. Most would
use the time when the message was written rather than the time it was
sent.
When you do  _not_ view full headers (which is most of the time), the time
stamp you see is the first one (in the headers, the bottom one) affixed to
the message.

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 21:44:19 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka  Jammers tower 

>Atop my modest small little domicile
>I, Jammer, a lofty pinnacle will build
>A smooth a glistening spar, It soars
>high above.  From the calliope atop, to
>the might Wurlitzer within, this 40 meter
>tower, for which I will deduct A$ 12 times
>10.  is built to honor the means by
>11.  which the sonorous tones of the
>12.  instrument within sound forth
>My Ivory tower, called from now on, the
>Jam Session, will have room for all.
>MY tomes of Acka Lore, Sword sharpeners
>to hone my rapier wit,  other items will
>be revealed as I, Jammer unpack the
>steamer trunk. I carry with me.

I reccomend everyone try reading this while listening to Sensurround from
TMBG.  The rythm is uncanny :)

snowgod
who just picked up the single

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:01:05 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: RuneMaker

I have determined the following for this Otzma Day

LSAP 6
This means that I can create 2 Otzma Cards

CrIndex for Cards Types

Go Fish		{8}
Map Shard	{8}
Summon Tornado	1
Untouch Me	18
Share my Expenses 10
Share your Income 10
Swinging Sale	1

(The numbers in curly braces indicate numbers which were calculated as the
average of all other numbers, as no MaxCard is defined for those Card
Types)

I will be using the Probabilistic method for both Cards.

The TCrIndex is 56

Niccolo Flychuck
RuneMaker

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:08:11 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: RuneMaker - Otzma Cards

The following Otzma Cards have been created:

OCID 106 Untouch Me
OCID 107 Summon Tornado

Niccolo Flychuck
RuneMaker

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 23:11:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Lynx

> Do you ever look at my entities page?  If so, does it render ok with
> all those images.  If not and if so, is there any way I can improve it
> for text-based browsers, such as add "alt" attributes to the images.

I look at it quite frequently, yes. In fact, I'd like to stop and take
this opportunity to thank the Web-Harfer and everyone else who
maintains the web pages that are so essential to playing this
game. They all look very good under Lynx. The only exception that
comes to mind is the Gallery page, and since you can't see the
pictures anyway, it hardly matters.

> I started to do that, but since the images really aren't part of the
> game, figured it would just clutter the screen.  The only purpose the
> images serve is as links to the germaine rules.  Let me know if there
> is a way I can make that page more Lynx friendly.

The linked images inside the list of player names I would leave as is;
I don't think any added text would be useful. However, it would be
nice if there were ALT tags on the images that appear at the very top,
like so:

These things are marked next to the appropriate players:<BR>
<A HREF="http://wilma.che.utexas.edu/~devjoe/acka/rule500.html#R549">
<IMG SRC="cross.gif" ALT="[Blue Cross]" width=40 height=40 border=0></A>
<A HREF="http://wilma.che.utexas.edu/~devjoe/acka/rule500.html#R549">
<IMG SRC="sstripe.gif" ALT="[Silver Stripe]" width=20 height=40 border=0></A>
[etc etc etc]

Also, for unlinked images, if there is no useful textual replacement,
then consider using an empty string, so as to hide it entirely. For
example:

<IMG SRC="line2.gif" ALT="" width=582 height=27>

This reduces clutter.

Finally, avoid using tables for pages that you want to be
Lynx-readable. Lynx does handle tables, and sometimes it handles them
quite well, but when is doesn't, it usually turns them into hash. (Nor
is this going to improve for a while; it requires a major rewrite of
all of the parsing code.)

BTW, there are lots of pages out on the web that teach you how to
write browser-independent HTML, and/or Lynx-friendly HTML. You might
want to check out http://www.crl.com/~subir/lynx.html, and
http://www.crl.com/~subir/lynx/author_tips.html, sometime if you're
interested.

breadbox

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:14:13 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Expert

I would like to be recognized as an Expert by the Senate in the following
areas:

PartyChess
Otzma Cards

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 22:28:43 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Expert 

I would like to be recognized as an Expert by the Senate in the following
areas:

internomic matters (Including, but not limited to the meta-game of Internomic)
headware

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 01:40:15 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Experts 

I am pleased that players are already applying to become Experts, and I
encourage all players who feel they are well-versed in particular parts of
the ruleset to apply to become Experts in those areas. I plan on making
several proposals that would allow Experts to take a greater role in the
game, so the more Experts in existence at that time the better.

Robert Sevin, who is currently in a duel fueled by his claim that he may or
may not be...
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 22:53:00 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: To Duel, or Not to Duel 

>Robert Sevin, who is currently in a duel fueled by his claim that he may or
>may not be...
>Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

snowgod
Who is currently awaiting Robert Sevin's move in the duel fueled by his
claim that the patch of air below his head is a Silly Vacation Hat.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 00:03:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Silver Stripe

> BTW, my 60th proposal passed in that last batch, making my Blue Cross Rank
> 70, and making me eligible for a Silver Stripe.  Feel free to give it
> to me, any of you.

Presuming no one has already beat me to it, it is with pleasure that I
award /dev/joe a Silver Stripe.

breadbox
senator, seat sinecure 33, who seems to have reverse snowgod's disease

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 02:26:48 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: To Duel, or Not to Duel 

>>Robert Sevin, who is currently in a duel fueled by his claim that he may or
>>may not be...
>>Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat
>snowgod
>Who is currently awaiting Robert Sevin's move in the duel fueled by his
>claim that the patch of air below his head is a Silly Vacation Hat.

Robert Sevin, who has sent his Ghost word to Malenkai and also may or may
not be...
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 00:41:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC: Internomic stuff

> Ammend Rule 588 (Selecting a Judge) by replacing the second paragraph
> with:
> 
> If the "remaining Pool" is ever reduced to 0 eligible active Players, 
> and a judge needs to be selected,  the Clerck of the Court (CotC) shall
> send a public message to the Ambassador containing the following:
> 
> 1.  A request for Internomic Judgement,  with the reason for the request
> (i.e. no available judges).

As someone else has pointed out, this is unlikely to ever happen. I
think it would be better if the Internomic judgement were simply
available as an option - if all parties involved wanted an outside
opinion, that would be the time to request an Internomic judgement.

Or, perhaps give the people an opportunity to vote (2/3 majority) to
have some decision made by Internomic instead of the Supreme Court or
the Praetor. (Could be useful if people feel that they are biased in
just this one case, and would prefer not to impeach them over it.)

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 23:52:45 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Proposal: NUMBER THREE! WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF THAT? 

Any play wearing a Silly Vacation Hat may purchase a HatBox from the
treasury for a sum of A$ equal to the number of days he was on vacation.

Included in the price of the HatBox is ta minor surgery that removes that
Silly Vacation Hat from a players head, and places it in the HatBox.  The
HatBox must then be worn on top of a players head for the remainder of his
Silly Vacation Hat wearing period. Due to the special air-tight
construction of a HatBox, the SVH of any player who has purchased one and
announced that he is using it, will be preserved, rather than disintigrate,
so long as the HatBox is never opened.

Once placed in a HatBox, a Silly Vacation hat can never be worn again, or
it will disintigrate.  The HatBox can never be opened, or the Hat it
contains will disintgrate.  Looking at the HatBox funny or publically
announcing any details about the Silly Vacation Hat inside the box will
also cause it to disintigrate.

A player who is wearing a HatBox on top of his head is not exempted from
posting the required text string "Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat" in every
public message.

This Rule takes precedence over R937

{{renumber this rule to 938}}

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

Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 23:57:32 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal: NUMBER THREE! WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF THAT? 

snowgod's disease strikes again.  sorry!

>Any play wearing a Silly Vacation Hat may purchase a HatBox from the
>treasury for a sum of A$ equal to the number of days he was on vacation.
>
>Included in the price of the HatBox is ta minor surgery that removes that
>Silly Vacation Hat from a players head, and places it in the HatBox.  The
>HatBox must then be worn on top of a players head for the remainder of his
>Silly Vacation Hat wearing period. Due to the special air-tight
>construction of a HatBox, the SVH of any player who has purchased one and
>announced that he is using it, will be preserved, rather than disintigrate,
>so long as the HatBox is never opened.
>
>Once placed in a HatBox, a Silly Vacation hat can never be worn again, or
>it will disintigrate.  The HatBox can never be opened, or the Hat it
>contains will disintgrate.  Looking at the HatBox funny or publically
>announcing any details about the Silly Vacation Hat inside the box will
>also cause it to disintigrate.
>
>A player who is wearing a HatBox on top of his head is not exempted from
>posting the required text string "Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat" in every
>public message.
>
>This Rule takes precedence over R937
>
>{{renumber this rule to 938}}

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 03:20:12 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka  Jammers tower 

>I reccomend everyone try reading this while listening to Sensurround from
>TMBG.  The rythm is uncanny :)
>
>snowgod
>who just picked up the single

Robert Sevin, who wonders if snowgod liked the original version or the
single version better and might be...
Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 01:26:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal: NUMBER THREE! WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF THAT?

> snowgod's disease strikes again.  sorry!

Let this be a warning to us all. Our soon-to-be-ex president is
writhing in the clutches of a horrible disease. Only you can save him,
by voting in favor of either Proposal 1526 or 1534. (Though probably
not both, as that would definitely be just too silly.)

breadbox

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 07:44:42 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Duel/Ghost Start

Mitchell Harding wrote:
> 
> >>Robert Sevin has been chosen to play first in the Ghost Duel
> >>with snowgod.  There is currently no Ghost word.
> 
> I wish to make the first Ghost word "g".

Robert Sevin played 'g'.  The Ghost word is now

g

It is snowgod's turn.

Just to clarify this, plays are made to the public forum, and it seems
to be game custom that the opponent waits for the referee to ack the 
play.

Malenkai
referee (who is waiting for the next installment of YORL)

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 07:50:32 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RuneMaker - Otzma Cards

Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> The following Otzma Cards have been created:
> 
> OCID 106 Untouch Me
> OCID 107 Summon Tornado

Should this be construed as the start of the auction?  If so, the
Runemaker is the auctioneer.  I remember there was some confusion about
this last time, and I don't remember how it was resolved :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 07:53:05 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Gravatational Monopole

I am building a Gravatitional Monopole so that the AckaPhysicist can
at least get his house reattached, and so that mabye we can get the Hall
of Elder's reattached as well.  It will be done in a few days.

Malenkai
Wizard

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:11:05 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RuneMaker - Otzma Cards - Auction

On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> Uri Bruck wrote:
> > 
> > The following Otzma Cards have been created:
> > 
> > OCID 106 Untouch Me
> > OCID 107 Summon Tornado
> 
> Should this be construed as the start of the auction?  If so, the
> Runemaker is the auctioneer.  I remember there was some confusion about
> this last time, and I don't remember how it was resolved :)
> 
> Malenkai
>

The only confusion was my confusion as to the private/public thing.

Since the Auction was called by a rule, which does not specify any values,
I suppose I'd have to use the defaults (I gotta ammend that to give the
RuneMaker some more freedom in this area)

I am calling two seperate Auction, one for OCID 106, and one for OCID 107
( I believe I am permitted to do that)

Niccolo Flychuck
RuneMaker

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:39:30 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 1552

Guy Fawkes wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Bollinger, John C. wrote:

[Guy Fawkes:]
>> >Renumber the just-created rule to 252. 
>> 
>> I believe that the number of the rule to which that refers would be
>> 1552.1.  It is far preferrable (in that there is less ambiguity) to
>> use the actual number.
>
>_I_ can easily do this, as I know all proposal numbers before they are 
>numbered, but how would anyone else write a proposal with that language 
>without using some variation of the truly roundabout syntax I've employed 
>elsewhere [...for the puroposes of this proposal, the letter y, when used 
>as a variable, is equivalent to this proposal's proposal number...] 

Point taken.  I still have problems with the ambiguity of the language
you used there, however.

>The current Undead system is broken in at least one and possibly two ways.
>
>The original versions of this in RFC form used the current systems of 
>undead creation/destruction, and they were the parts of those RFC's which 
>drew the most suggestions for changing; (1) Undead are named entities; 
>however, during an Undead's creation process, there exists an 
>infitessimal amount of time in which the Undead has no name.  I could CFJ 
>this, but that would serve no purpose.

This is not a problem (I don't think).  The entity rules make
provisions for the case in which a named entity has not yet been
assigned a name.  Also, that is only relevant if your premise is indeed
correct, of which I am not completely confident.
>
>(2) During the destruction of an Undead, there exists an infitessimal 
>amount of time in which a Player and an Undead have the same name.  The 
>Rule " " defers to other rules as to whether this is permissible, but 
>there exists no rule for it to defer to, unless you want to say the 
>player returning process does so implicitly.

Again, I'm not confident that the premise is true.  The returning
player chooses to reuse his old name, but it is not clear that that
name is actually assigned to him before the undead destruction, etc.
One could make a case (I'm not sure how strong) for those events
being simultaneous.
>
>No matter how I phrased the Undead workings in any version of this, 
>_someone_ had complaints, either material or aesthetic.  Often, those 
>complaints conflict with each other.

*chuckle*  I'm not at all surprised.
>
>The next version of this will contain several minor but significant 
>reworkings of Undead.  If that does not meet everyone's satisfaction, I 
>will consider abolishing the things in favor of another system (not that 
>what I have in mind is significantly different, but it seems there exists 
>a significant degree of ambiguity it the general player mindset as to 
>what exactly an Undead is, and I feel these preconceptions are the basis 
>for several of these conflicting objections.  It may be best to shed them 
>and start out again on a clean slate on the matter.  We'll see.)

That is a viable option.  But undead are fun!
>

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:56:38 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: players RFC 4

I am satisfied with the rewrite, with the exception of a minor
problem here:

>A person wishing to join the game, and who cannot do so as a Returning  
>player, should notify the Registrar, providing a valid email adress, 
>their real name, and the legal Ackanomic name they wish to play under.  Upon 
>them providing this information, the Registrar shall post a public message 
>announcing the new player and providing their Ackanomic name, real name, and 
>email adress, and if the prospective player provided it, how they discovered 
>the game.  Upon the posting of such an announcement, the person becomes 
>registered as a player.

I think that currently the Registrar has the power and responsability
of making sure that the name chosen is a legal one.  This appears to
strip him of that right, and indeed could result in a new player
being registered with an illegal name.

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:56:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RuneMaker - Otzma Cards - Auction

> I am calling two seperate Auction, one for OCID 106, and one for OCID 107
> ( I believe I am permitted to do that)
> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> RuneMaker

I believe it has to be that way, since the two OC's are of different 
types.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:07:06 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Steven A. Swiniarski)
Subject: Re: Winning

I may be a newbie but I do have some opinions on this matter.  I personally
think that points -- per se-- should not be the be all and end all of any
nomic.  Points are an accident of the inital set, and there can certianly
be a game without them.  I was, in fact, the person who repealed points
from the Agora Ruleset :)  I did so because a fear of scamming had led Agora
to drain every ounce of interesting-ness from points, they had made points
a currency-- but you couldn't transfer them 'cause you could scam a winn with
them.  Agora had repealed every independent entity that could grant you points
because you could "scam" a win with them.  (We had a Patato once <sniff>)
Points in the game became essentially pointless-- now that we've repealed them
the only way to win in Agora is to "scam" a win.

One of the reasons I joined Ackanomic is because it lacked this kind of 
conservitisim (which has its place, the Agora Ruleset is much easier to
understand than Acka's :) and seemed to suit my sense of Chaos.  So I feel
I should warn the Akanomicians about the dangers of taking Points too seriously,
stepping down that road for too long, and points will die for lack of interest.
(Note, when I proposed to eliminate Points, only three Players voted against.)

There should be a many-fold path up the mountian, the accumulation of 
points should only be one method.

Swann

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:12:49 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Lantern Play

The monster returns to the construction site, but it appears
that the construction crew has not yet returned.  However,
there are some men gathered in another cleared area.  The
monster runs toward the men but one of them fires a dart at
it.  The dart hits, and within a few seconds the monster
passes out.

The men put the monster's body into a large crate, reinforced
with steel bands after it is closed, which is then loaded
onto a cart drawn by four horses.  The crate is taken to a
station where it is loaded onto a train.  The train travels
for about a day before the crate is unloaded in another city.
As the crate is being loaded onto another cart, the monster
awakens, and, failing to break open the end of the crate,
manages to bust a hole in it.  However, the man with the dart
gun is there, and he knocks the monster out again.

box

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:21:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: players RFC 4

> 6) An Undead is created; its name is the same as the player's Real Life 
> name.
	There is a possible problem here if (by incalculable chances)
there is a player, or other entity, with the same name as the Real
Life name of the player who is leaving.
	I'm sort of against using Real Life names any more than is
absolutely necessary.  Remember that Real Life names are -not- unique.

- --Mohammed
:oP

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 16:05:45 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: players RFC 4

On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Jason Orendorff wrote:

> > 6) An Undead is created; its name is the same as the player's Real Life 
> > name.
> 	There is a possible problem here if (by incalculable chances)
> there is a player, or other entity, with the same name as the Real
> Life name of the player who is leaving.
> 	I'm sort of against using Real Life names any more than is
> absolutely necessary.  Remember that Real Life names are -not- unique.

I thought of this, but conceded the odds were overwhelming of having two 
identically named players in Acka.  The problem does exist, though.  I 
see a few options...

1) Keep the current playername==undeadname; it works, but I find it kind 
of sloppy.  (Others might disagree.)

2) Go to real names and don't worry until the situation comes up;  I did 
write it so that if a player who happened to have the same name but was 
not the same person did join, he would not "unlock" the undead; the only 
problem would come when that person wanted to quit, creating identically 
named undeads, which would, in theory at least, give us time to adjust 
the rules, but this IS sloppy.

3) Use identification numbers, which WOULD be unique, and let the 
Registrar keep track of which former player correpsonds to which Undead 
number.  (Or create an Office of the Mortician)

4) Simply use "the Undead created as a result of that player's most 
recent departure from Ackanomic" syntax -- wordy, but effective.

Comments on any of these, or new ideas for language, are welcome.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 17:49:02 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: players RFC 4

Guy Fawkes wrote:

> 1) Keep the current playername==undeadname; it works, but I find it kind
> of sloppy.  (Others might disagree.)

The rules assure (I think), that the player name is universally unique,
so I favor the undead==player name.  What do you find "sloppy" about it?
This is much better than a unique id.  I also agree that eliminating
Real Life names completely would be cool.  Mabye we could eliminate the
real life models we clone, too :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:46:17 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Duel/Ghost Start 

>Robert Sevin played 'g'.  The Ghost word is now
>
>g
>

My Move: gu

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:44:10 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka  Jammers tower 

>>I reccomend everyone try reading this while listening to Sensurround from
>>TMBG.  The rythm is uncanny :)
>>
>>snowgod
>>who just picked up the single
>
>Robert Sevin, who wonders if snowgod liked the original version or the
>single version better and might be...
>Wearing a Silly Vacation Hat

I liked the original version better, but when i saw the S-E-X-X-Y single
with TWO OTHERWISE UNRELEASED SONGS I couldn't resist...

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 18:45:52 -0600 (CST)
From: T Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Winning 

>There should be a many-fold path up the mountian, the accumulation of 
>points should only be one method.

I would not describe Acka as point-crazy, quite the contrary (not that you
said so). There are so many things going on that point accumulation is a
side road, even a dirt road in the game. True, most of the events have an
effect on score, but they are simply a common thread with each a minute
effect in the grand scheme of things.

In fact, from what there has been so far, I'd say Ackonomians don't really
care about winning. Sure, when you get near the top, it's fun to try, but I
don't think I've seen proposals repealed just to make someone not win, for
example.

CnH

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:47:46 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: AckaNomic: Church Stuff 

Malenkai has once again been ordained as a priest in the Church of the
markovian Dream

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 15:48:57 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: RuneMaker - Otzma Cards - Auction 

>On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Malenkai wrote:
>
>> Uri Bruck wrote:
>> >
>> > The following Otzma Cards have been created:
>> >
>> > OCID 106 Untouch Me
>> > OCID 107 Summon Tornado

>>>I am calling two seperate Auction, one for OCID 106, and one for OCID 107
>( I believe I am permitted to do that)

>Niccolo Flychuck
>RuneMaker

I bid A$3 for OCID 107

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 19:52:30 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Duel/Ghost Start

Phil Ackley wrote:

> My Move: gu

The ghost word is now

gu

It is Robert Sevin's turn.

Malenkai
referee

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 20:05:11 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Winning

T Joffrain wrote:

> In fact, from what there has been so far, I'd say Ackonomians don't really
> care about winning. Sure, when you get near the top, it's fun to try, but I
> don't think I've seen proposals repealed just to make someone not win, for
> example.

I agree.  The grind out point win, without scamming, isn't as cool as
other sorts of wins.  If it really meant that much, the Chartreuse 
Goose would possibly have been transferred to me.

The real fun is all the proposals.  I would like to see a more competitive
situation where perhaps the Goose is flying around, who knows?

Malenkai
who misses loophole surfing

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 19:52:26 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 1552

re:  renumbering the "just-created" rule
> Point taken.  I still have problems with the ambiguity of the language
> you used there, however.
	What ambiguity?

	If there is one, it can be resolved by putting a braced clause in 
the rule text:  {{ Renumber this rule to xxx. }}

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 20:14:25 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: players RFC 4

> I thought of this, but conceded the odds were overwhelming of having two 
> identically named players in Acka.  The problem does exist, though.  I 
> see a few options...
	I hereby create a Trinket named "Joe Bollinger" with a value of 
A$1.  (No offense, /dev/joe.)  What would happen if Mr. /joe left the 
game?  I can't think of a significant conflict right now, so this won't 
prevent me from voting for the overhaul.  But I do believe that something 
that can be broken is inherently less sloppy than something that can't.

> 1) Keep the current playername==undeadname; it works, but I find it kind 
> of sloppy.  (Others might disagree.)
	If you allow the player to rejoin under a different name, this 
looks kludgy; I agree.  Somehow, my Undead needs to recognize me when I 
rejoin.
	In your current favorite model, the Undead recognizes me by my
Real Name.  Okay.
	In mine, he recognizes me by my Ackanomic Name (which is unique.)
	I don't like Real Names.  They reek of RL.  Strictly speaking, a
player who doesn't reveal his or her real Real Name causes the Web-Harfer
to violate the rules.  Kelly Martin never revealed hers (his?) to anyone 
here, as far as I know.  Shall we bring charges against /dev/joe?
	Just restrict players from rejoining under different names than
they had when they left.  If I want, I can change my name to something new
*after* rejoining.

> 3) Use identification numbers, which WOULD be unique, and let the 
> Registrar keep track of which former player correpsonds to which Undead 
> number.  (Or create an Office of the Mortician)
	*laugh*  Attach Toe Tags to the Undead as they are created... 
this conjures a funny image (the Treasurer opens a vault and calls out an 
ID number; a dozen Undead stare around at the steel plates they each have 
stamped over one side of their head...), but I don't really like it.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 20:18:54 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Lantern Update

"box" was successfully played and is burned.

There are 40 cards in the deck.
6 cards have been burned.
 
There is one loose end:
        monster
 
Players:
        /dev/joe        has   3 cards.
        snowgod         has   7 cards.
        Habeous-Corpus  has   7 cards.
        Malenkai        has   7 cards.
        ThinMan         has   7 cards.
        Bascule         has   8 cards.
 
It is /dev/joe's turn.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 21:08:31 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Official (Inventor)

The Orbital Mind Control Laser was actually finished two days ago, but 
due to a ridiculous little snafu the auction hasn't started yet.

I'm calling a public auction on this puppy right now.

It's the 10th here, but that means it's the 11th UCT, which makes it 
Malenkai's duty to Auction the Gadget.  Now that the Chief Cheese isn't 
excluded from the Auction anymore, there really should be just one 
permanent Chief Cheese.  ...Nah, in a few weeks (it's been a few weeks 
for a few weeks now, I know, but the semester was much tougher than I 
expected, so...) I'll have both jobs, so why bother?

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 21:10:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Presidential Debate  **question**

My question is:

Are you Strange?

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 22:17:20 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Official (Inventor)

Jason Orendorff wrote:
> 
> The Orbital Mind Control Laser was actually finished two days ago, but
> due to a ridiculous little snafu the auction hasn't started yet.
> 
> I'm calling a public auction on this puppy right now.
> 
> It's the 10th here, but that means it's the 11th UCT, which makes it
> Malenkai's duty to Auction the Gadget.

Were on EST, so you have both jobs now.  I would say Mohammed is the
acutioneer, and the auction ends 3 days from the date of his post.

> I'll have both jobs, so why bother?

Are you planning a Coup for the office of Chief Cheese ;)  We still
need to alternate the duty for private auctions.

[I am standing on Guy Fawkes' Soap Box, and logging my name and date
(I will update the Trinket Archive shortly).]

If I may be so bold, I do not like the way we have modified the auction
rule, especially the public one where it can turn into a timing contest
at the end of the three day period, and whoever's mail client is a few
minutes behind can snag the thing.  I am thinking of proposing all 
auctions as private.

As an example, the current auction ends mid evening where I live, when I
happen to be on-line usually.  Other players are on-line at work or 
school during the day, or in a time zone where the auction will end at
03:00 their time, when they are asleep.  If it is an auction that 
really matters, it seems unfair.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 21:24:12 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official (Inventor)

> The Orbital Mind Control Laser was actually finished two days ago, but 
> due to a ridiculous little snafu the auction hasn't started yet.
	Okay.  The Auction begins now.  Send your bids to yours truly, 
the Chief Cheese.  The minimum bid is no tea.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 21:26:00 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official (Inventor)

> If I may be so bold, I do not like the way we have modified the auction
> rule, especially the public one where it can turn into a timing contest
> at the end of the three day period, and whoever's mail client is a few
> minutes behind can snag the thing.  I am thinking of proposing all 
> auctions as private.
	I agree.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 22:07:45 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Winning

On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> The real fun is all the proposals.  I would like to see a more competitive
> situation where perhaps the Goose is flying around, who knows?

Aww, and the Goose and I are getting so close.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 22:17:12 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official (Inventor)

On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Malenkai wrote:

> As an example, the current auction ends mid evening where I live, when I
> happen to be on-line usually.  Other players are on-line at work or 
> school during the day, or in a time zone where the auction will end at
> 03:00 their time, when they are asleep.  If it is an auction that 
> really matters, it seems unfair.

Point well taken, especially in light of last night's Hubert rush.  A 
totally private system, however, seems a bit hush-hush to me.  Perhaps if 
auctions were public for the first two days to let everyone get an idea 
of what the going rate might turn out to be, and then send bets to the 
Auctioneer for the last 24 hours?  I dunno.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 23:17:10 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Official (Inventor)

Guy Fawkes wrote:

> Point well taken, especially in light of last night's Hubert rush.  A
> totally private system, however, seems a bit hush-hush to me.  Perhaps if
> auctions were public for the first two days to let everyone get an idea
> of what the going rate might turn out to be, and then send bets to the
> Auctioneer for the last 24 hours?  I dunno.

That is the way it used to be, basically.  My new idea is the following:

A public auction ends 3 days after it is called, or three hours after the
last bid, whichever is later.  Bids must always exceed the previous
publically knowable bid.

Any comments?

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 22:46:34 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Proposals 1554-1563

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
  Send mail to [email-masked] for more info.

- ---559023410-684387517-850452394=:7485
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

This docket of proposals is brought to you in the manner with which I 
could most easily comply with the enclosed Proposal 1557, should it 
pass.  Personally, I like the gist, though not the details.  I have an 
idea under which I could easily do both promoter and tabulator, but I 
will be leaving for a long holiday in less than a week, and I would 
consider it irresponsible of myself to take these duties and try a new 
system without any time to get the bugs worked out.

The "ballot" described in P1557 would look like below:

#	Title					Your Vote
1554	Land Baroncy
1555	Minor Ownership Clarifications
1556	The 100, more or less, kaa Acka	
1557	Email Reform
1558	Amend R 1502
1559	Summaries
1560	Journalistic Euthanasia
1561	Press Ombudsman
1562	Stop Forehead Discrimination!
1563	Hat Box

- ---559023410-684387517-850452394=:7485
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; name=docket
Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Description: Proposals 1554-1563 docket

- ---559023410-684387517-850452394=:7485--

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #398
*******************************