Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #500
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Sunday, February 2 1997       Volume 01 : Number 500

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 09:07:53 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 338 Verdict

CFJ 338 has been judged TRUE.

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 338
  Subject: Paradox Win CFJs
Initiator: ThinMan
    Judge: Niccolo Flychuck (selected Jan 24, 1997, 20:04h EST)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

CFJ 334 was not a Paradox Win CFJ.

ThinMan's Reasoning:

The statement submitted for judgement number 334 was:
>It is impossible to determine with finality whether or not a CFJ is a
>Paradox Win CFJ.

Rule 219 defines a Paradox Win CFJ this way:
If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, rule
changes are impossible, or a player action which would affect the
game state appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may
call for judgement on a statement to that effect.

Such a call for judgement must contain in its reasoning a statement
to the effect that the initiator is claiming a win in accordance
with R 219, on a verdict of True. Such a CFJ is called a "Paradox
Win CFJ". No CFJ may be called a Paradox Win CFJ, except as
designated by the Rules.

Rule 211 may provide a supplemental definition of a Paradox Win CFJ,
but no CFJ will satisfy R 211's definition while not satisfying
R 219's.

CFJ 334 did not claim that further play was impossible, nor that rule
changes were impossible.  Malenkai has argued that the statement
would qualify under the third category, but I do not understand how
he supports that position.  Red Barn did not claim or argue that it
is illegal to submit a Paradox Win CFJ, nor that it is legal.  Rather,
he claimed and argued that the definition of "Paradox Win CFJ" is
indeterminate.  There is no player action in question, and no claim
of indeterminate legality -- only a claim of indeterminate definition.

Niccolo Flychuck's Reasoning:

As ThinMan pointed out CFJ 334 did not claim that further play was
impossibe or that rule changes were impossible. It also didn't claim that
an action was both legal and illegal. The strongest claim it could make
was that all Paradox Win CFJs should be judged Invalid, which is
unquestionably legal. Therefore it was not a paradox win CFJ

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 09:09:04 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 340 Verdict

CFJ 340 has been judged TRUE without comment.

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 340
  Subject: Player Registration
Initiator: Guy Fawkes
    Judge: Niccolo Flychuck (selected Jan 24, 1997, 20:17h EST)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

Assuming the revelation given in the post quoted below in
Reasoning is true, neither Eponimondas nor neitzsche ever registered as
players.

Guy Fawkes' 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 251:A person wishing to join the game, and who cannot do so as a Returning
player, should notify the Registrar, providing a valid email address,
their real name, and the legal Ackanomic name they wish to play under.
Upon them providing this information, should the requested name indeed be
a legal Ackanomic name, the Registrar shall post a public
message announcing the new player and providing their Ackanomic name,
real name, and email address, and if the prospective player provided it,
how they discovered the game.  Upon the posting of such an announcement,
the person becomes registered as a player.

Assuming the post quoted above is true (that one person, for lack of a
better name here known as "Zelda," on three separate occasions attempted
to register as an Ackanomic player, under the names Eponimondas,
neitzsche, and Joan of Arkansas respectively, and that "Zelda Morris" is
indeed that person's name), then on the first two occasions, her attempt
to register failed miserably.

To wit, "Zelda" failed to provide the minimum information necessary to
become registered as a player: on the first two occasions, she did not
provide her real name, instead providing the pseudonyms Adam Gesher and
Moses Rojas.

As a result, the Registrar did not post a proper message announcing their
admission to Ackanomic: the messages which at one time appeared to serve
this purpose did not actually contain the player's real name, and as a
result, neither Eponimondas nor neitzsche ever became a player.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:01:06 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  P1657 accepted (De-emphasizing Winning by Points (Longer Cycles))

Jason Orendorff wrote:
 
> Proposal 1657

> Yes:  12    No:  2     Present:  1   ...Proposal accepted.

This proposal appears prime.

Malenkai
wondering if the bot can report this automatically :)

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 11:08:35 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 345 (Lestrade)

Lestrade has been chosen.

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 345
  Subject: Magic Number
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Lestrade (selected Feb 02, 1997, 11:09h EST)
Judgement:

Statement:

The magic number for the cycle in which Proposal 1657 was accepted is
257 as of the time this CFJ is distributed.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

Proposal 1657 amended rule 220 to change the magic number from 257 to
541.  However, I'm not sure that would apply to the value of the magic
number for the cycle in which the amendment occurred, as that was
already established at the start of the cycle.  I don't care
either way, and can see the argument either way (although, without thinking
about it a great deal, I believe this CFJ is true), but better to make
sure now than at the end of the cycle.

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 18:56:40 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Chalice of the Palace found by Guy Fawkes

along with the other stuff that was buried along with it.

Here's the map:

1. Win two Duels provided that each Duel is against a different player,
and that for each Duel a different sub-game is employed.
2. The author of at least one G & C proposal which has been accepted, and
is suitable to be used in a Duel.
3. The author of a rule which defines an Otzma Card type which not realted
to either voting or PartyChess

Guy Fawkes was the first to fulfill all conditions

1. He won a Duel against Robert Sevin with a Limerick
   He won a Duel agaisnt Mohammed with ghost

2. He is the author of ghost.

3. He is the author of Scientist for a Day Otzma Card.

(and he had to remind of this, just as I was looking up the Duels
realizing that he might have found this Treasure. Really)

I'm sure Ackanomic can't wait to hear how Guy Fawkes found the Treasure.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:39:53 -0800 (PST)
From: fnord <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Request for a visit

[email-masked] spake thusly
> fnord said:
> > 
> > Techno, may I come and visit your Home, the Temple of the Damned,
> > to gaze upon this wonder of Acka-organics?
> > 
> Yes you may.

Thank you very much, you are most kind.

Do you have any vine to drink, Techno?  I look up at 
your magnificent Amber Banana Tree, then into the vast
sky under Ackanomic.  Thoughts of being a Cheetah at
the game of life keep crossing throw my mind.  I am
sorely tempted to wrap myself in a silver-linked Jane,
to prevent myself from causing the citizenry of
Ackanomic any punishment.

After I have gazed at your Tree long enough, Techno,
I thank you most profuesly for the chance to visit
the beautiful location that would hold such a wonder,
and then gracefully excuse myself from your domicile.

Afterwards, I take a long walk around our fair town,
heading for the treasury.  I walk in to the Treasury,
looking to see if perhaps there might be an Amber
Banana Tree here.

fnord

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:34:26 -0600 (CST)
From: Thierry Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Prayer for Deliverance 

Astronautically speaking,
"laki atino makini lorhoho"
Is neither aerodynamical
Nor really astrobiologic.

CnH

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 12:09:04 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: acka : Chalice of the Palace found by Guy Fawkes

> 1. Win two Duels provided that each Duel is against a different player,
> and that for each Duel a different sub-game is employed.
> 2. The author of at least one G & C proposal which has been accepted, and
> is suitable to be used in a Duel.
> 3. The author of a rule which defines an Otzma Card type which not realted
> to either voting or PartyChess
> 
> Guy Fawkes was the first to fulfill all conditions

Guess that means I'm not going to duel Niccolo Flychuck after all. :-)

/dev/joe

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 16:09:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : Chalice of the Palace found by Guy Fawkes

On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Uri Bruck wrote:

> I'm sure Ackanomic can't wait to hear how Guy Fawkes found the Treasure.

You gave it away, really; I've known the map for quite some time now, but 
the Otzma requirement kept eluding me.  I would have had it while I was 
on vacation in January, but I forgot to mention that the Fix My Gadget 
Otzma was a mention of the Otzma Card Rule suite.

Anyway, here's how it worked.  On November 15, Niccolo said:

>In the past week I've managed to post clues about two out of three
>conditions for my Treasure Map (I've written the one). If you want any
>clues about the third condition, you gonna have to fight it out of me.

which led me to search the past few days of email digest which included this:

>It appears that there is some confusion about G & C proposlas, perhaps
>because there very few of those, although those that include two players
>to win may prove to beneficial to the players who author them.

and this

>It's time for
>all those creative minds out there to propose new types of Cards ( the
>RuneMaker being no exception) , and not just about voting or PartyChess.

I couldn't quite figure out the third requirement (I thought it had 
something to do with PartyChessPieces, but the clue he gave saying how 
many people had fulfilled the various requirements so far didn't make 
sense in that context.  I was more or less stumped until he posted this:)

Dec 6:
>Challenge twice and be victorious 
>Or be Challenged to that end
>Alas, if you have beem redundant
>Then you have not reached your quest's end.

at which point I felt I had four possible conditions (I still felt 
PartyChessPieces were in there, and I couldn't figure which of the four 
things I didn't belong; no matter how I thought about it, I felt I'd 
misinterpreted one clue, so I decided to fulfill every condition I could 
possibly think of until he bestowed the Chalice upon me.

It worked.

Incidentally, what was the filename of the Treasure Map on the web; I 
never found it.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 02:01:13 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : Chalice of the Palace found by Guy Fawkes

On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> > I'm sure Ackanomic can't wait to hear how Guy Fawkes found the Treasure.
> 
> You gave it away, really; I've known the map for quite some time now, but 

Yes, I did, but there was at least one erroneous claim 
after the clues below were posted.

> the Otzma requirement kept eluding me.  I would have had it while I was 
> on vacation in January, but I forgot to mention that the Fix My Gadget 
> Otzma was a mention of the Otzma Card Rule suite.

I'll to look this up. It's possible you may have found it earlier.

> 
> Anyway, here's how it worked.  On November 15, Niccolo said:
> 
> >In the past week I've managed to post clues about two out of three
> >conditions for my Treasure Map (I've written the one). If you want any
> >clues about the third condition, you gonna have to fight it out of me.
> 
> which led me to search the past few days of email digest which included this:
> 
> >It appears that there is some confusion about G & C proposlas, perhaps
> >because there very few of those, although those that include two players
> >to win may prove to beneficial to the players who author them.
> 
> and this
> 
> >It's time for
> >all those creative minds out there to propose new types of Cards ( the
> >RuneMaker being no exception) , and not just about voting or PartyChess.
> 
> I couldn't quite figure out the third requirement (I thought it had 
> something to do with PartyChessPieces, but the clue he gave saying how 
> many people had fulfilled the various requirements so far didn't make 
> sense in that context.  I was more or less stumped until he posted this:)
> 
> Dec 6:
> >Challenge twice and be victorious 
> >Or be Challenged to that end
> >Alas, ifyou have beem redundant
> >Then you have not reached your quest's end.
> 
> at which point I felt I had four possible conditions (I still felt 
> PartyChessPieces were in there, and I couldn't figure which of the four 
> things I didn't belong; no matter how I thought about it, I felt I'd 
> misinterpreted one clue, so I decided to fulfill every condition I could 
> possibly think of until he bestowed the Chalice upon me.
> 
> It worked.
> 
> Incidentally, what was the filename of the Treasure Map on the web; I 
> never found it.

As you wrote, I gave it away. The Presidential Speech for acka's birthday
included a paragraph that refered to the history of names.
Chalice of the Palace is a movie refference. "Court Jester"
I made a further refference to this movie on Jan 27 with the line
"President of jokers and a joker of a President"
Paraphrasing Danny Kaye's "King of Jesters and Jester to the King" (I know
this is more of a trivia thing than a logic puzzle, but Ackanomic is full
of obscure refferences, and, as GF noted, all the information was already
out there)
The filename had to do with one more bit of trivia, the history of the
actor's name.  Danny Kaye's real name was David Daniel Kaminski, and the
latter, all in
lower case, is the name of the file.

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 
> Guy Fawkes
> 

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 19:11:17 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : Chalice of the Palace found by Guy Fawkes

Uri Bruck wrote:

> Yes, I did, but there was at least one erroneous claim
> after the clues below were posted.

Actually, I made at least two.  One of them produced the poem that
revealed at least one clue.  Unfortunately, I could not think of
an appropriate subgame.  I wasn't sure about the subgame requirement,
either Fictionary was going to suffice, or it wasn't.

> I'll to look this up. It's possible you may have found it earlier.

As I mentioned to /dev/joe in correspondance about treasures during
our duel, I believed Guy had found it quite some time ago.

Malenkai
likes misdirection and gizz in treasure hunts

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 20:19:44 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Ackanomicon (Niccolo)

"Narf" has attempted to join the game.  snowgod forwarded the following
message to me, and I got the answer to the poll question via private
e-mail.  Unfortunately, I am not the acting Registrar.

Upon the acting registrar (Niccolo) acking this, he is in the game.
Don't forget to assign a mentor, his poll question indicates that he
would like one.  I see no reason he cannot be added to the mailing
list now, though.

Malenkai
- --------------------------------------------------------------------  
Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> >From: [email-masked]
> >Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 23:21:03 -0500 (EST)
> >To: [email-masked]
> >Subject: Ackanomicon
> >
> >Greetings and salivations!  Please add me to the game!
> >
> >IF I understand the rules correctly (dubious at best) I need to give you a
> >full name: Joshua M Nave, an Ackanomic name: Narf , and an email address that
> >will only bounce mail on odd numbered rainy days: [email-masked]
> >

[email-masked] wrote:

I discovered the game from the PBEM list located at pbm.com...  From there I
jumped to the main nomicon page, and then on to ackanomicon.  And believe me,
any hints, suggestions or advice you care to send will be more than welcome!!

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 01:28:54 +0000
From: "Matt" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Vacation

I hereby go on vacation

Expected duration 1 week

Bascule

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 19:57:13 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Prayer of Deliverance

The sun oft smiles on this land, the harfiest of all,
But now, quite counterauspiciously, the rain begins to fall,
And so to save our blessed land from overinundation,
Please kneel and pray, and save the day; preserve thy b'loved nation.
O priests take heart and do your part, and find some words quite lengthy;
The tongue abuse, you can e'en use yeenewkleorrrrmeeesseilllllee!
Or combine random syllables, in one line 'tis required.
Koi olo mi, falafel free;
  Help solve this threat most dire.

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 04:40:14 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Otzma

Malenkai was correct in stating that an Otzma Day was triggered again.
This time by P1637. This was on Jan. 29 , which means I missed it again.
This is the second time I miss prime Otzma days, it is possible that I
have broken the rules. 
I proposed an ammendment that will still create an Otzma Card on prime
proposal acceptance, but it will not be an Otzma Day. 
There is some difference, Otzma Days have time limits, and currently I
cannot decalare another Otzma Day for several days.

I have downloaded and saved a prime numbers list for quick refference. 

Niccolo Flychuck
RuneMaker

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 05:03:37 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Prime Otzma Days 4,5

I have determined the following for Prime Otzma Days 4,5

Otzma Day 4 was triggered on Jan. 15 with the passage of propsoal 1619. 
The LSAP for that Otzma Day was 9 (proposals 1571-1579), which means that
there was no requirement to create Otzma Cards.

Ozma Day 5 was triggered on Jan. 29 withthe passage of proposal 1637, I
missed that one too. The LSAP for that one was 4, there were two such
runs.

Whle I am relieved that I have not broken the rules I am not happy about
this. I'm trying to figure out some better way to handle this. Otzma Day 4
was a real waste. 
The past fortnight also marks the first Otzma Card created not an Otzma
Day. Specifically  OCID 113 Untouch me which Red Barn received as a Boon.

Niccolo Flychuck
RuneMaker

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 05:55:23 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : The distant sounds of war.

Citizens of Ackanomic,
Following Ambassador's snowgod's revelation of a war like proposal in
Thring, I initiated informal talks with Thring's Speaker, Anthony Bailey,
and Liasion, Luke Shubert.
Basically I wanted to know that it's all about.
From their replies I gathered the following : the proposal itself does not
constitue a declaration of war, it is an expression of discontect with
Ackanomic's actions in Internomic. A key phrase was that Ackanomic should
submit to the majority rule of Internomic in all matters. I put forward
the following argument:
> I argue that Ackanomic has acted according to majority ruling of
> Internomic. Ackanomic has performed an action whose legality was
> questioned. A call for justice was issued and the matter was judged.
> There is no doubt that both those actions were performed according to
the
> rules of Internomic, since the rules of Internomic are, both in practice
> and in law, the result of the will of the majority and more of
Internomic,
> then the judgement of Ackanomic's action as legal, and therefore the
> action itself are in accord with the ruling of the majority of
Internomic.

It was further related to me that the while the proposal was strongly
worded, it was not entirely serious. It is mostly a way of sending a
message to Ackanomic that it should not repeat its recent actions. Its
acceptence however, would require Thring to submit an Internomic proposal
in the same spirit. 

The Thring Liasion has assured me that he will write a message concerning
this matter and the informal chat we had to Thring.

Thring's Speaker suggested the following:
> > I would encourage Ackanomic to persuade the Thring population that
> > such Proposals should not be passed through the mailing list (to which
> > there are already some of you subscribed, I believe) if they feel that
> > such action is appropriate; whether you wish to do this through your
> > ambassador or via Luke Schubert in eir role as our ambassador is up to
> >
Since I have no official diplomatic capacity, I wanted to bring this
message back to Ackanomic, so that any message will be a message from all
of Ackanomic.  
The general feeling I get is that Speaker and Liasion wish to resolve this
matter without creating any hostility between our nomics. I believe this
is also in our best interest to reach a peaceful solution.

I also Cc'd to Malenkai and snowgod, perhaps Malenkai has some further
comments to make

Niccolo Flychuck
President

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:02:01 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1713

Proposal 1713
Delayed Effect Syntax
Guy Fawkes

Create a new rule with text as follows:

{{Renumber this rule to 347.}}

Any rule text surrounded by single curly braces, and preceded in those 
curly braces by an unambiguous date or date and time (hereafter called 
the Trigger Time), shall have no effect until the Trigger Time comes to 
pass.  In the case where only a date is included, the Trigger Time shall 
be noon on that date.

When the Trigger Time comes to pass, the single curly braces and the 
Trigger Time marked within shall be deleted from the rule, and the enclosed 
text shall attain effectiveness.

The one-time application of self-deleting text enclosed with a Trigger 
Time inside single curly braces shall not occur until the Trigger Time; 
this takes precedence over Rule 346.

All text enclosed in the brackets below is explicitly immune from the 
effects of either this rule or Rule 346.  This also takes precedence over 
Rule 346.

[Examples:

{March 15, 44 BC {{Julius Caesar is hereby assassinated.}}  }
Kills Caesar at noon of March 15, 44 BC, then deletes itself from the rules.

{March 15, 44 BC, 10:30 AM  {{Julius Caesar is hereby assassinated.}}  } 
Gets the assassination done in the morning, so Brutus, Cassius, Casca, 
and the boys have time to wash up in time for lunch.

{March 15, 44 BC, 10:30 AM;  Hereafter, no player may, in a public 
message, refer to Julius Caesar as any sort of entity other than an Undead.}
Leaves a lasting regulation in the rules, unenforced until the Trigger Time.
]

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:02:00 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1712

Proposal 1712
Creation of a PartyChessPiece Transmogrifier
Guy Fawkes

Create a new rule, a member of the Party Chess Rule Suite, with text as 
follows:

1.  A Transmogrifier is represented by the ASCII character X.
2.  A Transmogrifier can move up to three squares in any single direction.
3.  Each extant Transmogrifier has its own Transmogrification Index, or 
TI.  When created, a Transmogrifier has a TI of 20.  Upon making a 
capture, a Transmogrifier may Transmogrify any one piece within N squares in 
any horizontal, vertical, or diagonal direction, where N is the material 
value of the just-captured piece.

When a piece is Transmogrified, it is destroyed, and a new piece is 
instantly created and placed on the square the just-Transmogrified piece 
occupied when it was destroyed.  The Office of Swinger which owned the 
piece destroyed during the Transmogrification is the owner of the new 
piece.  The absolute value of the difference between the Transmogrified piece's 
material value and the new piece's material value is subtracted from the 
Transmogrifier's TI.  If this would result in a negative TI, the 
Trasmogrification cannot take place.

A Transmogrification takes place if and only if the Swinger controlling the 
Transmogrifying Transmogrifier unambiguously specifies a legal 
Transmogrification in the same post as he makes the capture which opens 
the possibility of Transmogrifcation.

Kings cannot be Transmogrified, nor can Kings be Created through 
Transmogrification.

4.  A Transmogrifier has a material value of 12.

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 06:09:48 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Further sounds of clamor.

Thring's Liasion posted a message to Thring calling for a more moderate
response than the proposal we have recently seen.
Having discussed this with him before, I believe his message to be
sincere.

Niccolo Flychuck
President

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:08:48 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1711

> current system compromises the whole idea of hard currency when 
> exporting them.
	I fail to see how this is true.  The way I see it right now, if 
your proposal passes, things will actually be *worse*...

Under the current system, there are A$75000, and if you export a Trinket, 
there are then A$75000.

Under your system, there are Trinkets and A$ worth a total of A$75000, 
and if you export a Trinket, there are then Trinkets and A$ worth a total 
of A$74486.  Not good.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:13:51 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1657 accepted (De-emphasizing)

> This proposal appears prime.
> wondering if the bot can report this automatically :)
	Ah.  Yes.
	Increasingly I find things I'd rather repeal than implement.  But 
this is a cinch..

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 23:23:39 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1711

Jason Orendorff wrote:
> 
> > current system compromises the whole idea of hard currency when
> > exporting them.
>         I fail to see how this is true.  The way I see it right now, if
> your proposal passes, things will actually be *worse*...

This looks like an "agree to disagree".  Under the current system,
(which is also my system, BTW), its possible to have A$ 500000000 in
trinkets, and still have A$ 75,000: wealth ex niliho.  Of course you
cannot redeem them all, but fortunately ThinMan's e-mail timing 
proposal will adjudicate any run on the treasury that may occur.
  
> Under the current system, there are A$75000, and if you export a Trinket,
> there are then A$75000.

I understand that.
 
> Under your system, there are Trinkets and A$ worth a total of A$75000,
> and if you export a Trinket, there are then Trinkets and A$ worth a total
> of A$74486.  Not good.

I understand my new proposal as well.  I'm not sure whats "not good"
about it.  Its in asthetic thing, really.  I think of the A$75000 as
a quantity of gold.  You fashion a trinket out of that gold, say a
statuette.  You export the statuette, it stands to reason that the
intrinsic value goes with it.

Of course, we don't *have* to do it that way, but to me its preferrable.
I still do not think one is "good", and the other not; that part
mystifies me.  Its all a matter of what you want to do.

Proposal 1711 makes sense to me, but I can see why it does not bother
people that we do not do it that way.  Those people should realise,
though, that a trinket is not worth its advertised value in all cases.
Thats fine, its just a matter of how you want to do it.

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:26:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Official (Tabulator)

ThinMan bribed Tammany A$15 to vote NO on P1664, and A$20 to vote NO on 
P1663.

- --Mohammed
oops

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:31 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1668 rejected (Hear Ye, Hear Ye!)

Proposal 1668
Hear Ye, Hear Ye!
Guy Fawkes

Votes cast by active players:  12 / 18 = 66.666667%
Yes:  6    No:  5     Present:  1   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Strider
	Swann
	Lestrade
	Guy Fawkes

NO votes:
	mr cwm
	fnord
	breadbox
	ThinMan
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:31 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1667 rejected (Free Breakfast)

Proposal 1667
Free Breakfast
Jammer

Votes cast by active players:  13 / 18 = 72.222222%
Yes:  5    No:  7     Present:  1   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Strider
	Swann
	Mohammed

NO votes:
	/dev/joe
	fnord
	breadbox
	ThinMan
	Lestrade
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:32 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1672 accepted (Constructions and Architectural Aesthetic)

Proposal 1672
Constructions and Architectural Aesthetic
Calvin N Hobbes

Votes cast by active players:  11 / 18 = 61.111111%
Yes:  6    No:  2     Present:  3   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Strider
	Swann
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

NO votes:
	fnord
	ThinMan

PRESENT votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Robert Sevin
	breadbox

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Lestrade
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1672
Constructions and Architectural Aesthetic
Calvin N Hobbes

{Renumber this rule to 846}

{This rule will allow players to manipulate buildings. It will set a base
price for buildings, while allowing players to describe their home for the
record. It will also define construction and destruction, rebuilding and
upgrade}

The following table details the prices involved with various buildings:

Size	           Construction    Destruction     Rebuilding     Upgrade
Small	             A$100              A$10        A$100           A$500
Cosy	             A$500              A$50        A$250          A$1600
Classy	            A$2000             A$200       A$1000          A$4000
Lavish              A$5000             A$500       A$2500          A$7000
Sumptous           A$10000            A$1000       A$5000         A$15000
Extravagant         A$20000           A$2000      A$10000           n/a

Construction costs do not include land. If a building is destroyed, it no
longer exists. If a building is damaged it may be repaired for the cost of
rebuilding. For the cost of an upgrade and provided the player owns enough
land, a building's size is increased to the next. No building can be more
than extravagant.

Such costs are paid to the Treasury and events associated with them occur
upon acknowledgement by the Financier. A player may only build on land they
own and provided they own enough land. A player may only alter buildings
they own.

The player may post a description of a building they own. After paying A$2
per word for the description (to the Treasury) the building is made exactly
as their description of it, provided that description follows the rules. It
is a crime to give a description of the house which is not in accord with
the rules.

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:33 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1673 accepted (Reorganization IIIa)

Proposal 1673
Reorganization IIIa
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  10 / 18 = 55.555556%
Yes:  10    No:  0     Present:  1   ...Proposal accepted.

Malenkai +2 : EP P1673

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	fnord
	Swann
	breadbox
	ThinMan
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Strider
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Lestrade
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1673
Reorganization IIIa
Malenkai

I.  [Leftover from Reorg II]

Renumber R 201, "Quorum and Active Players" to 107, and change its
title to "Quorum".  ['Players' moved the definition of active player
out of this rule, it should have changed the title back, too.]

Renumber R 208, "When Score Changes Take Effect", to 205. [putting the
meta-rule before the actual rules.]

Renumber R 210, "Resolving Conflicts" to 102.

Renumber R 1448 "Crazy French-Scotsmen" to 1129.
Renumber R 1630, "Happy Birthday Ackanomic!" to 1131.

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

II.  [Where to put R 1519, "The Size of Things"]

{{[you've seen my justification of this a few times, now :)]}}

Amend R 1519, "The Size of Things" to replace:

"
I wish to make a modest proposal.

All Items in Acka have a size measured in thingees.
"

with:

"
All Items in Acka have a size measured in thingees.  Unless otherwise
specified in the Rules, an item's size is 0 thingees.
"

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

III.  [In the queue, some of these will be invalid rule changes]

Renumber R 1632, "Parents, Children, the Bees and the Gumball" to 1133;
then amend R 1133 to remove all text enclosed in single curly braces,
inclusive.

Renumber R 1633, "Evil Twins" to 1135; then amend R 1135 to remove all
text enclosed in single curly braces, inclusive.

Repeal R 1644, "Ridiculous!"
Repeal R 1645, "Too Many Hunters"
Renumber R 1646, "Unambiguizing ambiguities" to 713.1 [crime]
Renumber R 1647, "snowgod's Cure" to 207.3 [scoring]
Repeal R 1648, "Generic Proposal Title #1648"
Renumber R 1652, "Presidential Debate" to 1137

Renumber R 1667, "Free Breakfast" to 1139; then amend R 1139 to remove
the sentence which reads: "This is neither a modest nor a grandeous
proposal", and to replace all left and right curly braces with 
left and right square brackets, respectively.

Renumber R 1672, "Constructions and Architectural Aesthetic" to 846;
then amend R 846 to remove all text enclosed in single curly braces,
inclusive.
 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV.  [Discouraging Drift - assumes P 1623 passes]

Amend R 303, "Proposal and Rule Numbering" to add the following text to
the end of section II, sub-section 2.:

"
[Proposals should specify rule numbers for any rules they create so that
the new rule(s) are numbered into the appropriate section of the rules.]
"

{{[and please start numbering your rule creations.  The passage of P 1623
makes this real easy.]}}

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

V.  [Section Headings]

{{[it occurs to me that the rules document is unregulated, and the
web-harfer could add chapter headings to it now without changing the
game state, if he wants to, so I am going to leave this alone]}}

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:33 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1675 accepted (Giving Beldin a Longer Needle)

Proposal 1675
Giving Beldin a Longer Needle
Guy Fawkes

Votes cast by active players:  9 / 18 = 50.000000%
Yes:  7    No:  1     Present:  1   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	Malenkai
	Guy Fawkes
	/dev/joe
	breadbox
	fnord
	Swann
	mr cwm

NO votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Strider
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	ThinMan
	Bascule
	Lestrade
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1675
Giving Beldin a Longer Needle
Guy Fawkes

This is a Modest proposal.  Amend Rule 939, section 1, to read:

1) They may replace any one word in the rule with a different word, and
as part of this amendment, optionally replace an article which directly
precedes the replaced word (if present) with another article. The new
word must appear in the Official Dictionary or elsewhere in the rules.

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:31 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1669 accepted (A Small But Non-Trivial Detail)

Proposal 1669
A Small But Non-Trivial Detail
Guy Fawkes

Votes cast by active players:  12 / 18 = 66.666667%
Yes:  11    No:  1     Present:  1   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Lestrade
	Strider
	breadbox
	Swann
	fnord
	Tammany
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

NO votes:
	ThinMan

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1669
A Small But Non-Trivial Detail
Guy Fawkes

This is a Modest proposal.  Amend Rule 211 as follows:

In the fourth paragraph, change the first occurrence of "to the
statement
of a CFJ" to "to the statement of another CFJ".

In the sixth paragraph, change the first occurrence of "to the statement
of a Paradox win CFJ" to "to the statement of another Paradox Win CFJ".

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:33 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1674 rejected (Squeal)

Proposal 1674
Squeal
breadbox

Votes cast by active players:  10 / 18 = 55.555556%
Yes:  4    No:  4     Present:  2   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Swann
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

NO votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	fnord
	ThinMan

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin
	breadbox

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Strider
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Lestrade
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:32 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1670 rejected (Stop Giving Away Valuables!)

Proposal 1670
Stop Giving Away Valuables!
Calvin N Hobbes

Votes cast by active players:  12 / 18 = 66.666667%
Yes:  4    No:  5     Present:  3   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	fnord
	Swann
	Lestrade

NO votes:
	mr cwm
	Strider
	ThinMan
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Robert Sevin
	breadbox

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:27:32 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1671 accepted (Fix Home, Legal Residence and Renaming)

Proposal 1671
Fix Home, Legal Residence and Renaming
Calvin N Hobbes

Votes cast by active players:  11 / 18 = 61.111111%
Yes:  8    No:  0     Present:  3   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Strider
	fnord
	Swann
	ThinMan
	Guy Fawkes
	Malenkai

NO votes:

PRESENT votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Robert Sevin
	breadbox

Active players who did not vote:
	Mohammed
	Calvin N Hobbes
	snowgod
	Bascule
	Lestrade
	Techno
	Habeous Corpus

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1671
Fix Home, Legal Residence and Renaming
Calvin N Hobbes

{A part of R252Sec1 was removed because it makes more sense in R839. The
follwing also reconciles the different terminology of "home" and "legal
residence". I've also reduced the workload of the Senate so that land deals
without much impact are not subject to approval}

In R839, change:

"Each instance of a player Home is a Common Location, with the restriction
that no player may enter a Home they don't own without permission of the owner. 

The Senate Building is lavish. The FM building is a classy place. The
Courthouse is a cosy building. These buildings may never be smaller that as
defined originally but can be greater. All of these buildings are Common
Locations. 

All other land, with or without buildings on them, that is not owned by
players is called common lands. All deals to sell or buy common land must be
approved by Senate vote. 

The size of the buildings cannot be changed except as allowed by the rules. "

To:

"A player may own more than one building, although only one (of his
choosing) may be his home. A player's home is also his legal residence. Each
instance of a player home is a Common Location, with the restriction that no
player may enter a Home they don't own without permission of the owner. 

A player may change the name of buildings they own by publicly announcing
the new name and unambiguously identifying the building they wish to rename.

The Senate Building is lavish. The FM building is a classy place. The
Courthouse is a cosy building. These buildings may never be smaller that as
defined originally but can be greater. All of these buildings are Common
Locations. All other land, with or without buildings on them, that is not
owned by players is called common lands.

All deals to sell or buy common land which would result in a player owning
more than 5kaa of land must be approved by Senate vote. Otherwise the
Financier will acknowledge the transactions."

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #500
*******************************