Subject: Ackanomic Digest V1 #529
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest     Wednesday, February 19 1997     Volume 01 : Number 529

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:35:16 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Flights

fnord wrote:

> I decide that this would be a good location to Place Elvis.  I fly
> around the outside of the Monument, not having permission to enter it.
> I fly as close to the door to the vault at the base of the tower, and
> toss my trinket called Elvis inside, figuring that Placing it there
> is a good idea.

Was the Elvis buried as a Treasure?  If so, was it buried in the same
Treasure as the Elves?  If it was not buried as a Treasure, it is still
with you.  These facts, at the very least, must be disclosed 
unambiguously.

Malenkai
Trinket/Treasure Harfer

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:39:18 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Presidental Nomination

Its time for Acka's 6th presidential election.  The results of the
previous 5 were:

Robert Sevin 9, Mohammed 3
/dev/joe 5, this is not a name 4
snowgod 7, Niccolo Flychuck 4, /dev/joe 2
snowgod 7, Niccolo Flychuck 5, Uncle Sam 2
Niccolo Flychuck 7, breadbox 3, Robert Sevin 2

If you would like to volunteer for this office, e-mail me.  The
nomination lasts for 3 days.

Malenkai
Speaker

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:50:47 -0800
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Re: Acka:  Flights

Malenkai writes:
> fnord wrote:
> 
> > I decide that this would be a good location to Place Elvis.  I fly
> > around the outside of the Monument, not having permission to enter it.
> > I fly as close to the door to the vault at the base of the tower, and
> > toss my trinket called Elvis inside, figuring that Placing it there
> > is a good idea.
> 
> Was the Elvis buried as a Treasure?

No, I merely placed the Elvis Trinket in the Monument to Futility.

> If so, was it buried in the same
> Treasure as the Elves?

No, the Treasure stated above consists solelty of the Elves.  No Treasure
Map has yet been disclosed.

> If it was not buried as a Treasure, it is still

Why must the Trinket Elvis still be with me?  Are there no provisions
for just leaving Trinkets around?  Or did I miss something else?

fnord
- -- 
Michael J. Thomas                              [email-masked]
"Opinions are falling like drops of rain"  In that case, I'm in a downpour!

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:51:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Proposal 1739

On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Jason Orendorff wrote:

> Proposal 1739
> Organized Crime
> Narf
> 
Whatever you do, don't throw a vote strike!

IB

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 18:56:58 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1738

> Agreed that having fun is essential.  I don't see how removing the fun rules
	I will vote for P1738, and I wish Narf good luck on it.  Unfortunately, 
I don't think it will pass.
	If all Ackanomic's players were in a boat together, we'd starve in
the middle of the ocean because eventually, we'd all vote to lower the anchor
and there would be no chance of us ever scraping together enough votes to
pass a proposal to lift it.

[part of what makes]
> this game fun is being subject to a huge ruleset that requires constant
> attention.  
	I don't think it's fun having no clue what's going on... but part of 
what's fun is that everyone has a different idea of what's fun.  :o)

	If I were to choose rules to delete, I would pick:
	- the rules regulating playing cards (unused)
	- the Undead rules (unfun)
	- the point-win rules (not much fun, lotsa work)
	- the map (don't believe it should be legislated)
	- middle ages (enough is enough!)

Especially the Map.  It's nice to look at, but why does that need to be 
a rule?  :oP  No offsense, Malenkai.

- --Mohammed
oops, I didn't mean to waste time replying to this stuff, just read it 
and rerelease the voting results... but I wanted to let Narf know 

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:55:04 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Flights

fnord wrote:

> Why must the Trinket Elvis still be with me?  Are there no provisions
> for just leaving Trinkets around?  Or did I miss something else?

Trinkets are either in the treasury, museum, gaol, buried, or
owned by a player.  All of the preceeding represent ownership 
(or possession) states. Certainly you could argue that R 101 allows
placing the trinket at the MoF while you still are the owner (and
continue to be the owner), but I would argue that you do
not have permission to go there in the first place (I would also
question the legality of attaching some of the undead houses recently
for the same lack of permission reason, unless it is found that the
houses are unowned, which is possible.  I'll admit my no previously was
hasty).

Even if you did, *I* certainly do not have the work capacity to begin
tracking the *locations* of trinkets, especially when such does not have
an effect on the game state.

So, I am marking you as the owner of the Elvis.  That fact is not in
dispute.  If the location of the Elvis ever has a material effect on
the game state, assuming it is permissible to place it at a location,
I will defer to some other volunteer to track it.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:00:48 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1738

Jason Orendorff wrote:

> Especially the Map.  It's nice to look at, but why does that need to be
> a rule?  :oP  No offsense, Malenkai.

Why have any rules?  We don't need a single rule to do what we do.  I
only point out that the map did not exist before that rule, and now it
does.  I won't be offended if you repeal it.

Why write a rule?  I'll just wait for people to create things like the
Map spontaneously.  You can say this about most of the game.  You do
not need the treasure hunt rule or the subgame rule either, but count
the number of treasure hunts and subgames before and after those rules
were created.

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:33:22 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Diplomacy and copyrights 

In a message dated 97-02-19 18:41:58 EST, Malenkai wrote:

<< In the old days, one could buy replacement parts directly from 
 Avalon Hill.  Rules were generally US $4, but that was quite some
 time ago. >>

It's 10 bucks for the rules now, and there are several Diplomacy web pages.
 I posted the URL's of the best of 'em this morning.  Some of those pages
have synopsis of the rules, one of them has a direct order form for the
rules.  Your local game store should sell the game, at a reasonable price.
 Well worth the money, IMHO.

If you don't have a copy of the game, you may want to get one.  It's much
easier to follow if you actualy have a board you can set up and push armies
and fleets around on.
Narf

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:36:04 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1739 

Incidentaly, I wrote and sent off this proposal at the same time as the other
three, it just took the Acrobot 12 hours longer to distribute it :)  Am I
right in assuming the bot must work in cycles?  Or only when Mohammed checks
email?

Narf

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 17:53:57 -0800
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Re: Acka:  Flights

Malenkai writes:
> fnord wrote:
> 
> > Why must the Trinket Elvis still be with me?  Are there no provisions
> > for just leaving Trinkets around?  Or did I miss something else?
> 
> Trinkets are either in the treasury, museum, gaol, buried, or
> owned by a player.  All of the preceeding represent ownership 
> (or possession) states.

At the time, I did not know of any such restrictions, aside from 
the possibility that I might not be able to enter the Monument.
Hmm... I've just gone through the Rules and saw no such listing.

> Certainly you could argue that R 101 allows
> placing the trinket at the MoF while you still are the owner (and
> continue to be the owner), but I would argue that you do
> not have permission to go there in the first place

As I would argue that there is no owner of the House, it defaults to
being a Common Location having no other restriction barring me from
entering.

> (I would also
> question the legality of attaching some of the undead houses recently
> for the same lack of permission reason,

That is making an assumption that we _entered_ the houses to reattach 
them.  I can just as easily see that the houses were reattached by the
players pushing and maeuvering the house from the outside.

> unless it is found that the
> houses are unowned, which is possible.  I'll admit my no previously was
> hasty).

Ah, okay.  I had thought you might have specifically know why not. 
I've also scoured the rules about Undead/permission and will be 
submitting a CFJ shortly on that matter.

> Even if you did, *I* certainly do not have the work capacity to begin
> tracking the *locations* of trinkets, especially when such does not have
> an effect on the game state.

Actually, according to how I read the Map-Harfer's job description
("...to maintain and make publically available a list of the locations of 
all entities..."), I would say that it falls to /dev/joe.

> So, I am marking you as the owner of the Elvis.  That fact is not in
> dispute.  If the location of the Elvis ever has a material effect on
> the game state, assuming it is permissible to place it at a location,
> I will defer to some other volunteer to track it.

Now you see what I mean by Trinket-Harfer?  Not just "Malenkai because
he's Speaker", but an official position to keep track of that stuff.

fnord
- -- 
Michael J. Thomas                              [email-masked]
"Opinions are falling like drops of rain"  In that case, I'm in a downpour!

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:40:24 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1741

Proposal 1741
Value (resubmit)
Malenkai

This is a Modest proposal.

{{[I believe this would have passed had a couple of more people voted
last time.  I certainly believe it *should* pass :)

this doesn't really change the way the game is played, except when
the treasury is getting too low to back the value of Trinkets, making them
unredeemable.  The goal here is to set up a true equivelance between
A$ and Trinkets, rather than the pseudo one we have now.  It also allows
the exporting of Trinkets to have some meaning, if we ever export them.]}}

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

I. Amend R 505, "Treasury and AckaDollars", in the following ways:

A. Replace the text of section III, which reads:

"
AckaDollars may not be created nor destroyed. This Rule has precedence
over any Rule that would create or destroy A$. Whenever the Rules
specify that a Player should receive A$, and do not indicate where those
A$ should come from, they shall come from the Treasury. Whenever the
Rules specify that a Player should lose A$, and do not indicate where
those A$ should go to, or specify that they should be destroyed, they
shall go to the Treasury instead. The total number of A$ shall always
be 75,000.
"

with:

"
AckaDollars may not be created nor destroyed, except as Trinkets are
created and destroyed. This Rule has precedence over any Rule that would
create or destroy A$, except it defers to rules concering the creation
and destruction of Trinkets. Whenever the Rules specify that a Player
should receive A$, and do not indicate where those A$ should come from,
they shall come from the Treasury. Whenever the Rules specify that a
Player should lose A$, and do not indicate where those A$ should go to,
or specify that they should be destroyed, they shall go to the Treasury
instead. The total number of A$ shall always be 75,000 less the
combined value of all extant Trinkets (including those Trinkets created
in Ackanomic, yet exported as described in the rules).
"

- ----

B. Replace the text of section VI, which reads:

"
      A player may donate any non-mimsy Tradeable or gift entity they own
to the Treasury by publically announcing they are doing so.
"

with:

"
      A player may donate any non-mimsy Tradeable or gift entity they own
to the Treasury by publically announcing they are doing so.  If the entity
is a Trinket, it is transformed into its value in A$ upon donation.
"
 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

II.  Amend R 506, "Trinkets" to read in full:

      A class of gift entities known as Trinkets exist.

      Trinkets always have a value in positive A$. The value of a Trinket
may only be changed as specified by the rules. The owner of a Trinket may
transform it into its value in A$ by publically announcing they are doing
so. This action destroys the Trinket, creating A$ in its stead, and it
upsets the art and  antiquities communities.

      A player may create a Trinket by publically announcing its name,
description, and value, as long as the player has at least as many A$
as the announced value.  Upon doing so, the stated amount of A$ is
transformed into the Trinket, and the creating player becomes the owner
of the Trinket.

      Other rules may also create and bestow ownership of Trinkets, so
long as the rule provides for naming, describing, and valuing the Trinket.
In these cases, however, if the value of the Trinket would exceed the
number of A$ in the Treasury directly before it would be created, it is
not created.

      Trinkets have no power to affect any entities except as specified
in the rules.

      [What are Trinkets used for? Adding color, basically. Allowing gifts
of value other than Prosthetic Foreheads to be given, and for possible use
as Buried Treasure, or other uses.]

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

III.  Amend R 666, "End of Cycle", to replace:

"If the amount of A$s in circulation"

with:

"If the total of A$s in circulation plus the value of all extant Trinkets"

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:46:30 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1738

> I suppose the only actually *essential* rules were in the initial rule
> set.  And maybe not even all of those. 
	Supposedly not all of those, considering  we've done away with so many 
of them.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 18:56:42 -0800
From: [email-masked] (fnord)
Subject: Acka:  Or maybe not...

I was going to submit a CFJ on whether or not Haunted houses could
be entered ocnsidering how they're technically 'not owned'.  However, I
ran across something preventing my previous line of reasoning from
following through.  Apparently, in Rule 258, it states that
entities haunted by Undead can only be manipulated by the action
of the Undead.  This clause is also given precedence over any
Rule that would otherwise allow haunted entities to be manipulated.

So, entering an Undead's house is a no-go, as well as re-attaching them.
Also not doable , then, is the 'taxing' of an Undead's A$ during a cycle
change (if the A$ out of the Treasury is greater than that within it),
since 258 claims precedence (and also has a higher number).

fnord

- -- 
Michael J. Thomas                              [email-masked]
"Opinions are falling like drops of rain"  In that case, I'm in a downpour!

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:58:11 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1738

> Why have any rules?  We don't need a single rule to do what we do.  I
> only point out that the map did not exist before that rule, and now it
> does.  I won't be offended if you repeal it.
	You sound offended.

> Why write a rule?  I'll just wait for people to create things like the
> Map spontaneously.  You can say this about most of the game.  You do
> not need the treasure hunt rule or the subgame rule either, but count
> the number of treasure hunts and subgames before and after those rules
> were created.
	The treasure hunt rule also had some pleasant unintended effects that
would not have existed if it had been unregulated activity.

	I don't think the above is a good argument.  There are lots of holes 
in it, but I don't feel like arguing right now.  (For once. :o)  Suffice 
it to say that some rules need their enforceability and others 
(maybe) don't.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:03:54 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Or maybe not...

fnord wrote:
> Apparently, in Rule 258, it states that
> entities haunted by Undead can only be manipulated by the action
> of the Undead.  This clause is also given precedence over any
> Rule that would otherwise allow haunted entities to be manipulated.

> So, entering an Undead's house is a no-go, as well as re-attaching them.
> Also not doable , then, is the 'taxing' of an Undead's A$ during a cycle
> change (if the A$ out of the Treasury is greater than that within it),
> since 258 claims precedence (and also has a higher number).

It also means that the undead's houses couldn't start dangling in the first
place.  The end-of-cycle undead A$ tax, when it occurs, succeeds, because
it is worded (in R666 section e):
 "Each Undead stops haunting 20% (rounded down) of the A$ it is haunting."

/dev/joe

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:02:20 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1739

> Incidentaly, I wrote and sent off this proposal at the same time as the other
> three, it just took the Acrobot 12 hours longer to distribute it :)  Am I
> right in assuming the bot must work in cycles?  Or only when Mohammed checks
> email?
	Only when I log in, unfortunately; the reason is that so far the bot 
has proved to be notoriously unreliable and I prefer to be actually 
logged in when (not if) it crashes.
	The result is a significant inconvenience, unfortunately.  Sometimes
I let the bot run unattended and it seems to do okay.  But logging in and not
seeing the bot process anywhere... knowing it crashed... is not fun.

- --Mohammed

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:14:35 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Proposal 1742

Proposal 1742
Non-voting Players
/dev/joe

This is a grandiose proposal.

[Gist: Allow players to join Ackanomic as non-voting players; these
players cannot vote, make proposals, or judge CFJs, etc.
Non-voting is added as an extra player state.]

1. In Rule 252, "Joining the Game", at the end add this paragraph:
"Any player joining the game may specify that they are joining as
a non-voting player.  Otherwise, they are assumed to be joining
as a voting player."

2. Amend Rule 254, "Player States", to read in full:
"At any given time, exactly one of these states shall apply to each player:

Pending
Active
Vacation
Non-voting

Upon registration, a player is Pending, unless he specified that he
was joining as a non-voting player, in which case he is Non-voting.
A player in either of the states "Pending" or "Active" is considered
a voting player.

A Pending player becomes Active when it becomes publically knowable that
he has voted on a proposal.

Only Active players may be randomly selected for anything, except
where the rules specifically allow non-active players to be selected.

Any non-voting player may become a voting player by posting publicly
that they are doing so; e begins as Pending.  A player may not do so
within two days of having joined as a non-voting player or of having
changed from voting to non-voting status, voluntarily or otherwise.

Any voting player may become a non-voting player by posting publicly
that they are doing so; at the moment of this announcement, all their
existing votes on proposals whose results have not yet been released
are cancelled; they are treated as having declined judgement on all
CFJ's they have been selected to judge but not yet accepted or declined,
and treated as having failed to return a verdict on any they have accepted,
and they are removed from all offices non-voting players cannot hold,
and removed from the list of candidates in any Election or Nomination
for an office non-voting players cannot hold."

3. Amend Rule 255, "Vacationing", by adding to the end of the first paragraph
  "Whenever a player goes on vacation by any means, his player state
  becomes Vacation."
by changing 
  "he shall no longer be considered on vacation" (in the 5th paragraph)
to
  "he returns to the player state besides Vacation he most recently had."

[This is a little tricky -- I'm sharing the one Vacation state between
voting and non-voting players, and this little bit of glue ensures the
player states are managed correctly.  An odd side-effect is that vacationing
players are not voting players, but they weren't active players before
either and it didn't hurt anything.]

4. Amend Rule 422, "Postmaster", as follows:
In the second sentence, change:
  "official mailing list"
to:
  "official mailing list and a separate official voting mailing list"
and insert after the second sentence:
  "[The official list is intended for messages of importance to all
  Ackanomic, and the official voting list for messages of importance only
  to voting players.]"

In the fourth paragraph, just before the comment, insert:
  "For the purposes of this paragraph and the restrictions in the Postal
  Code, an action is a statement that the player is doing something
  regulated by the rules, or a public post required by the rules."

Change the first sentence of the fifth paragraph to:
  "For a player not on vacation not to be subscribed to at least one
  form of the official mailing list is a Crime.  For a voting player not
  on vacation not to be subscribed to at least one form of the official
  voting mailing list is a Crime."

Add to the end of the rule:

{{ The Postal Code is amended as follows:

   Change "ackanomic@wilma is the official mailing list" to
   "ackanomic@wilma is the official mailing list; actions pertaining
    to Games & Contest games, Grab-a-Donkey, and The Machine that
    Goes *ping*, or anything else besides treasure hunts described in
    the rules as a subgame are not allowed on this list"

   At the end of the limits on acka-games@wilma, change "*ping*" to
   "*ping*, or anything else described in the rules as a subgame"

   Change "ackanomic-digest@wilma is also the digest form of acka-games@wilma"
   to "acka-games-digest@wilma is the digest form of acka-games@wilma"

   Add to the end the following:
   "acka-voting@wilma is the official voting list; proposal distributions,
   proposal result posts, and CFJ-related posts are the only actions
   allowed on this list (but CFJ's pertaining to matters of interest
   to non-voting players should go to the official list instead).
   acka-voting-digest@wilma is the digest version of this list.
   Players are requested (but not required) to join this list in digest
   form if that doesn't bother them, to prevent a huge backlog of mail
   queueing up on wilma when a lot of proposals/results are distributed.

   acka-research@wilma and acka-discuss@wilma may not be used for any action.
   acka-research-digest@wilma and acka-discuss-digest@wilma are the digest
   versions of these lists and are subject to the same restrictions."
}}

5. Amend Rule 107, "Quorum and Active Players", to read in full:
  "If the number of players who voted on a proposal is equal to or
   greater than the number of abstaining Active players at the time
   the results are posted, the proposal meets quorum; otherwise it
   does not meet quorum."
[fixes the P1701-1706 dilemma]

[Now take care of the piddly bits, mainly changing "player" to
"voting player" where appropriate.]

6. In Rule 101, "The Game of Ackanomic", in the 3rd paragraph,
change "player" to "voting player" in the sentence that begins
"A player may only win a Cycle" and after that sentence insert
"Non-voting players may not win Cycles of Ackanomic."

7. In Rule 104, "Adopting Proposals", in the first paragraph, change
"Proposals are made by" to "Voting players may make proposals by",
and change "distribute them to the players" to "post them publically".
In the last paragraph, change "all players have cast a vote" to
"all voting players have cast a vote".

8. In Rule 106, "Voting on Proposals", change "Players" to "Voting
players" each time it appears. [3 times]

9. In Rule 207, "Scoring When A Proposal's Voting Results are Reported",
in section V, change "be placed on vacation" to "become non-voting" and
add to the end of that section "The events which Rule 254 generates when
a player voluntarily changes to non-voting status do not occur in this
case, but if a player who became non-voting by this rule does not become
a voting player within a week of having become non-voting, then the
events in Rule 254 are carried out as if the player voluntarily became
non-voting.  Players who become non-voting in this manner do not lose
offices they hold because of doing so, until they have remained non-voting
for one week; this takes precedence over rule 401."

10. In the first sentence of Rule 211, "Invoking Judgement",
change "active player" to "player", and change "distribute it to the rest
of the Players" to "distribute it publically".

11. In Rule 219, "Winning By Paradox", change
  "if the final verdict is true then the initiator wins the cycle"
to
  "if the final verdict is true, and the player who submitted the CFJ
  is a voting player at that time, then that player wins the cycle"

12. In Rule 220, "Winning by Points", in the fourth paragraph, change
"a single player" to "exactly one voting player"; in the fifth and sixth
paragraphs, change "two or more players" to "two or more voting players"
wherever it appears.

13. Amend Rule 222 as follows:
In the second paragraph, change "any Player may submit" to "any voting
player may submit"; in the sentence after that one, change "one Player"
to "one voting player".  

In the fourth paragraph, after "If a Player goes on Vacation or leaves
the Game" insert " or becomes a non-voting player", and before that
sentence insert "Non-voting players are never eligible to receive Keys."

In the paragraph just before the numbered list at the end of the rule,
change "a single Player" to "a single voting player" and "a Player opens"
to "a voting player opens".

14. In Rule 257, "No Dead Players Allowed", change "any player" to
"any voting player" the first time it appears, and change "all of
the Ackanomic players" to "all of the voting players".

15. In Rule 317, "Bonus Votes", in section 5 change "A player can use"
to "A voting player can use" wherever it occurs [twice] and add at
the end of the section of the section the sentence: "Non-voting
players may not use Bonus Votes."  In section 7 change "A player
may pay $A150" to "A voting player may pay A$150".

16. In Rule 360, "Hearings", at the end of the second paragraph, add
"Non-voting players may not vote in hearings, unless a rule says
otherwise for a specific type of hearing."

17. In Rule 362, "Crisis Resolution", in section 3, change
"Any player may publically challenge" to
"Any voting player may publically challenge".

18. In Rule 401, "Offices, Commonalities", at the end of section (i),
add "Non-voting players may not hold offices unless a rule says
otherwise for a specific office."  At the end of section (iv)
add "Non-voting players may only be acting officers for offices
which may normally be held by non-voting players."

19. In Rule 402, "Offices, Related Definitions", in section (ii)e)
change "each Player may cast" to "each voting player may cast".

20. In Rule 404, "Offices, Impeachment":
In section (i) change "by a Player" to "by a voting Player".
In section (ii) change "All Players" to "All voting players".
In section (iv)a) change "active Players" to "active voting players".

21. In Rule 421, "Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy",
in section d, change "2 players" to "2 voting players".

22. In Rule 593, "Ackanomic Research Guild", in section C, change "single
player" to "single voting player".

23. In Rule 597, "The Frankenstein Monster(s)", change
"Any Player (including the Mad Scientist)" to "Any voting player
(including the Mad Scientist)".

24. In Rule 709, "Gaol", in the numbered list of actions allowed to
players in Gaol, change "player" to "voting player" in actions 1 and 2.
{{[making a CFJ or CFCJ]}]

25. In Rule 723, "Rewarding Party Unity",
  change "every member of a political party"
  to "every voting player a political party"
  and change "every three distinct members of that party"
  to "every three distinct voting players in that party".
{{[ Allow non-voting players in parties without taking away the
party's unity vote(s), and don't count them for the purpose of
determining now many unity votes the party gets -- a party with fewer
than three voting members gets zero party unity votes, as always.]}}

26. In Rule 850, "Museum", in section VII, after "exceeding A$5000, "
insert "if e is a voting player, "

27. In Rule 909, "Steel Flea", change "lucky player" to "lucky voting
player" in the second paragraph, and change "any other Player" to
"any other voting player" in the 4th paragraph.

28. In Rule 927, "Silly Vacation Hat", in the second paragraph, change
"a player" to "a voting player".

29. In Rule 1112.3, "Let those who are without Harf cast the first stone.",
change "any Player" to "any voting player".

30. In Rule 1213, "Grab-a-Donkey", at the end of the first paragraph add
  "A non-voting player may be the Wrangler."

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 22:13:14 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1738

Jason Orendorff wrote:
> 
> > Why have any rules?  We don't need a single rule to do what we do.  I
> > only point out that the map did not exist before that rule, and now it
> > does.  I won't be offended if you repeal it.
>         You sound offended.

I'm not.  I'd prefer if you take me at my word rather than presume to
read my mind and then post such thoughts, though.  I'm not sure what
value the above post can add to the game.

> I don't feel like arguing right now.

Nor do I.  Please release the long overdue voting results instead. :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:28:03 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 1738

> >         You sound offended.
	[snip]
	I don't proclaim to be a mind reader.  I'm very sorry if what I said 
offended you in any way.  =(

> > I don't feel like arguing right now.
> Nor do I.  Please release the long overdue voting results instead. :)
	I'm trying to bring myself up-to-date on mail before doing that.  
Thanks for the smiley.

- --Mohammed
=)  tired

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:32:09 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1711 rejected (Value)

Proposal 1711
Value
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  7 / 14 = 50.000000%
Yes:  5    No:  3     Present:  1   ...Proposal rejected.

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

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:34:12 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1713 rejected (Delayed Effect Syntax)

Proposal 1713
Delayed Effect Syntax
Guy Fawkes

Votes cast by active players:  9 / 15 = 60.000000%
Yes:  5    No:  4     Present:  2   ...Proposal rejected.

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Strider
	Ludwig
	snowgod
	Guy Fawkes

NO votes:
	Niccolo Flychuck
	breadbox
	Mohammed
	Malenkai

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin
	Lestrade

Active players who did not vote:
	fnord
	Jammer
	Calvin N Hobbes
	ThinMan
	Techno
	mr cwm

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:34:19 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1716 accepted (Lot Sale)

Proposal 1716
Lot Sale
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  11 / 15 = 73.333333%
Yes:  12    No:  1     Present:  1   ...Proposal accepted.

Malenkai +2 : EP P1716

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Strider
	fnord
	breadbox
	ThinMan
	snowgod
	Lestrade
	Mohammed
	Malenkai
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:
	Narf

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin

Active players who did not vote:
	Jammer
	Calvin N Hobbes
	Ludwig
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1716
Lot Sale
Malenkai

This is a Modest proposal.

{{[this will allow things like a group of prosthetic foreheads to
be auctioned as a lot, at the option of the player auctioning them,
rather than the current system used for Otzma cards, and the like,
where each high bidder gets one.]}}

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

Amend R 516, "Auction", to replace:

"
a) the item to be Auctioned, which must be unowned if the Rules are calling
(or directing a player to initiate) the Auction, and must be a tradeable
or gift entity owned by the Player calling the Auction if it is being
called by a Player acting on their own.
b) the quantity to be Auctioned (default = 1)
"

with:

"
a) the item or items to be Auctioned, which must be unowned if the Rules
are calling (or directing a player to initiate) the Auction, and must be
tradeable or gift entit(ies) owned by the Player calling the Auction if
it is being called by a Player acting on their own.  Default quantity is
1 item.
b) if more than one item is being auctioned, whether or not the items
should be grouped and auctioned as a lot (default = no).  If yes, then
"item" (and "items") as used in the remainer of this rule shall be
construed to mean the entire lot of items being auctioned, and quantity
shall be 1. 
"

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:34:26 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1719 accepted (Vault Divination III)

Proposal 1719
Vault Divination III
Malenkai

Votes cast by active players:  10 / 15 = 66.666667%
Yes:  6    No:  1     Present:  4   ...Proposal accepted.

Malenkai +2 : EP P1719

YES votes:
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Strider
	Lestrade
	Mohammed
	Malenkai

NO votes:
	mr cwm

PRESENT votes:
	Ludwig
	breadbox
	ThinMan
	snowgod

Active players who did not vote:
	fnord
	Robert Sevin
	Jammer
	Calvin N Hobbes
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1719
Vault Divination III
Malenkai

Create a new rule entitled "Vault Divination", numbered 222.1, with
the following text:

"
      The Golden Frog knows the location of the Chalice Vault. If a player
eligible to find the Chalice Vault legally possesses the entity called 
The Golden Frog, The Golden Frog will tell him where the CV is, and
the player will thus find it. 

      Other players may still possess the Golden Frog, but they shall not
find the CV by doing so, unless they are eligible.
"

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:34:12 -0600
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P1714 accepted (What Time is it, Anyway?)

Proposal 1714
What Time is it, Anyway?
ThinMan

Votes cast by active players:  11 / 15 = 73.333333%
Yes:  11    No:  0     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

YES votes:
	mr cwm
	/dev/joe
	Niccolo Flychuck
	Strider
	fnord
	breadbox
	ThinMan
	snowgod
	Mohammed
	Malenkai
	Vulcan Unity vote

NO votes:

PRESENT votes:
	Robert Sevin
	Lestrade

Active players who did not vote:
	Jammer
	Calvin N Hobbes
	Ludwig
	Techno

Text of accepted proposal:

Proposal 1714
What Time is it, Anyway?
ThinMan

{{ [ 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," by deleting all of the fourth
paragraph
except the first sentence.

{{ [ The actual timing specification got long enough that I think it
should be in its own rule, so here it is: ] }}

Create a new rule entitled "Timing" with the following text delimited
by ** symbols:

**
Posts that are sent through any mailing list maintained by the
Postmaster are deemed to have occured at the time that they are received
by the list server.  Posts that are not sent through such a 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
mail server.  Other posts not sent through any of the Postmaster's 
mailing lists are deemed to have occured at the earliest time that they
are received by the mail server 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.

(The term "mail server" is intentionally left open to some
interpretation.  It is intended to indicate the actual computer used for
e-mail by the relevant player if that computer has a full-time internet
- -- or other form of e-mail -- connection; otherwise it is intended to
mean that computer from which the relevant player downloads his mail.)

Players are encouraged to use an appropriate Postmaster-maintained
mailing list if available.  If the times of two posts are compared and
(i) only one of them went through one of the Postmaster's lists and (ii)
their times are otherwise within three minutes of each other, then the
post sent through the Postmaster's 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.
**

Renumber the rule entitled "Timing" to number 371.

{{ [ The following bit will give the Promoter some discretionary power
in assigning proposal numbers, and remove any timing problems.  This
will also cover some cases that previously would have been incorrect
proposal numbering or incorrect distribution. ] }}

Amend Rule 406, "Promoter," by changing the text:

"(c) assign the proposal a number 1 greater than the number assigned to
the previously distributed proposal, and distribute it for voting."

to:

"(c) to assign each proposal an integer number greater than any number
previously assigned to a proposal.  It is expected, but not required,
that the promoter shall give each proposal a number exactly one greater
than the previous proposal's number;

(d) to promptly distribute each numbered proposal for voting." 

{{ [ 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 correct guess first 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.

{{ If Proposal 1686 was accepted then the text ',who shall be immune
from the
politeness moon in so doing (this takes precedence over Rule
374) ' is hereby deleted from the text of Rule 1209. }}
"

{{ [ 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 of Ackanomic Digest V1 #529
*******************************