Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #492
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest      Thursday, January 30 1997      Volume 01 : Number 492

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:11:20 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Ambassador - seek out and explore 

>http://www.gallaudet.edu/~ghritter/Nomic/
>
>I particulary found interesting proposals 330,331 :)
>
>I will looking forward for your report.
>
>Niccolo Flychuck

I have sent messages to Future Nomic on two previous occasions and have
never recieved a reply leading me to one of two conclusions:

A) They arew dead
B) I am sending email to the wrong party.

In any event, I'll give it one more shot and see what happens.  They
certainoly have the potential to be an interesting nomic.

snowgod

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:31:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code RFC

> > For the following lists, does 'may only be used for' mean that
> > the list will be the only place for that kind of interaction,
> > or only that that kind of action must go into that mailing list?
> > (basically, if I wanna give someone some ackadollars, can I say
> > it in the main list only, both the main and financial list, or
> > the financial list only?)
> 
> 'may only be used for' means 'only that kind of action may take place
> on that list'.  When we have non-voting players, I might make the
> subgame actions only allowable on the acka-games list, but for the
> present plan, any action allowed under the rules will be allowed on the
> official list.

Do we really want to make that a hard-and-fast rule, punishable via
CFCJ? It might be better to simply designate each list to a particular
purpose, but allow incorrect posts to occasionally occur.

b

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:44:01 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code RFC

> > 'may only be used for' means 'only that kind of action may take place
> > on that list'.  When we have non-voting players, I might make the
> > subgame actions only allowable on the acka-games list, but for the
> > present plan, any action allowed under the rules will be allowed on the
> > official list.
> 
> Do we really want to make that a hard-and-fast rule, punishable via
> CFCJ? It might be better to simply designate each list to a particular
> purpose, but allow incorrect posts to occasionally occur.

I believe it was Mohammed who objected to that possibility that game
actions that a player cared about could be missed due to being posted
on an inappropriate public list which that player didn't subscribe to.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:49:51 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Ambassador - seek out and explore

On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

> 
> >http://www.gallaudet.edu/~ghritter/Nomic/
> >
> >I particulary found interesting proposals 330,331 :)
> >
> >I will looking forward for your report.
> >
> >Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> I have sent messages to Future Nomic on two previous occasions and have
> never recieved a reply leading me to one of two conclusions:
> 
> A) They arew dead
> B) I am sending email to the wrong party.
> 
> 
> In any event, I'll give it one more shot and see what happens.  They
> certainoly have the potential to be an interesting nomic.
> 
> snowgod

Their web page claim to have been updated Jan.24 1997
May be they're just not interested.
Niccolo Flychuck

> 
> 

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:22:09 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Scroll of Crumble

The scroll of crumble auction is over.

Red Bard -605 +scroll of scrumble

Chief Cheese

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:28:31 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Time Check

Malenkai wrote:

>> >The Machine rule should be re-written so that guesses work like
>> >Magic letters - when there are multiple guesses at the same time,
>> >the first one is the one the scholar receives first.
>> 
>> Good idea, I'll incorporate that.  Anyone have any other timing
>> issues that should be addressed?
>
>Why would special language be needed for the machine?  It is my 
>understanding that the solution will solve the problem in general --
>it will be derterminable with finality whether message A precedes 
>message B.  According to the current language in the machine rule,
>it is a crime to send message B (the second guess) in that case, so
>it was never really sent (by R 713), and hence not a guess, at all.
>
>I guess the point is that I believe the general solution discussed
>will solve all the current and specific cases in the rules.

Well currently the Machine rule uses one time standard -- the Scholar's
reception time -- for magic letters, but a different one -- the
default -- for truth guesses.  It makes some sense that the Scholar
should be able to use his reception time for both.  The solution I
intend to propose will defer to anything that stipulates alternative
timing resolution.

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:53:41 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code RFC

I think the restrictions on the uses of the secondary public lists answers
my previous objections.  It looks good to me, now.

- -mr cwm

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:57:56 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code RFC

On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, breadbox wrote:

>
>Do we really want to make that a hard-and-fast rule, punishable via
>CFCJ? It might be better to simply designate each list to a particular
>purpose, but allow incorrect posts to occasionally occur.
>

At the very least, I hope we can declare incorrect posts as having not
been made to a public forum, or maybe the "proper" public forum.

- -mr cwm

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:44:21 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Expert

This is public notification that I wish to be granted Expert status in
the following areas:

1) Paradox wins
2) Non-winning paradoxes and non-determinism
3) Rule conflicts and precedence
4) The judicial system

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:00:24 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Ambassador - seek out and explore

On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:

> A) They arew dead

Not likely; their web page appears to be reguarly updated.

> B) I am sending email to the wrong party.

Possible there is no "right party."  A young nomic most likely does not 
have a diplomatic service yet.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:17:11 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1695

Proposal 1695
Overworked II - Bond-Harfer
Malenkai

Create a new rule entitled "Bond-Harfer Meta Rule", numbered 427.1, with
the following text:

"
[I.  Do we want bonds?]

Upon the creation of this rule, the following will occur, in the 
order specified:

1) A Hearing shall be called on the future of PFBonds, the valid responses
being:
 
"Bonds are worth the work, and I'm willing to do that work."
"Bonds are cool, but they just aren't worth the effort."

[II. No, we do not.]

Upon a result of the Hearing of "Bonds are cool, but they just aren't
worth the effort.", being publically knowable, with the added stipulation
that at least two thirds of the responses were this response, the stuff
on the following lettered list (Bond Repeal List) will occur in the order
specified:

a) All players are paid A$5 for every PFBond they possess.
b) All PBbonds, Bond Promissories, and Bond Options are destroyed.

c) Rule 252 is amended to delete the following 2 sections of text:
"
3) The New player is given 100 newly created PFBonds associated with
himself. The Financier shall assign a label that may be used to refer
to the PFBonds associated with the New player, although this procedure
may continue without waiting for him to do so.
"
and
"
3) All Bond Promissories in that player's real life name are converted
to PFBonds associated with that player. Their label is the same as the
PFBonds whose conversion created the Bond Promissories.
"

[and then the Spelling Bee renumbers the sections]

d) Rule 256 is amended to remove ", every PFBond associated with him is
destroyed", and
"
6) Every PFBond associated with him is converted into a Bond Promissory
in his real life name. Bond Promissories are tradeable entities.
"

e) Rules 507 ("PF Bonds"), 508 ("Bond Yields"), and 512 ("Bond Options")
are repealed.

f) Rule 666 is amended to remove
"g) Bond payments are held in suspension." and
"i) Bond payments are reinstituted, as if all players' scores were
their Eggplant Weight at the end of the previous bond cycle." 

[and then the Spelling Bee reletters the sections]
 
g) Rule 427.1, "Bond-Harfer Meta Rule", is then repealed.
 
[III.  Sure, lets keep bonds around.]
 
Upon any other result of the Hearing being publically knowable, including
a result of "Bonds are cool, but they just aren't worth the effort."
such that that response received less than two thirds of the responses,
the following will occur in the order specified:

1) A new rule entitled "Bond-Harfer", and numbered 427, shall be created
with the text below, delimited by double dollar signs:

[
$$
The Office of the Bond-Harfer is a Functional Office. The Duties of
the Bond-Harfer are: 

      (a) to calculate and publically report the yields on PFBonds,
per PFBond, when they occur.
      (b) to calculate and report PFBond yields per player based on the
PFBond yields per bond and players' PFBond portfolios.
$$
]

2) [A nomination for the functional office of Bond-Harfer now occurs]

3) Upon the results of the Nomination for the office of Bond-Harfer 
being publically knowable, one of the following will occur:

A) If there was at least one volunteer for the office, this rule
(Rule 427.1, "Bond-Harfer Meta Rule") is repealed upon a Bond-Harfer
being appointed.

B) If there were no volunteers for the office, Rule 427, "Bond-Harfer",
is repealed, the nomination for that office is terminated, then
steps a) thru g) on the list entitled "Bond Repeal List" occur.

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:17:12 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1696

Proposal 1696
Prelude to Pretty Powerful Party Pieces
Malenkai

This is a Modest proposal.

Amend R 1230.1, "Swingers Play Around I - the board and the playing pieces"
to add the following sub-section directly after section 3, sub-section I:

      J.  A PartyChessPieceDef rule may define an instance limit for
that type of piece.  If it does not, there is no instance limit for
that piece.  Instance limits are always enforced on a per Swinger
basis.  If such a limit is defined, a Swinger may not control
more pieces than the limit; if it is ever found that e possesses pieces
in excess of the specified limit, all excess pieces are destroyed until
this situation is corrected, starting with off-board pieces.  If 
random determination is required to perform this destruction, the
Chess-Umpire shall handle it.

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:17:05 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1693

Proposal 1693
Stuff
Malenkai

This is a Modest proposal.

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

I. [at least provide a sequence and reference to all end of cycle stuff
that is not part of R 666.  I almost forgot about the Archaeologist
last time.  Account for pass/fail of P 1690]

a) Amend Rule 666, "End of Cycle", to add the following section
directly before the section which contains "Ackanomic play resumes":

"
x) All events specified by other rules to occur at the end of the cycle
occur, in the numeric order of the rule that defines the event [see
rules 593 and 670]. 
"

then reletter each lettered section sequentially, starting with 'a'.

- --

b) Amend Rule 593, "Ackanomic Research Guild", to replace:

"
The Office of Archaeologist has one seat. This seat is filled or
transferred only as follows: At the end of a Cycle, before player 
scores are reset, this seat is transferred to the single player who
has the highest score which is both a prime number and not equivalent
to the Magic Number, and is not already a Scientist. If no such player
exists, this seat is not transferred (nor filled if vacant). 
"

with:

"
The Office of Archaeologist has one seat. This seat is filled or
transferred only as follows: At the end of a Cycle, this seat is
transferred to the single player who had the highest score when the
cycle ended, which was both a prime number and not equivalent
to the Magic Number at that time, and who is not already a Scientist.
If no such player exists, this seat is not transferred (nor filled if
vacant). 
"

- --

c) Amend Rule 670, "Commission d'Arts", to remove the following sentence:

"
This clause takes precedence over any other in any rule dealing with
the starting of a Commission d'Arts session. 
"
 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

II.  [de-goosing some precedence]

a) Amend R 1211, "Boons of the Ancients" to remove the following sentence:

"This takes precedence over the rule entitled "Chartreuse Goose""

b) Amend R 1240.11, "Otzma Card Type Foul Fowl" to remove the following
sentence:

"This rule takes precedence over rule 235."

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

III. [replacing machine truth revelation precedence with deferrence]
 
a) Amend Rule 1240.12, "Otzma Card of type TruthSeeker" to remove the
following sentence:

"This rule has precedence over Rule 1209 where there is a conflict."
 
b) Amend Rule 1209, "The Machine That Goes *ping*", to replace:

"
IV. It is strictly against this rule for the Scholar to use any means
whatsoever, other than those described in this rule, to communicate any
information regarding the Truth to any player, so long as the Truth
remains unknown to all players but him.
"

with:

"
IV. It is strictly against this rule for the Scholar to use any means
whatsoever, other than those described in the rules, to communicate any
information regarding the Truth to any player, so long as the undisguised
Truth is not publically knowable.
"

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

IV. [Shortening On-Ice shelf life]

Amend Rule 255, "Vacationing", to replace

"on ice for 90 consecutive days" with "on ice for 60 consecutive days"

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

V. [I've been meaning to do this for awhile]

Amend Rule 374, "Self Deleting Text", to add the following paragraph
directly before the one which begins with "Any text":

"
If a rule contains more sets of left double curly braces than right
double curly braces, that rule is amended to append a set of right
double curly braces after all of its other text.
"

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

VI. [Stuff requiring a rule]

Create a new rule with the following text:

{{
A. [executing the Eponimondas CFCJ, sort of]

If an Undead named Eponimondas exists [this will occur in the CFJ 340
FALSE thread], perform the following actions in the order listed:

a) A$20 is transferred from the treasury to /dev/joe.
b) The undead known as Eponimondas stops haunting all A$s it is
haunting
c) The undead known as Eponimondas starts haunting A$500.

- ----

B. [common sense for the automatic sculpture]

a) Amend the Blueprint for "Automatic Sculpture" to replace:

"
When an Automatic Sculpture is buried as a Treasure
"

with:

"
When an Automatic Sculpture is buried as, or as part of, a Treasure
"
}}

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:17:13 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1697

Proposal 1697
Chess Things
Niccolo Flychuck

This is a Modest proposal
In 1230.2 "Swinger Like to Play Around II - Managing the game"
section 2 J.(i) will be ammended to read in full:
"A Round play is defined as a time period in which each Swinger played
exactly once, where a Default Pass also counts a play, and a Special
DD-Turn counts as a play for each Swinger taking part in that turn, in eir
capacity as Swinger."

In section 2 D the text :
" as a result of the fact that eir Party no longer exists,"
Will be deleted.

{{[The second is a correction to the null proposal. The first should have
really gone with the check fix, because playing order may change as a
result of check, it is possible that the current condition of each Swinger
playing exactly once, might never be met. In the spirit of that
ammendemnt, Special DD-Turn also count.]}}

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:17:11 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1694

Proposal 1694
Overworked-Rest in Peace
Malenkai

Create a new rule entitled "Undead-Harfer", numbered 426,
with the following text:

"
      The Office of the Undead-Harfer is a Functional Office.
 
      The Duties are: 

      a) To maintain a list of all Undead, the entities they are
haunting, and any other pertinent details of the Undead.
      b) To make this list available to any player upon request.

$$
The text in this rule enclosed in double dollar signs, inclusive, is
known as 'This Section'.

Within a fortnight of the creation of this rule, the Undead-Harfer or
acting Undead-Harfer shall produce a list which is a good faith attempt
at an accurate list as specified in section a) above.  If no list
is published within the time limit, the null list is assumed to have
been published upon the expiration of the time limit.

[All officers shall make a good faith attempt to help the Undead-Harfer
compile such a list.  I have some of it, and I know of one player who
stated willingness to do the Undead-Harfer job].

Upon the contents of such a list being publically knowable, the following
will occur in the order specified:

1) All Undead not on the list shall be known as 'Lost Souls'.  No
other entities shall be known as 'Lost Souls'; any such attribute is
removed from any such entities.

2) All Lost Souls shall stop haunting all A$s they are haunting.  Any
other A$s being haunted, but not accounted for on the list, shall no
longer be being haunted as well.

3) All entities, including houses and land, being haunted by Lost
Souls shall have the attribute of 'ZZimsy'.  No other entities, except
as designated by this rule, shall have the attribute of ZZimsy.

4) All entities which are not on the list, but are being
haunted by Undead on the list, are given the attribute of ZZimsy as well.

5) All ZZimsy entites are destroyed.  This clause has precedence over all
rules.

6) All Lost Souls are destroyed.  This clause has precedence over all
rules.

7) This rule is amended to delete This Section.
$$

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:07:45 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Ambassador, what of PNomic? 

Ambassador, I am curious if any attempts have been made to contact the
Polish-speaking Nomic you announced previously. My brother has volunteered
to translate any messages you wish to send, and any replies they send. I'd
be interested to get the Polish perspective on things. :)

Robert Sevin

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:13:51 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ambassador, what of PNomic?

>Ambassador, I am curious if any attempts have been made to contact the
>Polish-speaking Nomic you announced previously. My brother has volunteered
>to translate any messages you wish to send, and any replies they send. I'd
>be interested to get the Polish perspective on things. :)

  Perhaps we should be trying to get them to join InterNomic?

- -------------------------------------------
    Daniel Knapp        Head Programmer
 [email-masked]    FeatherWate Software
    http://www.bergen.org/~dankna/FWS
- -------------------------------------------
      I think that I shall never see,
        A poem as lovely as a joke.
      Indeed - unless the poems fall,
     I may never see a joke - at all.
- -------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:17:28 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ambassador, what of PNomic?

>>Ambassador, I am curious if any attempts have been made to contact the
>>Polish-speaking Nomic you announced previously. My brother has volunteered
>>to translate any messages you wish to send, and any replies they send. I'd
>>be interested to get the Polish perspective on things. :)
>
>  Perhaps we should be trying to get them to join InterNomic?

  Or, on second thought, just let InterNomic handle that.

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:53:42 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Time Check

Bollinger, John C. wrote:

> The solution I
> intend to propose will defer to anything that stipulates alternative
> timing resolution.

I guess I would prefer doing away with "scholar time" then, and making 
the machine work off the default resolution solution as well.  I am
not a big fan of special cases; perhaps my original comments were
not clear, or I am missing some nuance that requires "scholar time".
Either is possible :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:59:13 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Evil Twins

I hereby announce that I agree to be snowgod's Evil Twin, if he agrees
to be mine.

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:23:50 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Time Check

On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> I guess I would prefer doing away with "scholar time" then, and making 
> the machine work off the default resolution solution as well.  I am
> not a big fan of special cases; perhaps my original comments were
> not clear, or I am missing some nuance that requires "scholar time".
> Either is possible :)

I wrote the magic letter bit the way I did to handle the case where 
message A was sent before message B, but the scholar receives and 
responds to message B before ever seeing message A, thereby committing 
the crime of revealing part of the Truth by means not permitted in the 
rule.  (ie, revealing a letter that was not, in fact, the Magic Letter, 
though he couldn't have known it at the time).  This did in fact happen 
once when I was Scholar, when Malenkai's naming of the Magic Letter was 
sent after both IdiotBoy's and Bascule's namings, yet I received 
Malenkai's first, and so responded to it.  IdiotBoy's nomination arrived 
minutes later, if I remember correctly, and Bascule's showed up that 
evening.

I support the idea to make the Truth-guessing work on the same basis.  
For this purpose, it only makes sense.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:18:54 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code RFC

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:

> Here's the RFC to have multiple official "public forum" mailing lists,

>   The Postal Code is a document which may be changed by the Postmaster
>   by publicly posting the desired changes; if fewer than 2 players
>   publicly disagree with the change within 3 days, it is applied to
>   the Postal Code; otherwise, the change is ignored.

Rather than "may be changed by the Postmaster", I would prefer something 
like "it is a privilege of the Postmaster to [...]".  It never hurts to
be explicit.

Also, I would like a clause that says something like: "any provision in
the postal code which is in conflict with the rules is void.  A postal
code with one or more self-inconsistencies is wholly void."
 
>   A message is a public message if and only if it is distributed to all
>   non-vacationing Players or it is sent to any mailing list indicated
>   as a public forum in the Postal Code, and any actions performed in the
>   message obey all restrictions in the Postal Code for that list, and
>   the subject line contains either "Ackanomic:" or "Acka:".

For messages sent to a list, I would like some language that makes it 
a public message upon distribution by the list, not upon sending to the
list as is worded here.  The distinction is important, at least to me.
(I realize "distribution by the list" is poor wording -- hopefully you
get the idea.).

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:37:39 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Proposal 1697 - retract

I'm retracting this one. Ambigous typos.

Niccolo Flychuck

On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Jason Orendorff wrote:

> Proposal 1697
> Chess Things
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> 
> This is a Modest proposal
> In 1230.2 "Swinger Like to Play Around II - Managing the game"
> section 2 J.(i) will be ammended to read in full:
> "A Round play is defined as a time period in which each Swinger played
> exactly once, where a Default Pass also counts a play, and a Special
> DD-Turn counts as a play for each Swinger taking part in that turn, in eir
> capacity as Swinger."
> 
> 
> In section 2 D the text :
> " as a result of the fact that eir Party no longer exists,"
> Will be deleted.
> 
> {{[The second is a correction to the null proposal. The first should have
> really gone with the check fix, because playing order may change as a
> result of check, it is possible that the current condition of each Swinger
> playing exactly once, might never be met. In the spirit of that
> ammendemnt, Special DD-Turn also count.]}}
> 

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:56:47 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Proposal 1691

While I like the piece, I think it should have a higher material value.

Niccolo Flychuck

On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Jason Orendorff wrote:

> Proposal 1691
> Creation of a PartyChessPiece Tornado
> Malenkai
> 
> 
> Create a new rule called "Creation of a PartyChessPiece Tornado" to be
> a member of the Party Chess Rule Suite, reading: 
> 
>     1. A Tornado is represented by the ASCII character T.
>    2. A Tornado's material value is 11.
>     3. A Tornado's move consists of N+1 segments, where N is the number
> of pieces captured by the Tornado in its current move sequence: 
> 
>     a) In the first segment of its move sequence, the Tornado can move
> up to 2 squares in any direction, provided all the squares between the
> current square and the destination square are unoccupied.
> 
>     b) If a Tornado fails to capture an enemy piece on the current
> segment of its move sequence, its move sequenceends when the current
> segment is completed (its movement ends).
> 
>     c) If a Tornado captures an enemy piece on its current move segment,
> it may start a new move segment as follows: the Tornado can move
> up to M squares, in any direction except forthe direction it moved on
> its previous move segment, provided all the squares between the
> current square and the destination square are unoccupied.  For the 
> purposes of this section, M is the material value of the most recent
> piece captured by the Tornado, unless that piece was a HarfyBlob, in
> which case M is the Hn of that HarfyBlob.
> 

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:09:52 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: RFC Timing

RFC: What Time is it, Anyway?
ThinMan

Alright, here is my timing proposal.  The text of the timing
specification is a little longer than I would like, but I think it
is comprehensive.  There are also an amendment making an exception
for the Tabulator and a rewrite of parts of the Machine that goes
*ping*.

(#submit proposal What Time is it, Anyway?)

{{ [ This is intended to resolve various timing issues involved in
the game.  R370 is amended to establish an "official" time standard
for posts.  A few potential timing problems are also addressed. ] }}

Amend rule 370, "No E-mail, No Game," in the following ways:

a) Delete all of the fourth paragraph except the first sentence.

b) Append the following three paragraphs to the end of the rule:

Posts that are sent through an official mailing list are deemed to have
occured at the time that they are received by the list server.  Posts
that are not sent through an official mailing list and for which the
Speaker is one of the designated recipients are deemed to have occured
at the time that they are received by the Speaker's computer.  Other
posts not sent through an official mailing list are deemed to have
occured at the first time that they are received by the computer of any
of the Players, other than the sender, designated as recipients.  If a
Player posts a message only to himself, then that post is deemed to
have occured at the time that it was sent.

Players are encouraged to use an appropriate official mailing if
available.  If the times of two posts are compared and (i) only one
of them went through an official mailing list and (ii) their times are
otherwise within two minutes of each other, then the post sent through
an official list is deemed to have occured first.  

This rule defers to any rule which specifies an alternative method for
determining the times or relative times of posts.

{{ [ The Tabulator needs a break to avoid violating the rules
involuntarilly. ] }}

Amend Rule 408, "Tabulator and Count Tabula," by changing the sentence:

"(c) to report the acceptance or rejection of proposals, in the time
order in which their voting periods ended."

to

"(c) to report the acceptance or rejection of proposals, in the time
order in which their voting periods ended; the time of these reports
is deemed to be the time indicated by the message's initial timestamp."

{{ [ The Machine that goes *ping* doesn't have a problem per se, but
it could benefit from some minor timing-related changes. ] }}

Amend rule 1209, "The Machine That Goes *ping*," in the following ways:

a) Replace section VI with the following text:
"Unless otherwise forbidden, each player other than the Scholar is
permitted to publicly post a guess at the undisguised form of the
Machine's truth.  The player during each Scholar's term who legally so
posts the first correct guess received by the Scholar shall receive
the following rewards: he shall be congratulated by the Scholar; he
shall receive one random Boon of the Ancients, created at that time by
the Machine; and the Machine shall transport itself to his home.

Each player who posts an incorrect guess shall suffer the following
consequences: he shall be publicly ridiculed by the Scholar, who
shall be immune from the politeness moon in so doing (this takes
precedence over Rule 374) and he shall pay a fine of A$ 10 for
mocking the sacred truth.  The Scholar must respond to each guess with
either congratulations or ridicule, as appropriate, within three days
of the time of the guess.

Players are forbidden from posting more than one guess during any given
term of any particular Scholar."

{{ [ This removes the restriction on players posting guesses while a
guess is already pending, thus making the game more playable by
preventing players from accidentally violating the rules.  Guesses and
magic letter naming which occur after a correct guess are handled by
the next change. ] }}

b) Change the sentence:

"During the time after the Machine changes locations but before a new
truth is announced, no one may post a guess at the Machine's truth or
name the Magic Letter."

to:

"Guesses at the truth and attempts to name a magic letter are wholly
ignored for the purposes of all other provisions of this rule if they
occur before the current scholar has announced the disguised form of
the truth, or if they are received by the Scholar after a correct
guess has already been received during his current term."

{{ [ The times that guesses and magic letter names are received by
the Scholar is used instead of their posting time so as to protect
the Scholar from accidentally violating the rule when two messages
are received close together. ] }}

(#end proposal)

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:53 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Evil Twins 

>I hereby announce that I agree to be snowgod's Evil Twin, if he agrees
>to be mine.
>
>ThinMan

I hereby agree that ThinMan is my Evil Twin, or that I am his.

snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:11:55 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ambassador, what of PNomic? 

>Ambassador, I am curious if any attempts have been made to contact the
>Polish-speaking Nomic you announced previously. My brother has volunteered
>to translate any messages you wish to send, and any replies they send. I'd
>be interested to get the Polish perspective on things. :)
>
>Robert Sevin

I will get right on a message to the Pnomic.  When It is completed, what
adress should I send it to for translation?  Also, would it be possible to
have your brother transalte (at least vaugly) their main Page?

Thanks,
snowgod

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:21:59 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1699

Proposal 1699
Chess Things
Niccolo Flychuck

{{[Now, that's more like it]}}

This is a Modest proposal
In 1230.2 "Swinger Like to Play Around II - Managing the game"
section 2 J.(i) will be ammended to read in full:
"A Round of play is defined as a time period in which each Swinger played
at least once, where a Default Pass also counts a play, and a Special
DD-Turn counts as a play for each Swinger taking part in that turn, in eir
capacity as Swinger."

In section 2 D the text :
" as a result of the fact that eir Party no longer exists,"
Will be deleted.

{{[The second is a correction to the null proposal. The first should have
really gone with the check fix, because playing order may change as a
result of check, it is possible that the current condition of each Swinger
playing exactly once, might never be met. In the spirit of that
ammendemnt, Special DD-Turn also count.]}}

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:21:57 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1698

Proposal 1698
Postal Code
/dev/joe

Repeal Rule 372, "Customary Subject Line".  {{[Incorporated into 422]}}

Amend Rule 422, "Postmaster", to read in full:

  The Postmaster is an optional functional office with one seat.

  A duty of the Postmaster shall be to create and maintain an official
  mailing list for Ackanomic, so public messages can be sent to one
  address and forwarded from there to all players and observers
  automatically.  The Postmaster shall create additional, optional
  lists as he deems it appropriate.  Another duty of the Postmaster
  shall be to keep a publicly available record of the Postal Code.

  The Postal Code is a document which may be changed by the Postmaster
  by publicly posting the desired changes; if fewer than 2 players
  publicly disagree with the change within 3 days, it is applied to
  the Postal Code; otherwise, the change is ignored.

  A message is a public message if and only if it is distributed to all
  non-vacationing Players or it is sent to any mailing list indicated
  as a public forum in the Postal Code, and any actions performed in the
  message obey all restrictions in the Postal Code for that list, and
  the subject line contains either "Ackanomic:" or "Acka:".
  [Only actions are regulated; discussion can take place anywhere,
  though players should try to post to appropriate lists.]

  For a player not on vacation not to be subscribed to at least one form
  official mailing list is a Crime.  There may be multiple forms of the
  official list, such as a regular list and a digest list.  Any person
  subscribed to any public forum who is not a player is considered to
  be an observer.  The Postal Code must always indicate which list is
  the official list.

  If a digest version of any mailing list exists, the Postmaster shall have
  the privilege of moving any player or observer from the normal list to
  the digest version of that list if that person's e-mail is bouncing.

  The Postmaster shall receive the usual salary for a Functional Office.

  {{The Postal Code now reads as follows:

  All addresses below which end in @wilma should be treated as having
  ".che.utexas.edu" appended to the name.  All mailing lists mentioned
  below are public forums unless otherwise specified.

  ackanomic@wilma is the official mailing list.
  ackanomic-digest@wilma is the digest version of this list.
  acka-priv@wilma is an alternate form of ackanomic@wilma, suitable for
  messages desiring a private reply.

  acka-games@wilma may only be used for actions pertaining to Games &
  Contest games, treasure hunts, Grab-a-Donkey, and The Machine that
  Goes *ping*.
  acka-games-priv@wilma is an alternate form of acka-games@wilma, with the
  same restrictions, but suitable for messages desiring a private reply.
  ackanomic-digest@wilma is also the digest form of acka-games@wilma

  acka-chess@wilma may only be used for actions in Party Chess.

  acka-financial@wilma may only be used for trades or gifts of entities.
  }}

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:25:22 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC Timing

Bollinger, John C. wrote:

> Amend Rule 408, "Tabulator and Count Tabula," by changing the sentence:
> 
> "(c) to report the acceptance or rejection of proposals, in the time
> order in which their voting periods ended."
> 
> to
> 
> "(c) to report the acceptance or rejection of proposals, in the time
> order in which their voting periods ended; the time of these reports
> is deemed to be the time indicated by the message's initial timestamp."

The promoter is required to distribute the proposals in numerical
order.  We can require the Tabulator to distribute the results in
that order as well, and possibly replace the timing language
completely with something simpler.

> Each player who posts an incorrect guess shall suffer the following
> consequences: he shall be publicly ridiculed by the Scholar, who
> shall be immune from the politeness moon in so doing (this takes
> precedence over Rule 374)

There is a proposal in the queue to repeal the politeness moon,
and amend this section.  This will clash if that passes.  Awhile
back, I proposed the concept of conditional rule changes which would
simplify this problem.  That proposal failed for reasons I cannot
fathom, perhaps I will re-propose it.  In any case, it looks like
you either have to wait until that proposal clears, or submit a
self-deleting rule to do this amendmend conditionally.

Malenkai

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:28:01 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Proposal 1691

Uri Bruck wrote:
 
> While I like the piece, I think it should have a higher material value.

Yes, originally I was going to suggest 15, but that seemed too high.
I do not have the best feel for material values.  If the piece is
accepted, perhaps you can propose a more appropriate material value.

What I really wanted to do was give it an instance limit, but I could
not see how to do that within the current framework of the rules.  I
have proposed an instance limit amendment, we'll see what happens :)

Malenkai

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #492
*******************************