Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #484
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Monday, January 27 1997       Volume 01 : Number 484

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:05:07 -0800
From: [email-masked] (John Martin Lotz)
Subject: Acka:  Graffitti Wall Submissions

I've got a client meeting tomorrow, and I have
some things that I have to do tonight.

So. . .

If folks just Email me the text they want up,
or send a small gif as an attachment, I'll get
it online tomorrow.  Please, use Acka-Wall
in the Subject line.

On a slightly related topic, does anyone have 
any experience with or know of a place where I 
can FPT software to make transparent Gif's --
one with the background transparent so just
the image appears.

Thanks
Jammer
John-Martin Lotz
[email-masked]

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:21:56 -0800
From: [email-masked] (John Martin Lotz)
Subject: Acka Related Question

Forgot to mention that I use a PC's 

Jammer
Who wants to avoid a Mac/PC Debate
John-Martin Lotz
[email-masked]

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:32:50 -0500
From: Dan Knapp (A.K.A. TheWiz) <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Chalice 

http://www.actcom.co.il/~bruck/acka/********.txt
... as simple as that.  So far, I've tried replacing those eight asterisks
with "Treasure", "treasure", "chalicepa", "chpalace", "palacech",
"forehead", "Forehead", "FOREHEAD", "chpaprfo", and even "FermatLT".  I
don't mind the guessing - that's fun - but could we at least know whether
to use upper or lower case?

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:53:34 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Graffitti Wall Submissions 

>On a slightly related topic, does anyone have
>any experience with or know of a place where I
>can FPT software to make transparent Gif's --
>one with the background transparent so just
>the image appears.

I don't suppose you are using a Mac, but if you are I will email you the
program that will do transperancies.

BTW, whoever was looking for netscape 1.1 for a 68k mac, I have it.  Let me
know and I'll get it on the way.

snowgod

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:54:22 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Chalice 

>http://www.actcom.co.il/~bruck/acka/********.txt
>... as simple as that.  So far, I've tried replacing those eight asterisks
>with "Treasure", "treasure", "chalicepa", "chpalace", "palacech",
>"forehead", "Forehead", "FOREHEAD", "chpaprfo", and even "FermatLT".  I
>don't mind the guessing - that's fun - but could we at least know whether
>to use upper or lower case?
>
>-Red Barn

I've been getting a 403 Forbidden from Niccolo's URLs.  Not sure what the
problem is...

snowgod

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:30:05 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Registrar's Report 

There are currently 24 registered players.  19 of the 24 players are
currently active.  5 are on vacation or are On Ice.  If you find any erros
in this document please let me know so that I can correct them.  This is
the "Player Names and Email Addresses" list that I send to new players and
observers when they enter the game.

snowgod
Registrar

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

23 Skidoo (David Thomas Fisher)
[email-masked]

On Ice

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Bascule (Matt Black)
[email-masked]

Active
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

breadbox (Brian Raiter)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Senator (Sinecure 33), Historian

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

BuzzBee (John Bruce Coifman)
[email-masked]

On Ice

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  AckaPhysicist

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Clairence (Clair Anthony Viglione)
[email-masked]

Vacation Per R362

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

/dev/joe (Joseph DeVincentis)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Scorekeeper, Web-Harfer, Map-Harfer
               Senator (/dev/senate3), Postmaster

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

fnord (Michael J. Thomas)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Poet Laureate

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

G. Peefalt (Aaron Morris)
[email-masked]

On Ice

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Guy Fawkes (Robert Shimmin)
[email-masked]

Active

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Habeous Corpus (Ed Graham)
[email-masked]

On Vacation

Offices Held:  Senator (Rebus 8-{})

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Jammer (John Lotz)
[email-masked]

Active

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Lestrade (John Duncan)
[email-masked]

Active

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Malenkai (Randy Hall)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Speaker, Financier, Clerk of the Court
               Count Tabula, Wizard

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Mohammed (Jason Orendorff)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Inventor, Justice, Promoter, Tabulator
	       Assistant to the Financier (non-office)

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

mr cwm (Eric Murray)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  CSRR Officer, Justice

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Niccolo Flychuck (Uri Bruck)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  President, Chess-Umpire, GamesMaster,
	       RuneMaker

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Red Barn (Daniel Knapp)
[email-masked]

Active

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Robert Sevin (Mitchell Harding)
[email-masked]

Active

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

snowgod (Phil Ackley)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Ambassador, Registrar, Gaoler

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Strider (Jason McCulley)
[email-masked]

Active

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Swann (Steven Swiniarski)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Mad Scientist

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Techno (Jerome Herrman)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Archaeologist

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

ThinMan (John Bollinger)
[email-masked]

Active

Offices Held:  Senator (melvin), Praetor

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:52:48 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : Chalice of the Palace

> > http://www.actcom.co.il/~bruck/acka/********.txt
 The asterixes stand for other letters.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:00:07 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Chalice

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

> >http://www.actcom.co.il/~bruck/acka/********.txt
> >... as simple as that.  So far, I've tried replacing those eight asterisks
> >with "Treasure", "treasure", "chalicepa", "chpalace", "palacech",
> >"forehead", "Forehead", "FOREHEAD", "chpaprfo", and even "FermatLT".  I
> >don't mind the guessing - that's fun - but could we at least know whether
> >to use upper or lower case?
> >
> >-Red Barn
> 
> I've been getting a 403 Forbidden from Niccolo's URLs.  Not sure what the
> problem is...
> 
> snowgod
> 

Each asterix should be replaced by a lowercase letter.

Niccolo Flychuck
Considering the moto
"President of jokers and a joker of a President"

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:50:57 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Duel: Malenkai accepts

/dev/joe:

Be it known that Malenkai scoffs at your bumbling attempts to find the 
Treasures of Jara, and that he accepts the duel, and that I am his Second.

The contest shall be the Limerick contest

He also wishes to reply to your meaningless scribbles of numbers.

>Perhaps you meant to say 573 18 1199 -9 308 9 1086 17 561 33 654 7 701 -9.
>With such obvious ineptitude, it is no wonder you come fishing for
>clues, thinly disguised in the form of a duel.
>
>You shall have your duel, but only if I'm vanquished shall I be goaded
>into helping you any more than I have here.  Otherwise, when I am the
>victor, ... :).
>
>I choose the Limerick contest.
>
>Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 07:57:38 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Duel Limerick

T'was a treasure hunter so lame
Despite his undeserved fame
Desperate for clues
Goads me into these duels
When he should be watching Parades

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:07:38 -0800
From: [email-masked] (John Martin Lotz)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 339 (Jammer)

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 339
  Subject: Leaving the Game
Initiator: Guy Fawkes
    Judge: Jammer (selected Jan 24, 1997, 20:09h EST)
Judgement: 

The judgement is Yes.  The player known as Zelda, in
whatever guise, has left the game.  Thus according to
Rule 256/6 "Leaving the Game" the following events occur:

     1) All of his mimsy possessions are taken away and considered unowned.
     2) The player is removed from all offices.
     3) The rental period for any rented entities in his possession ends.
[They return to their true owners.] If there exist any entities being
rented from
     him, such entities are no longer considered rented; the rental period
for such entities does not end, but simply cease to exist; their current
     possessors become their owners in fact.
     4) If the player was never at any time Active, all of his A$ are
transferred to the Treasury, every PFBond associated with him is destroyed,
every
     rented entity in his possession reverts to its owner, every entity
remaining in his possession is destroyed, and then the player is
deregistered. In
     this case, the procedure ends here.
     5) If the player was at any time Active, the procedure continues.
     6) Every PFBond associated with him is converted into a Bond
Promissory in his real life name. Bond Promissories are tradeable entities.
     7) An Undead is created; its name is that of the player.
     8) All entities in the player's possession are taken away, considered
unowned, haunted by the just-created Undead, and in the Treasury.
     9) The player is deregistered. 

I also observe that it is just as well that Zelda left the game, as the
procedures
for expeling a player are nebulous at best

Statement:

Assuming the revelation in the post quoted below is true, that post
resulted in Eponimondas leaving the game.

Guy Fawkes's Reasoning:

The relevant post:

>Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:35:40 -0500
>From: [email-masked] (Zelda B. Morris)
>Subject: Acka: I accept.
>
>I accept Nietzsche's and Eponimondas'  money.
>And must inform All, that they were me all along. I thought I'd just
>wait till I could figure a really good paradox win. But I just didn't
>have enough time---I'm returnin' my webtv box. Maybe I'll see you boys
>when I get my 'puter.
>- -ZELDA M.
>(for now having to settle for bein' the richest woman in acka)
>P.S. I must resign, me and my DRONES.
>- -------JOAN OF ARKANSAS

>From Rule 250:A player is any person who is registered as a player.

I assert that, if the revelation of this post is true (all mail from
Eponimondas and the non-players neitzsche and Joan of Arkansas was indeed
from the same person), the action of leaving the game, apparently taken
by Joan of Arkansas and neitsche, was actually taken by Eponimondas, who
left the game as a result of this post.

The act of leaving Acka was taken by the person (who for lack of a beter
name I shall call "Zelda") in this post.  "Zelda" was a person registered
as a player, more specifically registered as a player under the Ackanomic
name Eponimondas.  In this post, she resigned from the game, and as a
result was no longer registered as a player; more specifically, she was
no longer registered under the player name Eponimondas, and so
Eponimondas was no longer a player.

The fact that for some unknown reason she erroneously signed her name
Joan of Arkansas instead of Eponimondas in her resignation message is
immaterial to this argument.  "Zelda" was a person who was registered as
a player; as a result of this post, she became deregistered.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:52:56 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: game custom

Guy Fawkes wrote:

>Rule 216/0 
>Judgements Are Not Rules
>
>     If a statement on which Judgement has been called is Judged to be true, 
>     and that Judgement is not overruled, it does not thereby become a 
>     rule, or any part of a rule. It merely becomes an explicit part of 
>     currently accepted game custom. 
>
>     Initial Mutable Rule 216, Jan 22 1996
>
>Rule 216's provision that CFJ's become accepted game custom (as written, 
>at least) applies only to those CFJ's judged true.  The CFJ which 
>supposedly instituted the non-paradoxical preferability custom was a 
>paradox win attempt (240, I think) which was judged false.

Rule 216 makes the CFJ _statement_ become _explicit_ game custom if
judged true.  Game custom makes the negative of the CFJ statement
customary if the statement is judged false.  Game custom, to some
extent, makes CFJ reasoning implicitly customary, regardless of the
verdict.
>
>In the sense that the non-paradox preferability argument is an opinion 
>held by many (but by no means all) players, it is game custom.  In the 
>sense that many judges use it as a basis for judging paradox CFJ's 
>(personal opinion affects all judgments, after all), it is game custom.  
>But in the sense that it is in some unwritten hinterlands of the rules 
>and that it must be considered by all judges, I submit that no such 
>custom exists.

This is an issue of some interest to me, and not only because I was
the first to stiplulate a (game-spirit-based) preference for non-
paradoxical interpretations.  Some CFJ reasonings have been seriously
flawed despite leading to verdicts that have been (IMO) correct.
Should these become customary?  No, nor do I think that they do.  I
think it was me again, however, who first argued that CFJ reasoning
does become implicit game custom until and unless the relevant
CFJ is overruled.  I still think that this is true, to some extent.
But I don't think that simply putting a statement into a CFJ
reasoning makes it customary -- there is an element of general (or
at least widespread) acceptance that is also necessary.  Such
widespread acceptance is to some extent implicit in the non-overturning
of a CFJ, but that is not a wholly accurate guage.

As far as what judges may and must consider, I submit that it is,
indeed, left at the judge's discretion as to what is customary and
what not.  However, that does not grant free license to judges to
wantonly ignore previous judges' positions and arguments.  It is
incumbent upon a judge to consider even custom that he personally
disagrees with when rendering a verdict, and slapping a "non-customary"
label on such a personally-objectionable principle is a deplorable
dodge.  Personal disagreement is not sufficient to excise any judicial
principal from game custom.  The same custom applies to all -- the
problem is to decide what that custom is (and not what it _should be_).

The case of the preference for non-paradoxical interpretations is one
of the more solid ones, actually.  After I wrote the first decision
that employed it, it was later invoked by Malenkai and considered
as a valid principle by the Supreme Court.  At the very least it is
"functionally" customary, because the Supreme Court considers it valid,
or has done so in the past, at least.  It has been employed elsewhere
as well.  It is on much more sound footing than many less controversial
principles.

ThinMan

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:38:42 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 339 Verdict

CFJ 339 has been judged TRUE.  As a note, please submit verdicts
via private e-mail.  

This verdict is consistent with CFCJ 128, although the sentence of
CFCJ 128 cannot be performed.  It remains to be seen whether it will
be consistent with 340, and what the final shakeout will be.

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 339
  Subject: Leaving the Game
Initiator: Guy Fawkes
    Judge: Jammer (selected Jan 24, 1997, 20:09h EST)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

Assuming the revelation in the post quoted below is true, that post
resulted in Eponimondas leaving the game.

Guy Fawkes's Reasoning:

The relevant post:

>Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:35:40 -0500
>From: [email-masked] (Zelda B. Morris)
>Subject: Acka: I accept.
>
>I accept Nietzsche's and Eponimondas'  money.
>And must inform All, that they were me all along. I thought I'd just
>wait till I could figure a really good paradox win. But I just didn't
>have enough time---I'm returnin' my webtv box. Maybe I'll see you boys
>when I get my 'puter.
>- -ZELDA M.
>(for now having to settle for bein' the richest woman in acka)
>P.S. I must resign, me and my DRONES.
>- -------JOAN OF ARKANSAS

>From Rule 250:A player is any person who is registered as a player.

I assert that, if the revelation of this post is true (all mail from
Eponimondas and the non-players neitzsche and Joan of Arkansas was indeed
from the same person), the action of leaving the game, apparently taken
by Joan of Arkansas and neitsche, was actually taken by Eponimondas, who
left the game as a result of this post.

The act of leaving Acka was taken by the person (who for lack of a beter
name I shall call "Zelda") in this post.  "Zelda" was a person registered
as a player, more specifically registered as a player under the Ackanomic
name Eponimondas.  In this post, she resigned from the game, and as a
result was no longer registered as a player; more specifically, she was
no longer registered under the player name Eponimondas, and so
Eponimondas was no longer a player.

The fact that for some unknown reason she erroneously signed her name
Joan of Arkansas instead of Eponimondas in her resignation message is
immaterial to this argument.  "Zelda" was a person who was registered as
a player; as a result of this post, she became deregistered.

Jammer's Reasoning:

The judgement is Yes.  The player known as Zelda, in
whatever guise, has left the game.  Thus according to
Rule 256/6 "Leaving the Game" the following events occur:

     1) All of his mimsy possessions are taken away and considered unowned.
     2) The player is removed from all offices.
     3) The rental period for any rented entities in his possession ends.
[They return to their true owners.] If there exist any entities being
rented from
     him, such entities are no longer considered rented; the rental period
for such entities does not end, but simply cease to exist; their current
     possessors become their owners in fact.
     4) If the player was never at any time Active, all of his A$ are
transferred to the Treasury, every PFBond associated with him is destroyed,
every
     rented entity in his possession reverts to its owner, every entity
remaining in his possession is destroyed, and then the player is
deregistered. In
     this case, the procedure ends here.
     5) If the player was at any time Active, the procedure continues.
     6) Every PFBond associated with him is converted into a Bond
Promissory in his real life name. Bond Promissories are tradeable entities.
     7) An Undead is created; its name is that of the player.
     8) All entities in the player's possession are taken away, considered
unowned, haunted by the just-created Undead, and in the Treasury.
     9) The player is deregistered.

I also observe that it is just as well that Zelda left the game, as the
procedures
for expeling a player are nebulous at best

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:39:31 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

Phil Ackley wrote:

> I bid A$110 for the Scroll of Crumble.

Get real!  I bid A$201.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:41:58 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

>Get real!  I bid A$201.
>
>Malenkai

  I bid A$230.

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:47:06 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 127 Verdict

Malenkai wrote:
> 
> CFCJ 127 has been judged TRUE, with penalties to be assesed at the
> end of a 3 day grace period:
> 
> A PUBLIC APOLOGY of at least three lines.
> A FINE of A$25.
> 
> Mohammed -25 CFCJ 127

Note the following penalities are now assigned for CFCJ 127.

Clerk of the Courts

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:10:26 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

A.K.A. TheWiz wrote:
> 
> >Get real!  I bid A$201.
> >
> >Malenkai
> 
>   I bid A$230.
> 
> -Red Barn
	I bid A$255

		Strider

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:57:21 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 339 Verdict

> Call For Judgement 339
> Judgement: TRUE
> 
> Statement:
> 
> Assuming the revelation in the post quoted below is true, that post
> resulted in Eponimondas leaving the game.

> Jammer's Reasoning:
> 
> The judgement is Yes.  The player known as Zelda, in
> whatever guise, has left the game.  Thus according to
> Rule 256/6 "Leaving the Game" the following events occur:
> 
>      1) All of his mimsy possessions are taken away and considered unowned.
>      2) The player is removed from all offices.
>      3) The rental period for any rented entities in his possession ends.
>      4) If the player was never at any time Active, all of his A$ are
> transferred to the Treasury, every PFBond associated with him is destroyed,
> every rented entity in his possession reverts to its owner, every entity
> remaining in his possession is destroyed, and then the player is
> deregistered. In this case, the procedure ends here.

Not true.  "Zelda", in eir first guise as Eponimondas, did become active.
The true judgement in CFCJ 128 (even though it cannot cause the penalties
to be applied to an undead) established that the later two guises (which
never became active) never existed.  The financier should be able to tell
us how much money Eponimondas's undead has (about A$1100 if I recall
correctly).

>      5) If the player was at any time Active, the procedure continues.
>      6) Every PFBond associated with him is converted into a Bond
> Promissory in his real life name. Bond Promissories are tradeable entities.
>      7) An Undead is created; its name is that of the player.
>      8) All entities in the player's possession are taken away, considered
> unowned, haunted by the just-created Undead, and in the Treasury.
>      9) The player is deregistered.

> I also observe that it is just as well that Zelda left the game, as the
> procedures
> for expeling a player are nebulous at best

Would anyone be interested in forcing CFCJ128's penalties by way of
{{bracketed}} rule text?  I would do this in the same proposal where I
add a definition for being expelled to the rules (which should say that
the player cannot return, at least for some length of time, if it is
to mean much).

/dev/joe

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:01:40 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Phoebe (mr cwm)

Perhaps the wisdom that I now appear to have selfishly kept for myself is
that one cannot spend seven days thinking that one has at least one more
day to post Phoebe's Wisdom.  :) 

- -mr cwm

On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Malenkai wrote:

>mr cwm has found Phoebe's matchbox.
>
>Malenkai
>

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:22:05 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Duel Limerick

Malenkai buried lots of stuff
With no maps and clues that were tough.
The numbers he's teasin'
Have no rhyme or reason
And I think they're nothing but guff.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:46:30 -0800 (PST)
From: fnord <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: mailing idea

Phil Ackley spake thusly
>Guy Fawkes said: 
> >
> >Might it be a good idea to _start_ observers off on the digest list?  I
> >know that looking at scores of mailings in my box every day would be
> >enough to scare _me_ away if I was undecided on whether I wanted to play
> >or not.  A few large files, however, doesn't seem quite so intimidating.
> 
> Based on the comments I have recieved from a couple of Observers, I think
> this would be a good idea.  I try to reccomend to new observers that they
> join the digest version of the list, but a couple of times they have said
> they would rather join the "real" list so that they don't feel like they
> are missing anything.
> 
> If we made digest membership mandatory for new observers, perhaps they
> wouldn't feel obligated to bit off more than they can chew.
> 
> Fnord, you were and observer for a long time, (perhaps you ought to be our
> expert on observers :)  Any comments?

I'm glad you asked, snowgod, although I had already decided to throw my
opinion into the ring, anyway.

When I first joined as an observer, I got the same amount of public
mailflow that others were getting.  At that point, though, I knew that I
didn't have to read every single piece of mail that came into my Acka
mailbox.  And so, I didn't, at first anyway.  I kept an eye on what was
happening, I slowly became acquainted with all the little intricacies that
were involved with the game.  However, during all that time, I knew that I
could forego it all, simply by deleting the mail I was getting.

Why keep it separate, though?  Well, not to be mean, but we _do_ generate
a great deal of mail in this game.  And, again not to be mean, if the
person can't handle it when they're an observer, how're they going to 
handle it when they're playing the game?  I think the observer should know 
just how much mail this game can generate when we're in full swing.

A second point, but this may just be me, digests are always harder to read,
since it has so much information packed into one file.  Also, they're
harder to reply to, or so I've found.

fnord
(hmmm..., aside from trying to find a way for an Observer
to win the game (looked for two weeks for a possibility),
I dunno if I'm an _Expert_ on Observers, but
it sure does sound nice.)

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:27:34 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

>	I bid A$255
>
>		Strider
>

  A$281

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:54:09 -0800 (PST)
From: fnord <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 339 Verdict

/dev/joe spake thusly
> 
> Would anyone be interested in forcing CFCJ128's penalties by way of
> {{bracketed}} rule text?  I would do this in the same proposal where I
> add a definition for being expelled to the rules (which should say that
> the player cannot return, at least for some length of time, if it is
> to mean much).

I certainly wouldn't mind seeing this, at least as far as you getting
your money back for the CFCJ, and even for the money that Eponimondas
had returned to the treasury.

As far as the Expulsion stuff goes, we might want to have two categories.
One would be a permanent expulsion, and a second one would bar them
from returning for a specified period of time.  A change would then
also have to be made to the CFCJ rule to allow for the two different
types of Expulsion.

fnord

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:53:31 -0800 (PST)
From: "G. Peefalt" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: player removal

I am removing myself from the game until I can afford the time and mail
spool space to participate in Ackanomic.  Please remove me from the mailing
list.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:56:45 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

A.K.A. TheWiz wrote:
> 
> >       I bid A$255
> >
> >               Strider
> >
> 
>   A$281
> 
> -Red Barn

		A$303

	-Strider

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:39 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1680

Proposal 1680
Internomic Judgment
Guy Fawkes

In Rule 419.2, replace

"Whenever Ackanomic is required to serve as a judge in Internomic, the
Liaison shall render that judgement, and shall do so in the best
interests of Ackanomic."

with:

Whenever Ackanomic is required to serve as a judge in Internomic, the
Liaison shall publically post the statement for judgement along with any
accompanying reasoning.  During the four days following this post,
players are encouraged to respond to the statement for judgment with
whatever comments and reasoning they may have on the judgdment.  Four
days after the Liaison's posting of the statement for judgement, a
Hearing will commence.  The valid responses for this Hearing will be the
valid verdicts Ackanomic may deliver in response to the Internomic
statement for judgement.  For the purposes of determining a verdict in
this Hearing, each response from a Bronze Torch holder counts as two
player responses, and non-player responses do not count.  The verdict of
this hearing shall be the verdict delivered on the statement for
judgement.  In the event of a tie, the Liaison shall determine which
verdict to deliver.  In whatever areas this rule differs from the usual
procedure for Hearings, this rule takes precedence.  When reporting the
verdict to Internomic, the Liaison should use whatever player comments
on the matter he feels are appropriate.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:44 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1686

Proposal 1686
Repeal Politeness Moon
Guy Fawkes

This is a Modest Proposal.  Repeal Rule 374.

In Rule 1209 "Machine That Goes *ping*" remove the string, "immune from
the Politeness Moon in doing so"

{{[There is no risk in calling a Politeness Moon.  For similar purposes,
a Duel has a higher fun/work ratio.  More details on request.]}}

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:39 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1681

Proposal 1681
ng Elder tinan
snowgod

Amend R207.1 by replacing all occurances of the phrase "cows eat grass"with
the complete text of R207.1

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:42 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1684

Proposal 1684
's Bribery
snowgod

This is a modest proposal.

Amend R315 By removing the final sentence from section vii

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:42 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1685

Proposal 1685
ng CnH to 100 failed
snowgod

Create a new rule with the following text:

Pinnochio's Nose exists.  It is unique and nontradeable.  Pinnochio's Nose
will always attach itself to the face of it's owner in place of his real
nose.  It cannot be removed except as described in this rule.

Upon the acceptance of any proposal that contains either the word "modest"
or the word "harf" Pinnochio's Nose will grow by three inches.  It's owner
must then post a message saying something to the effect of

"Oh no, My nose is growing.  Since I have been in possesion of Pinnochio's
Nose it has grown x times.  Pinnochio's Nose is now y feet and z inches
long.  Once the nose exceeds 10 feet in length, I will be top heavy and
unable to change locations."

Failure to submit a message similar to the above  when mandated by this
rule is a crime, a felony.

Once Pinnochio's Nose reaches ten feet in length it's owner will become top
heavy and tip over, planting his nose in the ground.  He will be unable to
change locations for one week for as long as he is in possesion of the
nose.  Aditionally, the final line of his "Oh no," post must be changed to
indicate the distance of of the ground that Pinnochio's Nose has raised him
to [measured by the distance over ten feet that the nose has grown].

Once Pinnochio's Nose exceeds 15 feet in length in will miraculously remove
itself from its current owner and attach itself the face of the player
who's score is closest to the mean of the score of all the other players.

{{Initially, Pinnochio's Nose will be possesed by the player with the
lowest positive score}}

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:41 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1683

Proposal 1683
ne deserves a telephone call.
snowgod

This is a modest proposal.

Amend R709 by adding the following line of text to the end of the numbered
list:

9)) A player in the Gaol may post up to 3 public messages a day.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:01:37 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

>		A$303
>
>	-Strider

  A$334

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:06:14 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Proposal 1681

>Amend R207.1 by replacing all occurances of the phrase "cows eat grass"with
>the complete text of R207.1

  You mean _before_ this proposal, right?  Then we get:

  If an accepted proposal contains the phrase 
    "If an accepted proposal contains the phrase "cows eat grass", then
    the player who submitted the proposal is said to be silly, and shall
    score 5 points",
  then the player who submitted the proposal is said to be silly, and
  shall score 5 points.

  This makes no sense to me.

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:00:40 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1682

Proposal 1682
ng mr cwm
snowgod

This is a modest proposal.

{{Change the title of Rule 221 to "Winning is Inherently Amusing (or
Winning by Palindrome)"}}

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:12:46 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Proposal 1686

Jason Orendorff wrote:
> 
> Proposal 1686
> Repeal Politeness Moon
> Guy Fawkes
> 
> This is a Modest Proposal.  Repeal Rule 374.
> 
> In Rule 1209 "Machine That Goes *ping*" remove the string, "immune from
> the Politeness Moon in doing so"
> 
> {{[There is no risk in calling a Politeness Moon.  For similar purposes,
> a Duel has a higher fun/work ratio.  More details on request.]}}
Salutations!

		Please, illuminate me.  I assume that you mean for dueling to replace
the Politeness Moon?

			Regards,
				Strider

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:21:43 -0600
From: Eric Freeman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: withdrawing from the game

I'm sad to say that I must remove myself from the game of Ackanomic )C:
I just don't have the time to really be an active, contributing player.
Maybe when things settle down at work I'll be back.

AirHead

P.S. I sent a similar message last week but I still seem to be on the 
mailing list.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:30:24 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

A.K.A. TheWiz wrote:
> 
> >               A$303
> >
> >       -Strider
> 
>   A$334
> 
> -Red Barn

	A$364
		
- -Strider

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:36:45 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

>	A$364
>		
>-Strider

  Gee, this is getting pretty intense.  At any rate:

  A$401

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:50:09 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

A.K.A. TheWiz wrote:
> 
> >       A$364
> >
> >-Strider
> 
>   Gee, this is getting pretty intense.  At any rate:
> 
>   A$401
> 
> -Red Barn

A$441

	Are you aware that you are double-posting everything?  

		Strider

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:53:09 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Scroll of Crumble Auction

>A$441
>
>	Are you aware that you are double-posting everything?  
>
>		Strider

  I wasn't, thanks.

  A$486
  (The evil number!  But it was next.)

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:59:16 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 339 Verdict

On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, fnord wrote:

> As far as the Expulsion stuff goes, we might want to have two categories.
> One would be a permanent expulsion, and a second one would bar them
> from returning for a specified period of time.  A change would then
> also have to be made to the CFCJ rule to allow for the two different
> types of Expulsion.

I don't know that specifying expulsion as a permanent thing would have 
its intended effect.  The only thing I can think of that permanent 
expulsion would be appropriate punishment for is blatant, willful, 
destructive disregard for the Rules.  Someone who would commit some crime 
worthy of Expulsion and then who wanted back in would probably not think 
twice about figuring out some deception (such as the multiple accounts 
possible with webtv) to get back in.  If the deception were ever 
discovered, readjusting the game state to account for the lack of that 
player's presence could be devestating.  In short, permanent expulsion 
could cause more problems than its worth; it seems rather pointless to 
write rules for the handling of those who have no respect for them.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:46:12 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Change of Address

The main uiuc cluster keeps crashing, and since I think it's the best way 
for me to have a stable relationship with Acrobot, please address all 
nomic-related mail to me at:

[email-masked]

Thank you much.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:54:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: mailing idea

> Based on the comments I have recieved from a couple of Observers, I think
> this would be a good idea.  I try to reccomend to new observers that they
> join the digest version of the list, but a couple of times they have said
> they would rather join the "real" list so that they don't feel like they
> are missing anything.
	Then make it clear that by joining the digest form of the list 
first, they actually receive *more* material, including valuable 
information about what has happened in the few hours just before they 
joined.

- --Mohammed

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #484
*******************************