Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #423
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest     Wednesday, December 25 1996     Volume 01 : Number 423

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 15:20:16 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Fictionary 

>[email-masked] wrote:
>
>> Here are the definitions to be voted for.
>
>> 5. A Mongolian temple bell.
>
>I'll go with the bell.
>
>Note, the reply-to should be ackanomic@ ... as the votes must be public.
>
>Malenkai
>being sheeped

I never got a list... Could someone repost it?

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 15:32:03 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1560 Passes 

>Phil Ackley wrote:
>>
>> Quorum achieved: 21 Eligible voters - 15 Players cast votes
>> 13 YES votes - 3 NO votes - 0 PRESENT votes - Proposal PASSES
>>
>> Proposal 1560 - Thu, 12 Dec 1996 22:46:34 -0600 (CST)
>> Journalistic Euthanasia
>> snowgod (Phil Ackley)
>
>I am awarding snowgod a silver stripe for this proposal's acceptance.
>
>Malenkai

Wow! and it seems like just a couple of days ago that I got my first blue
cross!  I'd like to take this oppritunity to thank my mom, my dad, my
sister, Malenkai, /dev/joe, pTang, tinan, my dog, my cat mr cwm, Julias
Ceaser, Frank Murdock, John Flansburgh, John Linnel, Walt Disney, Robert
Sevin, the little lamb and all of the other little people who made this
joyous event possible...

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 15:34:17 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Financial 

>-.01      23 Skidoo           NV   (David Thomas Fisher)

I don't think it makes much of a difference, but 23 Skidoo is now active

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 15:35:25 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Financial 

>>-.01      23 Skidoo           NV   (David Thomas Fisher)
>
>I don't think it makes much of a difference, but 23 Skidoo is now active
>
>snowgod

Oops, never mind...

>Yield per bond (based on web page score + scores thru p1543 +
>RS Phoebe post + Mohammed's lack of Phoebe post)

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 20:33:06 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CSR 114

First, CSR 113 was accepted.

This CSR simply changes 'Ambassador' to Liaison in the section of R 970
replaced by P 1542.  Two objections before Jan 02 07:00 will sink it.

Malenkai
acting CSRR
- --------------------------------------------

Common Sense Report 114
Malenkai

     Amend R 970, "Ackanomic/Internomic Interface", as follows:

     I. Replace

     "
     Any Ackanomic Player may request the Liaison to make an InterNomic
     Proposal by sending the Proposal to the Liaison. If said Proposal
     is adopted by InterNomic, the player who requested it receives 7
     points upon the Ambassador reporting the fact of its adoption to
     Ackanomic.
     "

     with:

     "
     Any Ackanomic Player may request the Liaison to make an InterNomic
     Proposal by sending the Proposal to the Liaison. If said Proposal
     is adopted by InterNomic, the player who requested it receives 7
     points upon the Liaison reporting the fact of its adoption to
     Ackanomic.
     "

     II.  Replace "ambassador" with "Liaison" in the fifth paragraph.

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 21:53:28 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

> Value and wealth are anchored by absolute (or relative ;) measures of
> ones standard of living.  People talk of gold and land and other stuff
> anchoring currency, but what if there was some diasaster.  I would
> rather have a bushel of apples (or the technology to grow them), than
> a cubic meter of gold.
	I dunno, a cubic meter of gold can buy a hell of a lot of pears.
	Has anyone here seen the movie "Twenty Bucks"?

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:01:55 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Proposal 1591

Proposal 1591
Ouch
Malenkai

This is a Modest proposal.

Amend R 1023, "Auction", to add the following text at the end of the
section whose first sentence is "Let N be the quantity of items up for
Auction.":

"
If the auction was called by a player, and that player no longer has
has at least N items at the conclusion of the auction, that player is
placed in Contempt.  If a bidder does not have enough A$ to honer their
bid in either type of auction, they are placed in Contempt.  In either
of these cases, the auction is voided, and reinitiated if originally
called by the rules.
"

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:03:30 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1592

Proposal 1592
Ouch Ouch Ouch Ouch
Mohammed

This is a modest proposal.

Rule 515/1 ("Trading and Gifts") is amended by changing
- ---
A trade that offers or requests any entity that is neither tradeable
nor gift, or that the Player offering the trade doesn't own, is
illegal. A trade that offers more entities of any type than the Player
offering the trade owns is illegal.
- ---
to
- ---
A trade that offers or requests any entity that is neither tradeable
nor gift is illegal.  A trade that offers more entities of any type
than the Player offering the trade owns is illegal.
- ---

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:04:35 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Re: Proposal 1591

Oops, I flubbed the subject line.  I'm very sorry.

- --Mohammed   >:oP

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:07:31 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

Jason Orendorff wrote:

>         I dunno, a cubic meter of gold can buy a hell of a lot of pears.
>         Has anyone here seen the movie "Twenty Bucks"?

If we were in some post-nuclear world, and I had a cubic meter of
gold, and you had a basket of honeydew melons, we could probably make
a deal then, although the gold may be more edible :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:18:51 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Internomic Trading

On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, Malenkai wrote:
> >         One way of doing it is to say:  okay, it works as written while
> > it's in Ackanomic; when it gets traded outside Ack, someone else tracks
> > it and its power don't work.
> This case has little value.
	Agreed.

> >         Instead, Ackanomic should track its own entities, even across
> > Internomic borders.  And, while they should not be able to manipulate
> > entities that came from other nomics, they should be able to manipulate
> > Ackanomic entities wherever they find them.
> 
> I disagree here.  Items should be described as generically as possible,
> so that once they leave our space, they are not our problem, so that
> if we change our rules or crash or whatever, the entity should not be
> affected.  
	This introduces a huge amount of bureaucracy, though.  I guess 
a nomic could optimize its own import/export system to reduce the down time, 
but why bother?
	A potential problem with imports and exports is synchronicity.  
Suppose one nomic exports an object, another imports it, and then a CFJ 
in the first nomic corrects the mistaken belief that the object was 
legally exported.  What happens to the object?  Until Internomic 
Judgement is fleshed out, I/E will have some interesting possible side 
effects.  :o)  This is not to condemn the approach.  I just think it'll 
take some tweaking.

> > So the above object would be
> > "gift" wherever it goes, but its catastrophic effect would only have any
> > effect on entities that are from Ackanomic (including itself.)
> 
> Yes, the last sentence (or at least its ideal) is crucial, to prevent
> "Trojan Horse" entities, (i.e., entities that seem impotent, but for
> which we change the rules that define their behaviour once accepted
> by the target nomic), unless of course, we want to *try* to do that
> to another nomic ;)
	If we go the route of imports and exports, that little safeguard 
is less crucial, because every object will undergo a long "conversion" 
process.

> I think what will be needed is a little borrowing from RL :(.  Each nomic
> will be required to have support for a certain set of primitive
> operations in its ruleset if it wishes to participate in Internomic
> trading.
	I don't think that's really necessary.  Under SPOT, a nomic that
wants to "export" things must have a financier of some sort, and if they
want to make things easier on their players (purely optional), a Customs
Officer.  And a nomic that wants to import things doesn't need to do
*anything*.
	I am now convinced that I/E is necessary to maximize fun.  But 
SPOT is also necessary to maximize fun, because SPOT will allow *all* 
nomics to participate in Internomic trade without adding more than two 
lines of text to their rulesets.
	In its current form, I think your proposal sets up unnecessary
roadblocks to free trade.  There's a fourteen-day waiting period on sending
an Eggplant to Pumpkin Patch, for example.  And Pumpkin Patch can't 
receive it unless they modify their rules to make it acceptible.  :o(

	The fact that entities imported don't necessarily go where they're
supposed to go troubles me.  This is fixable by Rule Mallet, but I think
it's preferable to pick an approach in which no such fix is necessary. 
What I have in mind is this:  use my approach for object transfer.  But if
an Agoran who owns a Frobnotzer actually wants to use it on Agora's
ruleset, e has to get Ackanomic to export it and Agora to import it.  That
way, the rules of the two nomics don't have to say anything about
ownership; the ownership, as recognized by Internomic, is unchanged (but a
different Nomic is now responsible for keeping track of it.)

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 19:21:37 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics 

>	I dunno, a cubic meter of gold can buy a hell of a lot of pears.
>	Has anyone here seen the movie "Twenty Bucks"?
>
>--Mohammed

I really liked Twenty Bucks (but nowhere near as well as clerks!).

snowgod
who thinks we should base the economy on the quantity of mail sent :)

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:22:38 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

> >         I dunno, a cubic meter of gold can buy a hell of a lot of pears.
> >         Has anyone here seen the movie "Twenty Bucks"?
> If we were in some post-nuclear world, and I had a cubic meter of
> gold, and you had a basket of honeydew melons, we could probably make
> a deal then, although the gold may be more edible :)

Oh.  I missed the context before.

- --Mohammed
(scanning horizon for clouds in fungusy shapes)

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:25:05 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Internomic Trading

Jason Orendorff wrote:

>         This introduces a huge amount of bureaucracy, though.  I guess
> a nomic could optimize its own import/export system to reduce the down time,
> but why bother?

What bureacracy.  It takes about 5 minutes to write a Customs Form
generically.

>         A potential problem with imports and exports is synchronicity.
> Suppose one nomic exports an object, another imports it, and then a CFJ
> in the first nomic corrects the mistaken belief that the object was
> legally exported.

Under my proposal, it does not leave the first nomic until customs are
cleared.  There will be no problem.  If the target nomic rejects it,
it gets lost in Internomic space somewhere, for all I care.  Once it
leaves our nomic, it is Somebody Elses Problem (an SEP field is created
around it, as Douglas Adams might put it)

>         In its current form, I think your proposal sets up unnecessary
> roadblocks to free trade.  There's a fourteen-day waiting period on sending
> an Eggplant to Pumpkin Patch, for example.  And Pumpkin Patch can't
> receive it unless they modify their rules to make it acceptible.  :o(

Where are you getting 14 days?  7 days in our customs.  I am not mandating
this system for other nomics.  There is really no reason it could not
be reduced to the custom of 3 actually, as long as a CFJ is not called.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:31:31 -0600
From: "Eric L. Freeman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

> Value and wealth are anchored by absolute (or relative ;) measures of
> ones standard of living.  People talk of gold and land and other stuff
> anchoring currency, but what if there was some diasaster.  I would
> rather have a bushel of apples (or the technology to grow them), than
> a cubic meter of gold.

Gee, with the price of gold at $380 per oz. (I haven't checked the price lately,
but that's close) and gold weighing 19.3 grams/cu.cm, the total comes to....
$7,334,000,000.  The block would also weigh 21.5 tons, so I could drop it on
your head and take your apples.

AirHead

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:29:32 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

Eric L. Freeman wrote:

> The block would also weigh 21.5 tons, so I could drop it on
> your head and take your apples.

If you could lift it, or even move it for that matter, you would not
need my apples.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 19:45:13 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics 

>Eric L. Freeman wrote:
>
>> The block would also weigh 21.5 tons, so I could drop it on
>> your head and take your apples.
>
>If you could lift it, or even move it for that matter, you would not
>need my apples.
>
>Malenkai

He might need it more than anyone.  Thing of the calories that type of
metabolism would need to survie :)

snowgod

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:57:45 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Internomic Trading

> >         This introduces a huge amount of bureaucracy, though.  I guess
> > a nomic could optimize its own import/export system to reduce the down time,
> > but why bother?
> 
> What bureacracy.  It takes about 5 minutes to write a Customs Form
> generically.
	Then the Customs Officer has to distribute it and track it, and 
if there's a hearing, Tabula has to take votes on it.  There will also be
several pages worth of rules regulating this process, and they have to be 
upkept (is that a word?).  The Customs Officer will have to send the 
Customs Form to the next nomic down the line.  That nomic's Officer will 
have to translate the Form into nomic-specific terms.  I'd like to 
emphasize that this is NOT a trivial task in most cases, and to work well 
it'll require a good bit of research.  Etc.
	Also, unless I missed something in your proposal, transferring 
A$175 to another nomic will involve writing 175 Customs Forms.  Under my 
simpler (but less robust) setup, the same transfer is accomplished with a 
single public message.
	I believe it would be illogical not to merge the two systems into
something that is robust while remaining usable.

> >         A potential problem with imports and exports is synchronicity.
> > Suppose one nomic exports an object, another imports it, and then a CFJ
> > in the first nomic corrects the mistaken belief that the object was
> > legally exported.
> 
> Under my proposal, it does not leave the first nomic until customs are
> cleared.  There will be no problem.
	Suppose it is then discovered that the original message announcing
the Customs Form wasn't public.  A CFJ is called, and the concensus that
the object cleared customs is reversed.
	Within our ruleset this is no problem, because the CFJ goes back 
and changes all that happened since then.  We act as if the object never 
cleared customs (it didn't; not legally anyway).  But our CFJ doesn't
scope to other nomics.

> Where are you getting 14 days?
	I'm assuming other games' Customs process will be similar to 
ours.  A sane assumption.  Each nomic will have its own process, sure.  
But I would guess that it'll still take significantly more than 10 days 
to port the average object from one nomic to another.

> 7 days in our customs.  I am not mandating
> this system for other nomics.  There is really no reason it could not
> be reduced to the custom of 3 actually, as long as a CFJ is not called.
	I'd rather it stayed at seven days, actually.  Since I/E isn't
perfectly safe, every day you shorten the quarantine period will increase
the danger to the game-- and also increase the possibility players will
call Hearings just to delay the import/export long enough for meaningful
debate!
	The sensible solution is to make two modes of transfer available: 
a quick, safe transfer, which takes no more time than intranomic trading
but leaves the transferred objects more or less neutered; and a
slow-but-sure I/E transfer, which gives serious local power to foreign
objects. 

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 22:59:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

> >> The block would also weigh 21.5 tons, so I could drop it on
> >> your head and take your apples.
> >If you could lift it, or even move it for that matter, you would not
> >need my apples.
> He might need it more than anyone.  Thing of the calories that type of
> metabolism would need to survie :)
	Correct.  The proper logic is, if you could lift it, you would 
not need the gold in order to obtain Malenkai's fruit.

- --Mohammed
(how d'ya like them apples)

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:12:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Internomic Trading (was Victorious Eggplant)

Moh>         One way of doing it is to say:  okay, it works as written while
   > it's in Ackanomic; when it gets traded outside Ack, someone else tracks
   > it and its power don't work.
Mal> This case has little value.
C&H> But it should be a default case.
	Nah.  Transfer of responsibility inevitably leads to unnecessary
time delays and loss of information.  Why should this be the default?
	Instead, it should be "when it gets traded outside Ack, we still 
track it but its power doesn't work."

> >>         Instead, Ackanomic should track its own entities, even across
> >> Internomic borders.  And, while they should not be able to manipulate
> >> entities that came from other nomics, they should be able to manipulate
> >> Ackanomic entities wherever they find them.
> >
> >I disagree here.  Items should be described as generically as possible,
> >so that once they leave our space, they are not our problem, so that
> >if we change our rules or crash or whatever, the entity should not be
> >affected.  
> 
> I agree. We don't want objects depending on things we have not defined
> ourselves.
	Under my scheme, an object won't automatically adjust to our 
environment when it's brought across.  Most of what it tries to do won't 
work.  (It will still be able to manipulate entities that are from the 
same game it was from.)
	In order actually to *use* an object, we have to turn to some 
sort of Import/Export facility, like Malenkai's.  But rest assured, my 
scheme doesn't to my knowledge open security holes, and it won't cause 
anything to crash or any behavior to be undefined.

> Not only that, but the President should be able to veto export/import. Also,
> there should be a ceiling to how much of Acka can be exported. For example,
> if we have point trading, and in another Nomic points are cheap, I could
> imagine the whole of Acka being sold and traded, it's history plundered,
> it's creations lost forever, just for a few short lived points.
	The way Malenkai's proposal is just now, all exports have to be 
approved (at least by acquiescence) by the public.  We really can't be 
plundered.

> I'd like to see the amount of Acka stuff outside Acka be always 8-12% max.
	Bah, humbug.  We don't need no stinkin' limits.  :o)

> >I.  The process of importing an entity may only be initiated if
> >said entity was transferred to Acka as described, and in accordance to,
> >the rules of Internomic.  Said entity is placed in the Customs House
> >and may not affect the Acka game state except as described by this rule,
> >until it clears customs.
> 
> Good. It gives it a cooling off period. How about saying that any object in
> the Customs House for import has no effect while still in the CH?
	He did....

	Hmm.  The only problem I have with I/E per se is that if a nomic
wants to have an Electronic Potato, they can propose their own rule to
create one in less than fourteen days.  :oP

> If Ackadollars leave Acka, are they still Ackadollars? We may have to keep
> track of our assets as they circle around the globe. This could be very
> difficult. And what if another nomic destroys our Ackadollars? Those crazy
> heretics them.
	Well, that's the problem.  Under the I/E scheme, either no one 
else is allowed to hold AckaDollars except our Players, or there's a 
waiting period on A$ transfer, and there's the possibility the A$ will be 
lost or destroyed.
	Under the hybrid scheme I endorse, any player in any nomic would
be able to hold A$, but they are not Exported in the sense of leaving
Ackanomic's realm of responsibility.  So they cannot be traded except
through *our* list, and they cannot be destroyed by foreign rules.  Make 
sense?  I think it does.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:12:53 -0600
From: "Eric L. Freeman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Economics

>If you could lift it, or even move it for that matter, you would not
>need my apples.

I was thinking more of a Wile E. Coyote type device to lift it.

AirHead

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

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 00:19:21 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Internomic Trading

Jason Orendorff wrote:

[about bureaucracy]

I think you are overdoing it here.  My premise is that the object 
must be described in nomic-neutral terms for any meaningful transfer
to take place.  If I trade cheese to France, I do not care that the
name is "cheese" here and "fromage" there, I only care about the raw
physical properties of the substance, really.  I would not describe it
as "cheese", but as an arrangement of various subatomic particles,
ideally.  The bureaucracy required is only what is needed to describe
the entities in nomic-neutral terms, and that is the crux of my idea
of a workable system.

>         Also, unless I missed something in your proposal, transferring
> A$175 to another nomic will involve writing 175 Customs Forms.

I missed that.  A minor detail.

> Under my simpler (but less robust) setup, the same transfer is
> accomplished with a single public message.

OK, I create a Gadget: Ultimate Rule Ripper.  When the red button is
pushed, which occurs whenever the number of seconds since midnight is
prime, every rule from 1 to 8675309 has all words except 'the' removed
from them.  I hereby transfer said Gadget to Agora.  To me, transferring
Gadegts in a public message seems overly simplistic.  It leaves open
many questions.

>         I believe it would be illogical not to merge the two systems into
> something that is robust while remaining usable.

I have no problem merging systems, but I believe the following premises
must be upheld:

1) The description is translated into generic terms

2) It is not possible for an entity in one nomic to affect an item in
another nomic unless its description explicitly states this behaviour
and how it is to be accomplished, and the nomics/Internomic have rules
to handle such interactions

3) Any item transferred from our nomic or from another nomic should be
done in such a way that after the transfer, it is in no way governed
by the rules of the nomic that exported it, it is only governed by
its description and the rules of the importing nomic, including, but not
limited to, those rules that give its description legal sway.

My system requires very little Internomic rules, its more for requirements
of incoming things (reject any that don't meet our laws), and for outgoing
things, it just seems reasonable, if the target can't deal with it, trade
with Agora.  The basis is that every nomic handles its *incoming* rules,
and counts on every other to do the same.  Very RL :(
 
>         Suppose it is then discovered that the original message announcing
> the Customs Form wasn't public.  A CFJ is called, and the concensus that
> the object cleared customs is reversed.
>         Within our ruleset this is no problem, because the CFJ goes back
> and changes all that happened since then.  We act as if the object never
> cleared customs (it didn't; not legally anyway).  But our CFJ doesn't
> scope to other nomics.

My proposal allowed export only after all CFJs were discharged.  It was
implicit therein, but should have been explicit, that once the thing
clears our customs, the statue of limitations kicks in, and a CFJ or
hearing on the matter is invalid.

> 
> > Where are you getting 14 days?
>         I'm assuming other games' Customs process will be similar to
> ours.  A sane assumption.  Each nomic will have its own process, sure.
> But I would guess that it'll still take significantly more than 10 days
> to port the average object from one nomic to another.

You are assuming the acceptance and validity of my solution, and using
that to argue against my solution, with this argument here ;)

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:24:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Victorious Eggplant

> Mohamed brings up some interesting points.  
> However,I've got a few questions about his approach.
	I'll try to answer them.  :o)

> 1)  Does that mean that that someone will have to track an item across
> Nomics,  Follow anything that might effect the transfered item in the othe
> nomics message stream, reflecter, Ftp, www site, etc, then announce
> to the other Nomic what the resultof that activity  is.  It sounds like a
> lot of work and many . . . many . . . many messages cluttering up eis box.
	I cannot emphasize enough:  the answer is NO.
	Currently, just about the only way to manipulate an Ackanomic
entity is to send a message to *Ackanomic's* mailing list.  This doesn't
need to change.  Ackanomic's Financier only has to watch the Ackanomic 
mailing list to keep tabs on all Ackanomic tradeable entities.

	When an object is traded to a foreign player, it isn't automatically 
"Exported".
	"Exported" means the object is no longer our responsibility; 
other nomics can fold, spindle or mutilate it; it can be traded on 
foreign markets; Ackanomic no longer cares.
	"Traded to a foreign player" means the object is owned by someone 
from some other nomic.  But Ackanomic still takes care of it, and it can 
only be traded via *our* mailing list.

> 1a) if this is so, what happens if if the effect is against he rules in the
> other nomic,  what if what it affects is nonexistant in another nomic.
	The object is still an Ackanomic object, so it still creates 
destroys and manipulates Ackanomic objects.  A foreign trader who owns a
Pyraic Frobnotzer may only use it on our ruleset.  So it *can't* affect 
anything in another nomic, whether that thing (or something similar) exists 
there or not.
	If you want that kind of behavior, you have to Export the entity 
from Acka and Import it into the other nomic.

> 1d)  by what mechanism are these widgets transfered,  officially, Nomic to
> Nomic officially, through a common Market, privately, by having someone,
> the inverntor?, responsible for setting it up in the other nomic and
> monitoring it?
	That's the beauty of it.  The objects are transferred in exactly 
the same way they're transferred now.  No extra work is created, and 
there are no extra rules to memorize.  To give a gift of a Trinket to 
someone from a foreign nomic, just make the appropriate announcement, and 
it's done!

> 1d)  Do we get a vote if some other nomic changes something of ours,  If we
> do, how is that vote limited?  If not, does Acka have the same
> resonsibilites and potential liabilities as a regular player would in
> the other nomics.  Is Acka prepared to deal with the same?
	Yes.  If you buy a machine from another nomic that replaces any one
rule with "Enjoy Coca Cola!", and you want that machine to work in Acka, you 
must somehow get our rule set to recognize it.  My little, simple scheme 
is insufficient for that.  You must either (a) Import the object, a la 
Malenkai's I/E scheme, or (b) write a Proposal in Acka to create an entity 
with similar powers.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 23:23:36 -0600
From: john duncan <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Inernomic Trading

> 
> Trademark/Copyright law is a fairly high-level thing to worry about before
> we've gotten to the bead and trinket level.

True, but we have to set the boundaries of the field before we play the
game. All trade among the nomics would be useless without some type of
copyright rules that bind the member games.   

However, this is one thing trade-wise I think big-I Internomic would be
suited for, imposing penalties
> for counterfiting, trademark infringement and whatall.
> 
> Swann

I agree. This is best worked out at the Internomic level, but it should
be addressed before we get too deeply involved in trade.

Lestrade

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #423
*******************************