Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #526
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest      Tuesday, February 18 1997      Volume 01 : Number 526

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 00:26:54 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  *****Contest Spoiler*****

The following message will describe in detail the location of the Hidden 
Contest in the April, 1997 issue of Games Magazine.  If you subscribe to 
the magazine, and enjoy hunting for their hidden contests as much as I do, 
don't read the following message!

- --Mohammed
treasure hunter

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 00:35:44 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  *****Contest Spoiler -- Do Not Read!*****

What follows is a spoiler to GAMES Magazine's April 1997 Hidden Contest!

Don't read it!

The Hidden Contest can be found on page 30 of the April issue of Games, in
a puzzle called "Fold-Erol".  The instructions say, "Each space in the
grid will be used in exactly two words."  However, there are a number of
apparently unchecked letters at the top and bottom of the grid.  After
solving the puzzle, the 13 unchecked letters at the top of the grid read
"HIDDEN CONTEST".  The 13 letters at the bottom contain the instructions
for entering the contest. 

- --Mohammed
treasure hunter

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 21:15:07 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : Conspiracy Board-Game 

>(posting in response to the Organizations Power/ generic Organization
>discussion)
>
>Equipment:
>8 named pieces, each representing an agent, plus one piece representing a
>suitcase.  Each player has a bankbook which e may use to deposit money in
>any agent's swiss bank account.  Each player start off with $10,000
>  A board, each location on the
>board is named for a capital city, each city is connected to 2-3 other
>cities. Four cities are HQ, one for each player (it's possible to play
>with fewer players, but not really much fun). The precise layout of the
>board is not important right now, it  is symmetrical, HQs are near the
>edges. Initially the suitcae is at the center of the board, and each agent
>is near an HQ.
>Agents are not owned by players, HQs are.
>
>

This would make a great subgame if we could figure a way to play it on our
own map, using various acka buildings as headquarters and giving it a local
(as opposed to national) flavor.

Alternatively, it would make a great internomic competition.... :)

snowgod

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 21:18:28 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Harf 

>On the cover of the current (February 1997) issue of Games magazine, the
>word HARF is clearly visible at the upper left part of the bowl of
>alphabet soup.
>
>/dev/joe

I have found the word Harf (followed by an !) in a short story by Jophn
Irving called the Pension Grilparzer.  This Short story was orginally
"Written" by TS Garp in John Irvings novel "The World According to Garp".

It was spoken by the bear riding the unicycle.

If anyone is intersted the short story (sans the surrounding novel) can
also be found in John Irvings newest work (non-fiction) called Trying to
Save Piggy Sneed.

snowgod
Harf Harf Harf

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 01:05:15 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Orion's Crystal Found

Mohammed wrote:
> What follows is a spoiler to GAMES Magazine's April 1997 Hidden Contest!

(spoiler deleted - go read it yourself if you like; the rest of the
instructions for entering the contest are in the editor's message on
page 4; entries are due May 1)

By posting that message, Mohammed found the treasure of Orion's Crystal.

BTW, there's quite the usual amount of April Foolery in that issue.
In addition to the hidden contest and one silly reference that isn't the
hidden contest and the fake ad, I found four clear April Fools jokes,
and two puzzles where the answers don't match the puzzle (in one case
two answers are just swapped; in the other, the puzzle is broken as
printed).

The map for Orion's Crystal was exactly as originally posted:

When a player publicly posts the location of a GAMES Magazine Hidden
Contest which has never been publicly posted before, and does so at
least one week before the end (in New York City) of the day entries
are due for that contest, e shall find this treasure.
Players are asked to put SPOILER warnings in the subject of such
messages so that others who haven't yet given up may keep searching.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 01:58:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  RFC Actions

Is this worth doing, and if so, where in the ruleset should it go?

RFC:  Actions
Mohammed

A new rule is created, numbered ???, titled "Public Actions", and reading:

- ---
This rule defers to all other rules.

For an entity to perform an action entails two things:  first, to
attempt the action; and second, for the attempt to succeed.  A given
attempt succeeds if, and only if, no rule implies that it fails.

A public action is a course of play that is specified by the rules to
be a public action.  A player may attempt any public action available
to him or her, at any time, by sending a public message specifying the
action to be taken.  If the information given in the message is
insufficient to specify unambiguously a single course of action, then
the attempt fails.  [An attempt may also fail for other reasons.]
- ---

[It is my intent that, after this passes, we can write stuff like:

    "A player may change his or her name as a public action."
    "A player may transfer any gift entity to another player, as a
	public action."
    "A player may rename his or her home as a public action."
    "A player may leave Ackanomic at any time, as a public action.
	An attempt to leave Ackanomic is guaranteed to succeed."

This kind of language will be especially useful in Blueprints, where
people are always attempting something or other.]

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 23:11:57 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Nomic Contest 

Below are the rules for a contest sponsored by Doug Chatham (Geezer). This
could be fun.  Let's put in a strong showing for Ackanomic's creative
minds.  We should come up with something either as a group or individually,
but either way, I think we can win this one!

>            Yesmic Contest Rules
>
>    1.Contestants shall post on the Nomic Bulletin Board a proposed initial
>      ruleset they feel deserves the name "Yesmic".
>
>    2.Such rulesets should in some sense(s) be a mirror image of standard
>      Nomic, but respecting the spirit of Nomic in other respects.
>
>    3.Each entry will be judged (by the editorial us) on originality,
>      playability, and the appropriateness of the name "Yesmic" for that
>entry.
>
>    4.All legal entries become public domain upon posting.
>
>    5.One winning entry shall be chosen, and its author shall receive the
>title
>      Inventor of Yesmic.
>
>    6.Deadline for entries is March 15, 1997 at 5:01 AM GMT.
>
>    7.The Judge's decision is final.

You can submit your contest entries at the Nomic Bulletin Board -
http://funnelweb.utcc.utk.edu/~chatham/cgi-bin/msgs.html

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 08:41:28 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: New Blueprint

Malenkai wrote:
> 
> Blueprint
> Spell Book of Chorg

This blueprint has existed for 3 days.  I am building a Spell Book
of Chorg.

Malenkai
Wizard

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 08:46:47 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Internomic: new ruleset

Matt Miller wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> <SNIP to the juicy part>
> > 103.  At any time, there shall be exactly one moderator, who must be a
> >       player of at least one member nomic.  The moderator may not
> >       resign.  If the moderator is no longer a player in any member
> >       nomic, e must name a successor who is.  Once this is done, the
> >       successor replaces the moderator.
> 
> Isn't this conflicting under our strict constructionalist view?  There's a
> moderator who must be a member, but he doesn't get succeeded upon leaving a
> member Nomic until he performs more duties as Moderator, which he can't be,
> etc, etc, etc.
> 
> (I'd like to suggest someone from Malenkai's Loophole Service do
> the kicking.)

It does appear paradoxical, or at least ugly (without having thought
about it much), as Internomic does not have intra-rule
precedence resolution.  OTOH, Internomic does not have Paradox Win
CFJs either.  It says a moderator must be a player of a member nomic,
yet specifies duties for the moderator when he is not so.

I agree with CnH that the moderator rule needs rework for the AWOL 
case anyway.  The problem with Internomic rules is thay still have the
Immutable baggage, so it will take forever to change it.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 07:03:03 -0800
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Ambassador: Nomics, Nomics Everywhere

I'll think about it.  Still, there is a very good chance that one of eir 
members speaks english very well.  At any rate, a previous message have brought 
to attention the fact that we would look like stupid americans to them.  Our 
communications will more than likely end up in English, but since we are 
contacting them, they should start in german.
Ludwig

On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Phil Ackley <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>I speak a little German from High School.  I can translate slowly, what would
>>this entail??
>>Ludwig
>
>First it would require looking at the web page and giving me a roungh
>translation of what it says.  Secondly, I would like a vaugue overview of
>their rules, but that is not really as important.
>
>The most important thing I guess would be to translate a letter from me
>(onb behalf of Acka) into german so that I could send it to them.
>
>snowgod
>
>
>

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 10:58:46 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1735

Proposal 1735
Tammany Reform
Mohammed

[ I believe this will allow me to automate the Tammany Bribing
process.  I really want to get that done soon so that I might be able
to fully automate proposal finalization.  Please vote YES, barring
unforseen bugs in this revision. ]

Rule 315/10 ("Tammany") is amended to read, in full:
- ---
Tammany is a unique entity capable of casting one vote on each
Proposal.  Tammany only votes on Proposals as specified by this Rule.

A statement sent to the Tabulator is a Tammany Bribe if, and only if, it
conveys the following information:

    a) the Proposal number of a Proposal that has not yet come to
	resolution.

    b) an amount of currency in the range of A$ 25 to A$ 100
	(inclusive).

    c) a Desired Vote of either YES, NO, or SILENT.

    d) the intent of the sender of the message to bribe Tammany the
	amount specified, in order to vote in the manner specified on
	the Proposal specified.

It is the Duty of the Tabulator to ensure that each Tammany Bribe
remains secret until the end of the voting period of the Proposal to
which it applies.  The Tabulator shall not intentionally examine the
text of any Tammany Bribe until this rule makes it eir Duty to do so.
If he should inadvertently do so, he should, as a matter of ethics,
avoid allowing this foreknowledge to influence his game actions in any
way.

Each Player may submit a maximum of one valid Tammany Bribe per
Proposal.  Should more than one Tammany Bribe be submitted by a Player
for a given Proposal, the Tammany Bribe received most recently by the
Tabulator shall be deemed the sole valid Tammany Bribe by the Player
for that Proposal, with all others being disregarded.

Before the voting results for a given Proposal are announced, the
Tabulator has the Duty of determining whether and how Tammany will
vote on this Proposal, based upon the valid Tammany Bribes for that
Proposal and the specifications below in this Rule.  Tammany's vote
and all Tammany Bribes pertaining to a Proposal shall be reported
along with the voting results for the Proposal.

Each Player who submitted a Tammany Bribe for a Proposal that is about
to be resolved shall have the designated amount of currency deducted
from his account.  In the case that this would result in a negative
currency balance for a Player, his entire Bribe is disregarded.

Tammany shall vote YES on a Proposal if and only if the total amount
of currency associated with Tammany Bribes that had a Desired Vote of
YES is greater than the total amount of currency associated with
Tammany Bribes that had a Desired Vote of NO plus twice the total
amount of currency associated with Bribes that had a Desired Vote of
SILENT.

Tammany shall vote NO on a Proposal if and only if the total amount of
currency associated with Tammany Bribes that had a Desired Vote of NO
is greater than the total amount of currency associated with Tammany
Bribes that had a Desired Vote of YES plus twice the total amount of
currency associated with Bribes that had a Desired Vote of SILENT.
- ---

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 10:03:44 -0800 (PST)
From: fnord <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Correct Hunting

Malenkai spake thusly
> 
> You must disclose the actual map for the treasure to be found, or 
> should I construe /dev/joe's explanation (or at least the map part),
> as the verbatim treasure map?

The treasure map read, in full:

THE TREASURE WILL BE FOUND BY THE FIRST PLAYER TO
REQUEST TO VISIT MY HOUSE AND 5 OTHERS IN THE SAME
PUBLIC POST WHILE HOLDING A TRINKET WITH THE 
WORD BAA IN ITS NAME

Congratulations to /dev/joe on finding the treasure.

And ya know, I had thought to make sure there were no Q's
and Z's in the message, and in my original it didn't, but
I had to make changes, and the word 'request' slipped in.
(I had a program do the translation from text to phone-code
for me.)

fnord

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 12:22:00 -0600 (CST)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: translation offer

Hello everyone!

No, I'm not able to rejoin the game, but I do have an offer for the 
ambassador.  If you ever run across a French-speaking nomic, I'm fairly 
adept in written French (the verbal part of my skills have decayed, but 
after seven years of learning it, the writing stays with you).

Best regards,
Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 10:39:38 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:Machine

Salutations!!
 
Today is Monday, the 17th day of February, in the Year of Our Lord 1997,
and the Machine That Goes *ping* Has Gone *ping* today. Since i have
been scholar, the Machine has gone *ping* 1 time.

*sigh* 

Don't you hate doing stupid things?  The Machine *ping*ed yesterday; I
heard it loud and clear.  I just forgot to tell anyone.  

- --Strider

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 10:57:24 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:CFCJ

> Salutations!
> 
> I wish to submit a CFCJ.
> Strider-A$20 court fee
> 
> Statement: Strider has committed a crime.
> 
> Initiator's Comments: R1209 states, in part; "The truth must be such
> that the Machine shall not fail to go *ping* for any seven consecutive
> calendar days,"  In posting a truth which strayed from this, Strider
> broke the rules.
> 
> Suggested Penalty: You tell me.
> 
> Strider
> 
> (just having one of those days)

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:25:36 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1708 failed quorum (Chess Things)

Proposal 1708
Chess Things
Niccolo Flychuck

Votes cast by active players:  8 / 18 = 44.444444%
Yes:  6    No:  0     Present:  4   ...Proposal failed quorum.

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Strider
	snowgod
	Guy Fawkes
	Mohammed

NO votes:

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin
	breadbox
	Lestrade
	Malenkai

Active players who did not vote:
	fnord
	Calvin N Hobbes
	ThinMan
	IdiotBoy
	Panther
	Narf
	Ludwig
	Techno
	mr cwm
	Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 11:29:07 -0800
From: Stephen McCulley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Bonds

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> You are free to perform your own calculations and compare them to mine.
> This is what I see as the current bond state:
> 
> 23 Skidoo: 100 23 Skidoo
> Bascule: 100 Bascule
> breadbox: 99 breadbox
> BuzzBee: 100 BuzzBee
> Calvin N Hobbes: 100 Calvin N Hobbes
> Clairence: 100 Clairence
> /dev/joe: 100 /dev/joe, 10 ThinMan, 5 fnord
> fnord: 94 fnord, 1 breadbox, 1 mr cwm, 1 snowgod, 1 Strider
> IdiotBoy: 10 snowgod
> Jammer: 100 Jammer
> Lestrade: 100 Lestrade
> Ludwig: 100 Ludwig
> Malenkai: 80 Malenkai
> Mohammed: 80 Mohammed, 40 snowgod
> mr cwm: 99 mr cwm, 1 fnord
> Narf: 100 Narf
> Niccolo Flychuck: 50 Niccolo Flychuck, 25 Techno, 5 snowgod, 20 IdiotBoy
> Panther: 100 Panther
> Red Barn: 100 Red Barn
> Robert Sevin: 100 Robert Sevin
> snowgod: 17 snowgod, 20 Mohammed, 20 Niccolo Flychuck, 10 Malenkai, 35 Techno, 50 IdiotBoy
> Strider: 99 Strider
> Swann: 100 Swann
> Techno: 40 Techno, 30 Niccolo Flychuck, 25 snowgod, 30 IdiotBoy
> ThinMan: 90 ThinMan, 10 Malenkai
> 
> And these are the dividends (all should be rounded up to a whole A$ in
> favor of the entity receiving A$):
> 
> 23 Skidoo: 0.0  -->  100*0
> Bascule: 0.0  -->  100*0
> breadbox: -2.475  -->  99*-5/2
> BuzzBee: 0.0  -->  100*0
> Calvin N Hobbes: -7.5  -->  100*-15/2
> Clairence: 0.0  -->  100*0
> /dev/joe: 31.05  -->  100*31 + 10*0 + 5*1
> fnord: 1.315  -->  94*1 + 1*-5/2 + 1*4 + 1*13 + 1*23
> IdiotBoy: 1.3  -->  10*13
> Jammer: -1.0  -->  100*-2/2
> Lestrade: 9.0  -->  100*9
> Ludwig: 0.0  -->  100*0
> Malenkai: 69.6  -->  80*87
> Mohammed: 8.4  -->  80*4 + 40*13
> mr cwm: 3.97  -->  99*4 + 1*1
> Narf: 0.0  -->  100*0
> Niccolo Flychuck: 4.025  -->  50*8 + 25*-5/2 + 5*13 + 20*0
> Panther: 0.0  -->  100*0
> Red Barn: -15.0  -->  100*-30/2
> Robert Sevin: -2.5  -->  100*-5/2
> snowgod: 12.435  -->  17*13 + 20*4 + 20*8 + 10*87 + 35*-5/2 + 50*0
> Strider: 22.77  -->  99*23
> Swann: 7.0  -->  100*7
> Techno: 4.65  -->  40*-5/2 + 30*8 + 25*13 + 30*0
> ThinMan: 8.7  -->  90*0 + 10*87
> 
> I'll have to thank fnord for the 5 PFfnord which already earned me an extra
> A$ this bond cycle, despite his scoring only 1 point.
> 
> /dev/joe

Thanks really huge big amounts to /dev/joe for the work on this.  
I want to present you with 5PF Strider in appreciation.  Who knows, they
might even be worth something someday.  My apologies for not getting
this done myself and for even being late checking up on it. 

			Regards,
				Strider
Strider -5PFStrider
/dev/joe +5PFStrider

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 14:37:26 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka:  P1708 failed quorum (Chess Things)

Mohammed wrote:

>Proposal 1708
>Chess Things
>Niccolo Flychuck
>
>Votes cast by active players:  8 / 18 = 44.444444%
>Yes:  6    No:  0     Present:  4   ...Proposal failed quorum.

Um... I take it this was sent by mistake?  The results of P 1708 were
released, and deciphered in the context of the quorum problem, days
ago.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:45:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Pre-RFC org reorg

> I think your RFC fails to address a very significant point. The
> exclusionary membership of both Parties and Churches.
> So an Organization becomes a Party, suppose one of its members is already
> a member of another Organization which is also a Party.
	I see two ways to go about this, I'm interested in what you think 
of 'em.  We could change the rules so that being a member of multiple 
Parties is merely a Crime.  Or, we could prohibit an Organization from
obtaining a Big Tent if any of its members is already a member of a Party.

	The former is simpler and handles more contingencies.  Let me 
point out that the main reason I see for making party membership 
exclusive (the Unity Vote) will go away when this proposal passes; i.e. 
Unity Votes won't be free anymore.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:57:16 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  destruction

I destroy Rosebud for A$1.  I destroy the Little Bag 'O Chips F for A$1.
I intend to sell Thring to whoever is willing to pay good money for it.  
Bidding starts at A$2; if it doesn't sell within a week, I'll destroy it.

This is not an Auction; but make your offers and I will accept the best 
one.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:57:44 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: P1708 failed quorum (Chess Things)

> Um... I take it this was sent by mistake?  The results of P 1708 were
> released, and deciphered in the context of the quorum problem, days
> ago.
	I didn't know that.  Hmm.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:59:43 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1711 failed quorum (Value)

Proposal 1711
Value
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  7 / 18 = 38.888889%
Yes:  5    No:  3     Present:  1   ...Proposal failed quorum.

YES votes:
	Malenkai
	Niccolo Flychuck
	breadbox
	snowgod
	Strider

NO votes:
	Mohammed
	Lestrade
	Guy Fawkes

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	fnord
	Panther
	Calvin N Hobbes
	ThinMan
	IdiotBoy
	Ludwig
	Narf
	Techno
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Habeous Corpus

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 15:07:52 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: My money grows stale!

I am still interested in purchasing all of the bonds quoted in my post to
Acka-Finance.  If you lost the message, think your bonds are worth more, or
just want to haggle, mail me!

Going private soon-
IB

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 15:03:34 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: P1708 failed quorum (Chess Things)

Mohammed wrote:

>	I didn't know that.  Hmm.

P1709 and P1710 were retracted, but we _are_ still waiting on the
results of proposals 1711 - 1719, and voting on several more proposals
will close late tonight.  Going by the Web page, at least.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 14:10:02 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka:  P1711 failed quorum (Value)

> Proposal 1711

> YES votes:
> 	Malenkai
> 	Niccolo Flychuck
> 	breadbox
> 	snowgod
> 	Strider
> NO votes:
> 	Mohammed
> 	Lestrade
> 	Guy Fawkes
> PRESENT votes:
> 	Robert Sevin

9 votes were cast by players, although Guy Fawkes has left the game and,
at least in the past, we have ignored votes from players who had left the
game before the results were released.  So at least 8 votes were cast.
Somehow your program only counted 7; somebody's player state is probably
wrong.

> Active players who did not vote:
> 	Panther
> 	IdiotBoy
> 	Narf
> 	Habeous Corpus

Habeous Corpus left the game.
Narf and Panther are still Pending - it is not yet publicly knowable that
they have voted.
IdiotBoy is Pending - is it not PK that he has voted since he rejoined
the game.

> 	fnord
> 	Calvin N Hobbes
> 	ThinMan
> 	Ludwig
> 	Techno
> 	mr cwm
> 	/dev/joe

This leaves 7 abstains.  The proposal meets quorum, and passes.
Can you try updating all the player states before releasing more
voting results?  Some of these are still wrong from before the
P1700 quorum failure.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 14:19:56 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Bonds

Strider wrote:
> Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> > You are free to perform your own calculations and compare them to mine.
> > This is what I see as the current bond state:
> > 23 Skidoo: 100 23 Skidoo
 [...]
> Thanks really huge big amounts to /dev/joe for the work on this.  
> I want to present you with 5PF Strider in appreciation.  Who knows, they
> might even be worth something someday.  My apologies for not getting
> this done myself and for even being late checking up on it. 

I am refusing this gift.  I did not intend to upstage you by doing your
job for you, but I was offering my help for this, the first bond cycle
since you have become bond-harfer, and perhaps reminding you that the job
was there to be done.  It is now only a little more than 24 hours since
the bond cycle ended, and not unreasonably late to get the dividends
published.

You now have the scores from the end of the last bond cycle and what I
believe to be the current bond state.  Keep track of bond trades and
watch for me to post the end-of-bond-cycle scores (or get them yourself
from the web page if I am late in posting them) and you should be able
to do your job well.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 15:20:31 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka:  P1711 failed quorum (Value)

Mohammed wrote:

>Proposal 1711
>Value
>Malenkai
>
>Votes cast by active players:  7 / 18 = 38.888889%
>Yes:  5    No:  3     Present:  1   ...Proposal failed quorum.

[...]

>Active players who did not vote:
>	fnord
>	Panther
>	Calvin N Hobbes
>	ThinMan
>	IdiotBoy
>	Ludwig
>	Narf
>	Techno
>	mr cwm
>	/dev/joe
>	Habeous Corpus

I was on voluntary vacation at the time that the voting period for
this proposal ended, and was therefore not active.  IdiotBoy was
not yet back in the game at that time.  Some of the other players
may also have been on vacation or otherwise not active then.  The
proposal fails in any case, but if even one other player can be
removed from the list of Active players who did not vote then it will
be a normal failure instead of a quorum failure.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 16:11:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P1711 failed quorum (Value)

> 9 votes were cast by players, although Guy Fawkes has left the game and,
> at least in the past, we have ignored votes from players who had left the
> game before the results were released.  So at least 8 votes were cast.
> Somehow your program only counted 7; somebody's player state is probably
> wrong.
	snowgod was listed as being on vacation.  I'm not sure when that 
vacation ended.  In any case, it's over now.

> Habeous Corpus left the game.
> Narf and Panther are still Pending - it is not yet publicly knowable that
> they have voted.
> IdiotBoy is Pending - is it not PK that he has voted since he rejoined
> the game.
	This has now been corrected.  What about Jammer?  Can I assume he 
was still on vacation at the time the proposal's VP ended?

> This leaves 7 abstains.  The proposal meets quorum, and passes.
	As soon as I get confirmation (one way or the other) about 
snowgod and Jammer, I'll rerelease the above.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 00:52:10 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Pre-RFC org reorg

On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Jason Orendorff wrote:

> > I think your RFC fails to address a very significant point. The
> > exclusionary membership of both Parties and Churches.
> > So an Organization becomes a Party, suppose one of its members is already
> > a member of another Organization which is also a Party.
> 	I see two ways to go about this, I'm interested in what you think 
> of 'em.  We could change the rules so that being a member of multiple 
> Parties is merely a Crime.  Or, we could prohibit an Organization from
> obtaining a Big Tent if any of its members is already a member of a Party.

I'd prefer the latter.
> 
> 	The former is simpler and handles more contingencies.  Let me 
> point out that the main reason I see for making party membership 
> exclusive (the Unity Vote) will go away when this proposal passes; i.e. 
> Unity Votes won't be free anymore.
> 
> --Mohammed
> 
Is it the only reason?
How many Unity Votes can an Organization buy?

Making Party Membership non-exclusive will mean that any group of three
players could form several Organizations, and buy a Unity Vote for each,
we have several players who could afford it now.  
Back when we were discussing Townships that this might be fun for an
Organizations that plays its own subgame of nomic to have two such
Organizations with highly Similar memberships playing two (or more) nomics
simultaneously.

But your above suggestion would make a very high number of votes available
for a one time fee.

The Synod has internal provisions for that, mostly because at that time
there was a proposal to make Church membership non-exclusive, and I have
reason to believe that Church membership might be ammended at some not
too distant future time. 
One solution would be to make some provisions for this case here as well,
but why create unnecessary complexity where it serves little purpose?
I believe the simpler solution would to maintain the current membership
policies of Parties.

Generic Organizations are good, but there needs to be balance, there needs
to be give and take, every action should have both advantages and
disadvantages.

I suggest:
" An Organization may purchase a Big Tent provided that none of its are
mmebres of a Party. A player may be a member of at most one Party at any
given time."

And if someone wants to join an Organization just to prevent them from
becoming a Party, and the current members of that Organization intend to
become a Party, then they could refuse em membership. All current
Organizations (except perhaps for Ackanomic, which is not defined
anywhere as an Organization) have that option.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:02:35 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Diplomacy

>>Malenkai
>>who used to love to play Germany and hate to play Russia
>
> [snip] I like France
>and Italy myself.
>Narf
>

I recall favoring England and Turkey, which might be psychologically
revealing, or perhaps it just reveals that I never played enough to really
figure things out.  Or perhaps I'm already positioning myself ... 

(I'd prefer hand adjudication - I looked at the Judge information files
once, and I'd rather not throw learning all that on top of everything
else.)

- -mr cwm

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 01:19:42 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Otzma Auction results

The Otzma Auction results are as follow:

Malenkai gets the Go Fish Card at A$1
snowgod gets all the other Cards at A$50 each

Malenkai -1
snowgod -200

I believe I got a small comission coming 
Niccolo +20

Niccolo Flychuck
RuneMaker

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:19:22 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Otzma Auction results

Uri Bruck wrote:

> I believe I got a small comission coming
> Niccolo +20

Commissions are no longer paid for conducting a public auction.

Commissions were originally put in as compensation for not being able
to bid.  As the Chief Cheese can now bid in a public auction, I removed
the commission in the lastest rewrite.

Malenkai
Financier

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 01:25:46 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Otzma Auction results

In that case that little plus sign below didn't happen.
Niccolo Flychuck

On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> Uri Bruck wrote:
> 
> > I believe I got a small comission coming
> > Niccolo +20
> 
> Commissions are no longer paid for conducting a public auction.
> 
> Commissions were originally put in as compensation for not being able
> to bid.  As the Chief Cheese can nowbid in a public auction, I removed
> the commission in the lastest rewrite.
> 
> Malenkai
> Financier
> 

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 01:28:30 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Today we Give Swingpoints

It's that time again. 

Niccolo Flychuck gets 4 Swingpoints.
Ludwig gets 3 Swingpoints.

Nobody owned any Swingpoints today at noon, so there are no  points
involved.

Niccolo Flychuck
Chess-Umpire

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 01:28:59 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Otzma Transaction

I give 4 Swingpoints to ThinMan

Niccolo Flychuck
Vulcan Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 01:31:11 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Should have been Swingpoint (Otzma Transaction)

Oops. Just noticed the subject line. That's what one gets for trying to
juggle Offices.
Niccolo Flychuck
Officer at large.

On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Uri Bruck wrote:

> 
> I give 4 Swingpoints to ThinMan
> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> Vulcan Swinger
> 
> 
> 

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 17:34:28 -0600 (CST)
From: Thierry Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Diplomacy and copyrights 

>(I'd prefer hand adjudication - I looked at the Judge information files
>once, and I'd rather not throw learning all that on top of everything
>else.)

I see someone has offered to hand adjudicate already, but I don't mind doing
it. I'm getting burned out playing, so I'd rather adjudicate. Also, the
judge system isn't really difficult. Have a look at:
http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ifgz711/diplomat/newbies.html

It's mostly short lines, small paragraphs and the likes. I've ran over two
dozen newbies through their first game, and none had any real problems, just
questions. Since the web page has been up, I've had next to no questions
about the judge, only tactical questions about the games.

If some people are interested in learning the game, or just getting a
refresher course, I'm sure that could be arranged. The only restriction is
that the rules are copyrighted and cannot be put online. This is especially
important for putting them up as a game in Acka, since we could be liable.

I recommend simply giving a short and "in your own words" recap of what is
involved in the game. Creating a variant would help, but not completely.
I've been involved in a few discussions about this in other forums, but
Manus (editor of the DipPouch) knows more than I do. I could contact a few
people if need be.

CnH

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:40:59 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Bonds

/dev/joe wrote:

> Keep track of bond trades and watch for me to post the 
> end-of-bond-cycle scores (or get them yourself from the web page if
> I am late in posting them) and you should be able to do your job well.

Note that even bond holdings are tracked for you at the players-entities
page.  I generally update the page once a day or once every other day.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:47:05 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Bonds

Strider wrote:

[quoted bond holdings and calculations]

> Thanks really huge big amounts to /dev/joe for the work on this.

I assume this should be construed as the official report?  In any case,
could you please :) put these in the financier's format, with the 
numbers rounded and not quoted.  Sorry for being so picky :)

You don't have to do it this time, but I'd appreciate it for next
time.

thx
Malenkai
Financier

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 19:55:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Tithing.

I am making a donation of A$25 to the Church of the Markovian Dream.

IB

IdiotBoy -25
Church of the Markovian Dream +25

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 19:01:57 -0600 (CST)
From: Thierry Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Diplomacy and copyrights 

>I've ran over two dozen newbies [...]

I think that didn't quite come out the way I wanted.   >;-]
Replace "ran over" by "guided"...

I'm actually wondering if we could not create an Acka variant with the board
being the world according to Nomics. There could be "Agora", "Thring",
"Acka", "Pumpkin", "Gnomic", etc... On second thoughts, it should be
parodies, not the actual Nomic names. Ogara? Aack? Ringth? Kumpin? Nogmic?

Then there would not be units, but players with swords (armies) and players
with boats (fleets). Each province would be a rule, the board the rule set.
We could then play it so that you get as many points per game year as you
control rules. First to 100 points wins.

CnH
wondering...

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 19:12:24 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Pre-RFC org reorg

> > 	I see two ways to go about this, I'm interested in what you think 
> > of 'em.  We could change the rules so that being a member of multiple 
> > Parties is merely a Crime.  Or, we could prohibit an Organization from
> > obtaining a Big Tent if any of its members is already a member of a Party.
> I'd prefer the latter.
	It figures; I'd prefer the former.  :o)  I'll explain why below.

> > 	The former is simpler and handles more contingencies.  Let me 
> > point out that the main reason I see for making party membership 
> > exclusive (the Unity Vote) will go away when this proposal passes; i.e. 
> > Unity Votes won't be free anymore.
> Is it the only reason?
	As far as I know, yes; although I believe the restriction was 
there before Unity Votes existed.  *shrug*

> How many Unity Votes can an Organization buy?
	An Org can buy as many Big Tents as it wants, but it only gets one 
Unity Vote.

> Making Party Membership non-exclusive will mean that any group of three
> players could form several Organizations, and buy a Unity Vote for each,
> we have several players who could afford it now.
	In my opinion, being a member of more than one Party should just be 
a Crime, and in that case, I would enjoy watching someone try to get more 
than one unity vote... every player in the however many organizations it 
turns out to be would get hosed for everything they have....

> One solution would be to make some provisions for this case here as well,
> but why create unnecessary complexity where it serves little purpose?
> I believe the simpler solution would to maintain the current membership
> policies of Parties.
	That's not the case, unfortunately.  It's much simpler just to say 
"To belong to more than one Party at a time is a Crime."

> I suggest:
> " An Organization may purchase a Big Tent provided that none of its are
> mmebres of a Party. A player may be a member of at most one Party at any
> given time."
	I thought of that, but that language doesn't tell what happens when 
a Party trades its Big Tent to another Organization which has a member 
that's in another party.  Maybe there are other odd little situations; in 
any case I think it's better to use Crime than to try and account for 
them all.  :oP

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 20:13:31 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  P1711 failed quorum (Value)

> Proposal 1711 
The proposal's voting period was from 02/01, 13:33, thru 02/08, 13:33.

> YES votes:
>       Malenkai
>       Niccolo Flychuck
>       breadbox
>       Strider
>       snowgod

snowgod went on vacation 02/01, 06:04, and returned 02/13, 05:35,
therefore his vote was illegal and did not occur.

> NO votes:
>        Mohammed
>        Lestrade
>        Guy Fawkes

Guy Fawkes announced his intention to quit on 02/08, 16:17.  However,
he also stipulated that the resignation was effective 3 days after
the post, due to his will.  CFJ 233 has established that his vote 
should count; the fact that the voting results are being released 11
days after the end of the voting period should not matter with respect
to him quitting, as he quit after the voting period ended, unless rules
or game custom has changed since CFJ 233.

> PRESENT votes:
>       Robert Sevin

I count a total of 8 votes.

/dev/joe wrote:
 
> 9 votes were cast by players, although Guy Fawkes has left the game and,
> at least in the past, we have ignored votes from players who had left the
> game before the results were released.  So at least 8 votes were cast.

We both arrived at 8, via different reasoning.
 
> > Active players who did not vote:
> >       Panther
> >       IdiotBoy
> >       Narf
> >       Habeous Corpus

Agreed.  All not active for reasons previously discussed.

[Abstentions]:

> >       fnord
> >       Calvin N Hobbes
> >       ThinMan
> >       Ludwig
> >       Techno
> >       mr cwm
> >       /dev/joe

Swann and Jammer are not on the list, and, according to my records,
were not on vacation or in Gaol for the entire voting period.  If they
both abstained, that makes 9 abtentions, causing quorum failure and
putting those players on vacation again, once the results of this proposal
are actually released.  If one of them voted, there is no quorum failure.
If both voted yes, the proposal passed.

I have a CFJ that needs to be distributed, I will hold it until it is
publically knowable whether the proposal failed quorum, or before 3 days
pass.  As I understand the rules, the results of this proposal's voting
are not yet publically knowable (as all the voting has not yet been
reported).

Malenkai
trying to track the game state

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V1 #526
*******************************