Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #31
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Tuesday, April 1 1997        Volume 02 : Number 031

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 00:03:37 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line 

>MLB opening day, Dodger's are playing at the Phillies.  I'm giving 5-1 odds
>on the Phillies.  What that means is every dollar you bet on the Phillies
>will pay 5 dollars if they win, every 5 you bet on the Dodgers will pay 1 if
>they win.

I'll bet A$57 on the Phillies.

Robert Sevin

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:07:01 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line 

In a message dated 97-03-31 01:03:42 EST, you write:

> I'll bet A$57 on the Phillies.
>  
>  Robert Sevin

I do not ack this.

Da Godfather

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

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 22:06:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: President

> Before I cast my vote, I want to know what the 4 candidates are
> going to do about the growing problem that organized crime poses.
> It is a menace to our society that must be stopped!  So hop up on
> your soap box and let's hear it.

Actually, since we have more than one candidate, there ought to be a
Debate, though unofficial. Didn't somebody volunteer to do the next
Debate? Does anybody remember?

Anyway, once somebody has expressed willingness to run the Debate, you
can submit this question for inclusion.

I myself prefer to wait until that time before answering your
question, so that I know that the press will be there to record every
carefully crafted word. For now, I would just like to remind you of my
campaign slogan:

"breadbox: the only candidate that isn't one of the other candidates".

breadbox

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:07:55 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: Keys 

Robert Sevin loses another 7 A$ as the holder of the gold key.
Thin Man loses a processing chip.

Narf
Come to IRC

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

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 22:11:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: bot

> Check it out; it *should* be able to mail you a password which you can 
> then use to get in and see your votes.  The votes are the only thing 
> available right now; it's pretty much the equivalent of #current.

> Lemme know what you think.

I think the first new command you should add would allow someone to
select their own password. The password it gave me is something like
"foobarbazmetawhackgarplyramalamadingdongtingtangwallawallabingbang".
Furrfu. (Okay, maybe I'm exaggerating a bit here, but it's merely for
effect. Poetic License and all that.)

breadbox

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 00:18:22 -0600
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line 

>> I'll bet A$57 on the Phillies.
>I do not ack this.
>
>Da Godfather

What is the maximum bet you will allow me to make on the Phillies?

Robert Sevin

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:49:02 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line 

In a message dated 97-03-31 01:20:05 EST, you write:

> What is the maximum bet you will allow me to make on the Phillies?
>  
>  Robert Sevin
>  

I will not accept ANY bet from you.

Da Godfather

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:59:59 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Presidential Debate

A presidential debate has been requested.  The way it works is players
send me questions with the word 'Debate'  in the subject line.  All
such questions are collated into a single e-mail, and distributed to
the forum, at which time candidates may respond to them if they want.
I will take questions until 22:00 EST today.

Malenkai
Speaker

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 11:41:06 +0000
From: "M. J. Blackler" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Vacation

I'm going on vacation until the weekend (estd)

Bascule

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 09:54:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line

On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> I'll bet A$10 on the Phillies.
> 
> Malenkai
> 

Being a kind-hearted soul, I'll kind of 'cover' this bet:

A$50 on the Dodgers.

IB

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 09:57:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: President

On Mon, 31 Mar 1997 [email-masked] wrote:

> Before I cast my vote, I want to know what the 4 candidates are going to do
> about the growing problem that organized crime poses.  It is a menace to our
> society that must be stopped!  So hop up on  your soap box and let's hear it.
> 
> Narf
> 

I think organized crime is keen.  That's why I voted for snowgod!

IB
mudslinging

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:47:32 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Purple Key

Aren't we supposed to sneer, or something?

- -mr cwm

On Sun, 30 Mar 1997 [email-masked] wrote:

>
>
>I have decided that I want the purple key back, just in case someone needs to
>be rescued from jail, and is willing to pay for my services.  I have
>therefore followed the instructions on my map, decoded and shown below for
>all to see...
>
>
>if someone deciphers this text and privately mails me a translation before
>the crystal chalice is removed from the rule set, e shall find the purple
>key.
>
>In decoding it, I discovered a typo... it's hard to proof read your work when
>your fingers are deliberately one row off....
>
>Narf.
>
>
>

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:49:48 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line

I wouldn't know the Phillies if they fell on me, but I can't resist the
odds.  I'll put A$10 on the Phillies.

- -mr cwm

On Mon, 31 Mar 1997 [email-masked] wrote:

>Well here it is... the long awaited first ever opportunity to gamble with the
>Narfalones.
>
>Remember, no bet is official until I ack it, and then it's only official if
>the Narfalones have the money to cover the bet.
>
>Here it is
>
>MLB opening day, Dodger's are playing at the Phillies.  I'm giving 5-1 odds
>on the Phillies.  What that means is every dollar you bet on the Phillies
>will pay 5 dollars if they win, every 5 you bet on the Dodgers will pay 1 if
>they win.
>
>I don't deal in small chump change, so if you bet on the Dodgers, make sure
>you bet in 5 A$ increments, capiche?
>
>Da Godfather.
>

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:51:55 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 364 (ThinMan)

> Mar 28 18:01 EST: -3 Techno: did not respond to CFJ 364
> 
> ThinMan gets a go at it.
> 
I am invoking my privilege as Praetor to send CFJ 364 to the Supreme
Court.

ThinMan
Praetor

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 09:55:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Presidential Debate

Debate questions:

What do you think of the Crystal Chalice?

Are you capable of doing (and willing to do) all the Acka work if a
functional officer should suddenly resign?  Will you appoint replacements
with astonishing speed? 

What is your position on creeping slime mold?

If you are walking down a hall of an office building and you find that 
someone's door is open (it's dark in there), do you believe it is ethical to 
go in and what would you do with their computer?

...feel free to discard up to four of the above.

- -- Mohammed

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:54:30 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: President

On Sun, 30 Mar 1997, breadbox wrote:

>"breadbox: the only candidate that isn't one of the other candidates".

I'm not so sure about that.
Are you IdiotBoy? No.
Then you *must* be one of the other candidates.

- -mr cwm
who enjoyed elementary school immensely.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 09:55:36 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Presidential Debate

> A presidential debate has been requested.  The way it works is players
> send me questions with the word 'Debate'  in the subject line.  All
	Bah, acka-priv.

- -- Mohammed
snowgod's diseased

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 11:09:59 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code Change 105

To:   Ackanomians
From: mr cwm

By this message I publically object.  If "game actions related to current
proposals" means what I think it means, then it is yet another list to
which one must subscribe if one is to track the game state.  If it doesn't
mean what I think it means, then I object to its ambiguity.

On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, /dev/joe wrote:

>Effective immediately, I'm changing the reply-to's on ackanomic and
>ackanomic-digest to ackanomic. (this is not covered in the postal code)
>Be careful replying to old messages on ackanomic -- they will still
>reply-to acka-discuss and will not be valid for actions besides trades.
>
>I'm also making the following postal code change, effective in 3 days
>if there are fewer than 2 objections:
>===
> Change the paragraph that begins with acka-research@wilma to read:
>  "acka-research@wilma may only be used for game actions related to
>   current proposals.
>   acka-research-digest@wilma is the digest version of this list and is
>   subject to the same restrictions."
> 
> Add to the end of the paragraph that begins with acka-finance@wilma:
>  "acka-finance-digest@wilma is the digest version of this list and is
>   subject to the same restrictions."
>===
>
>When this takes effect, I intend to let acka-discuss mail bounce.
>Please send it to acka-research or ackanomic, as appropriate.
>
>The new structure will look like this:
> ackanomic is for anything except subgame actions
> acka-voting is for proposal and vote result distribution
> acka-finance is for trades, gifts, auctions
> acka-games is for subgame actions
> acka-chess is for party chess
> acka-research is for discussion, and stuff related to proposals
>
>/dev/joe
>Postmaster
>

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 13:00:02 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Treasure/Auction

>I bid A$112 on Earth.

  Has anyone bid since this?  (I'm swamped in mail at the moment)  No?
Then I bid A$130 on Earth.

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 14:09:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code Change 105

> By this message I publically object.  If "game actions related to
> current proposals" means what I think it means, then it is yet
> another list to which one must subscribe if one is to track the game
> state.  If it doesn't mean what I think it means, then I object to
> its ambiguity.

While I am not quite to the point of publically objecting, I do want
to second the idea that acka-research should be explicitly marked as
not being available for game actions. I urge the Postmaster to
consider making another change that would say this unambiguously.

breadbox

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 18:34:58 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line 

In a message dated 97-03-31 09:50:48 EST, you write:

> On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Malenkai wrote:
>  
>  > I'll bet A$10 on the Phillies.
>  > 
>  > Malenkai
>  > 
>  
>  Being a kind-hearted soul, I'll kind of 'cover' this bet:
>  
>  A$50 on the Dodgers.
>  
>  IB
>  
>  
Actualy, IB, until established otherwise by a cfj that may or may not be
forthcoming, the bet has already been covered by the Narfalone family.

And I'm afraid I can't ack your A$50 bet.

Da Godfather.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 18:42:01 -0500 (EST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Da Godfather's Morning Line 

In a message dated 97-03-31 11:09:35 EST, you write:

> I wouldn't know the Phillies if they fell on me, but I can't resist the
>  odds.  I'll put A$10 on the Phillies.

Neither would a baseball... with the exception of the leading rookie of the
year candidate, they don't have much goin' for 'em.

However, I regret that I can not ack this bet.
 
>  -mr cwm
>  

Da Godfather, who reminds all of Ackanomia that they must join the Narfalone
family if they wish to gamble.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 18:54:43 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 362 Appeal Verdict

Supreme Court's Judgement:  uphold the orginal decision of FALSE

Mar 31 18:54 EST: -25 Red Barn: Frivilously Bother the Judges on CFJ 362

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 362
  Subject: Treasure Maps
Initiator: Red Barn
    Judge: IdiotBoy (selected Mar 22, 1997, 12:49h EST)
Judgement: FALSE
   Appeal: FALSE

Statement:

  If a treasure map states that a player shall find its treasure only by
fullfilling certain conditions and, after finding the treasure, adhering to
certain other conditions, then if e fulfills the initial conditions, is
considered to have found the treasure, and subsequently breaks the
conditions then applicable, e has not found the treasure.

Initiator's Comments:

  Rule 1217 states "The player must write a treasure map that describes, at
a minimum, the conditions necessary for a player to find the treasure".  It
does not state that these conditions need apply only before the treasure
has been found, therefore they do not.
  [This is my attempt at using existing rules to create a contract-like
system, whereby a player must do certain things or they lose the treasure.
If this doesn't work, I'll have to go through proposals and nobody will see
what I have in mind for a couple of weeks. :) - the treasure map system is
actually quite powerful, though it takes some effort to word this sort of
thing comprehensibly.]

Judge's Comments:

>From Rule 1217, Paragraph 5:

==
Upon a player (who is not a map custodian with respect to the map in
question) achieving the conditions for finding buried Treasure as specified
by a Treasure Map, it is a duty of the map writer or a map custodian (if any
exist) to make this fact, and the map, public (once they become aware of the
condition being achieved, and final act that lead to the condition being
achieved is publically knowable). This action destroys the map, and the
player who achieved the conditions receives the Treasure, and thus becomes
the owner of its constituent entities (which are no longer considered
"Treasure").
==

This section makes it clear that once the conditions of the Treasure Map
have been fulfilled, the Map is revealed.  Once this occurs, the Map is
detroyed and the entities which once made up the Treasure become the
possessions of the "finder".

The Map holds no sway over any entities once it's "finding" conditions have
been fulfilled.  In fact, the Map is destroyed.

The Treasure is no longer Treasure, but merely entities which are subject
only to such rules as apply to any other entities of their type.

Red Barn's Appeal Reasoning:

  However, there's nothing keeping the map from having requirements about
the future.  The map no longer exists once the treasure has been found, but
if the Map could have "looked ahead", the treasure wouldn't have been found
in the first place - but we, not having similar foresight, just didn't
realize it yet :).  I don't see that the conditions need to be only
regarding the present and the past - in fact, the treasure hunt rule
specifically states:

>>>>><<<<<

  While that doesn't mean that the conditions can regard the future, there
is, I believe, precedent for the game state being undetermined in certain
respects.  Thus a verdict of TRUE is mandated.

Supreme Court's Reasoning:

The Court rules that one cannot "achieve" a condition that depends on
future events which may or may not take place.  At the time the condition
is checked, the outcome is uncertain; therefore the condition is not
achieved at that time.  To apply knowledge gathered at a later time to the
condition check would be a retroactive effect.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 19:08:32 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 132 Verdict

CFCJ 132 has been judged TRUE.  snowgod will go to Gaol in 3 days for
3 days.

Clerk of the Courts
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Criminal Judgement 132
  Subject: Gaoling the Gaoler
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: ThinMan (selected Mar 29, 1997, 22:33 EST)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

snowgod has comitted a crime.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

The irony here is too good to pass up.

The Senators went to Gaol March 26th, 17:13 EST.

- -From rule 712, Gaoler:

>      (iii) The duties are

>            b) To publically post a description of the cell of anyplayer
> in the Gaol.

snowgod, the Gaoler, has not performed these duties.  Perhaps our Gaoler
has lost touch with the Gaol, and from within its walls, he will be in a
better position to do so, or at least get reacquainted with the Gaol and
acka's tough on crime custom, something his prisoners have not
experienced ;-)

Suggested Penalty:

3 days in Gaol for the Gaoler

ThinMan's Reasoning:

It is indisputable that snowgod did not post the descriptions of the
cells of the Senators.  The three-day period provided for by "Speed"
had expired when this CFJ was submitted.  I agree with Malenkai that
the Gaoler's duties required posting cell descriptions, thus I judge
this CFJ TRUE.

I note that an alternative reading of R 712 would require the Gaoler
to publicly post a cell description only once, ever.  This does not
seem to be the customary interpretation, however.

Actual Penalty:

3 days in Gaol

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 19:14:44 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 368 (Ackers)

Ackers has been chosen.

Clerk of the Courts
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 368
  Subject: Single Nouns
Initiator: IdiotBoy
    Judge: Ackers (selected Mar 31, 1997, 19:14h EST)
Judgement:

Statement:

For the purposes of Rule 596 (Mad Scientist), a capitalized entity is a
"single noun."

IdiotBoy's Reasoning:

This hasn't quite come up yet, but I want some clarification before it
potentially does.

If someone brings the Mad Scientist a part from the rules related to the Fat
Lady, can they claim that they wish to replace "Fat Lady" with
<monster-name>?

I personally, believe they can, but I'd like something definitive.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 20:02:17 -0800
From: [email-masked] (John Martin Lotz)
Subject: Acka:  The Band

Sorry it took a bit of time. but I just got finished with
class

I am officially starting an organization,  The Band.

The band exists to make music, playing gigs at
functions around Ackanomic.  Any question
regarding any other purpose is met with a "No 
comment"

Jammer

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

Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:07:38 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Presidential Debate Questions

What are you going to do to clean up our growing mafia problem?

How do you feel about the fact that one of the candidates for this
office is running the debate?

Igel urre-ak Euskara hitzegin daiteke?

Why did you decide to run for president?

How do you feel about the following phrase "Tecno for President"?

If elected, will you serve t the beck and call of techno?

Other than yourself, which candidate do you must support?

Have you ever been in Gaol?

Have you ever been burned as a witch?

What will you do to make your term as President as harfy as possible?

What do you think of the Crystal Chalice?

Are you capable of doing (and willing to do) all the Acka work if a
functional officer should suddenly resign?  Will you appoint replacements
with astonishing speed?

What is your position on creeping slime mold?

If you are walking down a hall of an office building and you find that
someone's door is open (it's dark in there), do you believe it is ethical to
go in and what would you do with their computer?

How do you feel about he issue of the sanctity of Harf, and its
application to the inventor of harf?

Do you see the President as having an active role in Ackanomic, or
mostly as an exravagant figurehead?

What should we do with the postal code?

What would you like to see the government of Ackanomia, such as it is, do?

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

Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:11:43 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Presidential Debate Questions

> Are you capable of doing (and willing to do) all the Acka work if a
> functional officer should suddenly resign?  Will you appoint replacements
> with astonishing speed?

Alot of questions were asked.  This is the only one that matters for the
presidency though; the President's opinion on any of the others is no
more important that anyone elses.

This is the only reason I am running, and if I'm elected, the
functional office work that makes this game run smoothly will get done
accurately and efficiently when required.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 23:44:20 +6600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka:  P1861 accepted (Trinket Destruction Amnesty Period)

> Proposal 1861
> Trinket Destruction Amnesty Period
> /dev/joe
> 
> Votes cast by active players:  12 / 19 = 63.157895%
> Yes:  8    No:  4     Present:  2   ...Proposal accepted.

> Insert after the second paragraph of rule 506, "Trinkets", the following
> paragraph (including the ** lines delimiting it):
> 
> **
> To reduce the length of the Player/Entity web page, a two-week amnesty
> period is hereby called.  The art and antiquities communities will
> not be upset at the conversion of any trinket to A$, and will cheer
> the conversion of trinkets worth A$5 or less.  Two weeks after this
> section of this rule takes effect, this entire paragraph (including
> the lines containing just two asterisks delimiting it) is deleted
> from this rule.
> **

Hallelujah!

I'm destroying some of this junk I own; specifically, these 6 trinkets
are being converted to their worth in A$:

Pumpkin Patch (worth A$1)
Thring (worth A$1)
baa baa food (worth A$5)
Little Bag O' Chips G (worth A$1)
The Staff of the Scorekeeper/Postmaster/Demon King (worth A$10)
Bond Bracelet (worth A$25)

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 00:49:16 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Acrobot

Oops.  Messed up thos curly things....

#retract proposal 1894

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 20:50:27 -0900 (AKST)
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: SFG Internomic Edition

SFG Internomic Edition
Volume 1, Issue 4

IN WHICH THE SFG PUBLISHES SOMETHING OF VALUE AND INVALIDATES MAELNKAI"S
CLAIMS< MAKINGHIS THE ONLY ALLEGED NEWSPAPER TO PUBLISH FLUFF OR PERISH.

INTERMOIC ETP ARCHITECHT SPEAKS OUT
By DR WEST, PPN
Subject: Re: ETP and the Human Response

Sorry I didn't get this to you sooner. Let me know if you have any
suggestions.

On the Entity Transfer Protocol 

Snowgod has very kindly invited me to address here some of the concerns
expressed by Ackanomicians over the proposed Entity Transfer Protocol.
First let me say that I am pleased that the ETP has attracted such
intelligent commentary in Ackanomic. This to me is what nomic is all
about: the pleasure of endless discourse about our little mind toys.

Now to the matter at hand. Malenkai has very insightfully used the
internet as a metaphor to address the issue of Internomic trade. This is
an accurate metaphor, but I would suggest that Malenkai has not pushed it
to its ultimate conclusion. His initial point, as I understand it, is that
the ETP in its current form resembles the phone system rather than the
more desirable packet-switched "cloud-like"  network of the internet.
While the ETP requires one-to-one connections between individual nomics
(in the form of similar ETPs), the ideal would be a system that would
allow Ackanomic to trade with any other nomic.

I agree that the latter many-to-many structure is the ideal, and I would
be very interested in hearing proposals for alternative systems that could
achieve this ideal; as Snowgod has suggested, the proposed ETP is merely a
test of one possible system. But I do think that some sort of shared
protocol will be necessary to achieve many-to-many connectivity between
nomics, and that ultimately this shared protocol has to boil down to the
passing of similar rules in different nomics. The internet is, in fact, a
perfect example of this principle, being founded on a shared protocol. The
various computers and networks comprising the internet would not be able
to communicate with each other if they did not have available to them the
shared language of the Internet Protocol. Every computer capable of
sending a message over the internet literally has the IP as a part of its
"ruleset." Thus while I can see that different protocols for inter-nomic
trade might be more efficient than the proposed ETP, I challenge
Ackanomicians to develop a system for meaningful trade that doesn't depend
on any shared protocol at all.

One possible alternative to the decentralized ETP method for establishing
such a protocol would be for Internomic to pass some sort of central
protocol, and indeed Malenkai has proposed such a solution as a more
efficient alternative to the ETP. Such a system could certainly work, but
in my opinion would necessarily involve severe incursions into the
sovereignty of member nomics. While the ETP would allow for some local
variation in the treatment of imported entities, an Internomic rule would
impose the same system on all nomics. Furthermore, an Internomic entity
transfer system would depart from the current internomic conception of
nomics as individuals, as atoms if you will, and would necessarily extend
the jurisdiction of internomic rules to intrude upon the inner workings of
member nomics. How, for example, could an individual player of a member
nomic own an entity whose transfer was governed solely by Internomic
rules? As they stand now, Internomic rules cannot refer to or govern the
actions of individual players of member nomics.

As for the question of potential disputes and judgments concerning
transferred entities, this issue most definitely deserves attention. But I
disagree that, in the absence of formally defined judgment procedures,
nomics participating in the ETP will find themselves having to interpret
the rules of other nomics. This is precisely the situation that the Entity
Behavior Rule is designed to circumvent. Because an entity's Entity
Behavior Rule actually becomes part of the host nomic's ruleset, disputes
concerning the entity should be able to be resolved solely from within
that ruleset. This places a heavy burden on the drafters of EBRs and the
creators of entities, of course--EBRs will have to be phrased in terms
simple and adaptable enough to be functional in any nomic. The rules that
currently define our entities' behaviors will almost certainly not be
adequate to the task of defining their behavior in any possible nomic. But
I think we're up to the challenge. While it might eventually be advisable
to incorporate "consultants" from an entity's nomic of origin into the
dispute resolution process, in the absence of such a system I think
individual nomics will be required by the ETP as it now stands to look
only to their own rules to determine the behavior of entities.

In conclusion, let me urge you to let the ETP try its legs: only by
putting it into action can we evaluate its effectiveness.

Thank you,
Dr. West
Spud, PEAR, Supreme Court Justice
Pumpkin Patch Nomic
[email-masked]

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 23:53:02 +6600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Postmaster Time-checks himself

Please ignore the time zone on any posts I made this evening.  It should
be -0600 (CST), regardless of what elm put in my headers.  Elm has this
bug at the end of every month.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 23:54:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka:  trinket obliteration

I am destroying Orion's Crystal, the Frozen Mirror, and the Needle's Eye 
for cash.

Mar 31 23:53:01 CST: Mohammed: -1 the Orion's Crystal
Mar 31 23:53:01 CST: Mohammed: -1 the Frozen Mirror
Mar 31 23:53:01 CST: Mohammed: -1 the Needle's Eye
Mar 31 23:53:01 CST: Mohammed: +28 A$

- -- Mohammed
ah, windfall

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

Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:55:11 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Newspapers

I do not believe Kolot Ackanomic published anything in the 
month of March.  I am not sure about 'is'.  All other papers published
some sort of bandwidth-wasting gizz.  If the publishers of the
first two could confirm or deny this, we can see if they were destroyed
or not.

Malenkai

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #31
******************************