Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #55
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest       Saturday, April 19 1997       Volume 02 : Number 055

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:35:17 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Fictionary Results

On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Brian Raiter wrote:

> > Oddly enough, I looked this up in webster's 3rd just now, and besides
> > a couple meanings for cram in the sense of "cram food in one's mouth",
> > there isn't even anything starting with "cram" that has a food-related
> > meaning.
> 
> I, and probably other Bluffers, was also influenced by the similarity
> to "gumbo".

Some years we (in Israel) used to have a snack called with the brand name
Crambo. It was a chocolate shell with cream inside. Come to think of it,
 'crambo' could be a compound word meaning literally 'cream inside'. 
Fortunatenly no one in Intel has picked up on that yet

Niccolo Flychuck

 > 
> breadbox
> notes that ThinMan is our next Brainiac
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:36:56 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 374 Verdict

On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Bollinger, John C. wrote:

> I must say, Malenkai delivered, IMO, a masterfully-reasoned verdict.
> I also appreciate the wealth of detail and the abundance of
> research that he invested in reaching his decision, and the fact that
> he recorded it all.
> 
> ThinMan

There are a couple of bits in the reasoning which I might differ with, but
the CFJ served its purpose.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 04:16:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 371 Verdict

> CFJ 371 has been judged false without comment.

Hmph. Have I been snubbed?

> A fine feathered friend has shown up at breadbox's abode.

Ah, yes. The Chartreuse Goose. I don't believe we've been introduced,
madam. I will admit to having possessed one of your fine eggs on more
than one occasion.... Anyway, come in, come in. Oh, you'd rather stay
outside and feast upon the lawn? Well, suit yourself.

I presume this means that I am now responsible for tracking the keys
to the Vault? Is this going to be a problem, seeing that Narf hasn't
been terribly active in the game lately? (Sorry if this is a stupid
question, but I'm afraid I get the Crystal Chalice and the other
Treasure hunts mixed up sometimes.) I guess what I'm asking is, do I
need to know anything about the current state of the keys besides who
owns which at this point in time?

breadbox

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 07:22:22 -0500 (CDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: PF's

I noticed the other day that my Undeath (well actually my will immediately 
before it) had somewhat decimated my PF collection.  Anyone with issues 
they would like to sell is more than welcome to post prices.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 15:21:49 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Acka: EBS

> On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Bollinger, John C. wrote:
> 
> > 
> > >  I am building an Evil Ballot Stuffer.
> > > > 
> > > > This is complete.  An auction for it commences now, and
> > > > lasts for 3 days.
> > > 
> > I bid A$ 35 on the EBS.
> > 
> > ThinMan
> 
> I bid A$ 45 on the EBS
> 
I bid A$ 55 on the EBS.
And I offer A$ 10 for every bond that is for sale. 

CarsesraC 

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 15:35:44 +0000
From: "Bascule" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: EBS

> And I offer A$ 10 for every bond that is for sale. 
> 
> CarsesraC 

I still remember a message from you, CarseraC, on the old OotF page 
saying Don't sell your bonds to him! I'll offer A$0.75 per bond...

Oh how things change

Bascule
Waiting for bonds to trade hands for A$100 each

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:09:22 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Acrobot

Let's try this again.

#retract proposal 1929

- -- 
Mohammed
Five amorphous aliens stalked a American for cash.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:43:43 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 371 Appeal

breadbox wrote:
 
> > CFJ 371 has been judged false without comment.

CFJ 371 has been appealed to the Supreme Court by Malenkai

Clerk of the Courts
- --------------------------------------------------------

Malenkai's Reasoning:

Not that I believe the verdict is incorrect; indeed, I
have not even considered it very thoughfully from the 
prospective of a Judge.  However, I find it very interesting
as an observer, and would like some reasoning.  Moreover, this
will be a chance to playtest the judicial conflict-of-interest
amendment.

There was one comment that I saw go by indicating that
*all* the Scientists broke the rules.  That didn't sit 
well with me on first reading.

Imagine 4 people on a desert island with a gun.  One of them
is shot, and the police (presumably some sort of deep sea
desert island police with jet skis) show up, and no one will
confess to the murder (details ommitted for simplicity).  Are
they all guilty?  This seemed to be the implication of that
statement alluded to in the preceeding paragraph, but like I
said, I did not look  into it; it may be a different case.

In any case, *I* find this interesting, and am willing to
spend 25 points to see it kicked around more.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:46:00 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Phoebe (You can call me Al)

Apr 18 13:45 EDT: -3 Bascule: did not report what Phoebe said

You can call me Al has found Phoebe.

Malenkai

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:58:49 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Forehead Hearing

> 3 forehead hearings have been called as decribed below.  Please vote on

The elvis was found to be unique, the other two copies.  The rules
describe what happens to the copies; as I recall, they are destroyed
(but not retroactively), and /dev/joe loses some points.

Count Tabula
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

(#1: elvis)

Unique
- ------
Mohammed
mr cwm
fnord
Idiot Boy
/dev/joe
You can call me Al
breadbox
ThinMan

Copy
- ----
Malenkai
Evil Ballot Stuffer
Vynd
CarsesraC
snowgod

(#2: SMH)

Unique
- ------
Vynd
ThinMan

Copy
- ----
Mohammed
mr cwm
Malenkai
Evil Ballot Stuffer
fnord
Idiot Boy
/dev/joe
CarsesraC
snowgod
You can call me Al
breadbox

(#3: mr cwm)

Unique
- ----
Vynd

Copy
- ----
Mohammed
mr cwm
Malenkai
Evil Ballot Stuffer
fnord
Idiot Boy
/dev/joe
CarsesraC
snowgod
You can call me Al
breadbox
ThinMan

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:10:58 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Thanatopsis 

WARNING! OFF TOPIC MESSAGE! WARNING!

Citizens of Ackanomic,

Those who have defied death by creating a system of undead are invited to
read my essay, Simple Thanatopsis, which just won Second Prize in teh
Anchorage Daily News Creative Writing contest, non-fiction category (which
made me $250 richer).   It beat out about 2998 other entrants :)

If you want me to send you a copy, reply to this message.

snowgod

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:10:30 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Forehead Hearing 

>> 3 forehead hearings have been called as decribed below.  Please vote on
>
>The elvis was found to be unique, the other two copies.  The rules
>describe what happens to the copies; as I recall, they are destroyed
>(but not retroactively), and /dev/joe loses some points.
>
>Count Tabula

Justice has been served.... :)

snowgod

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:33:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Forehead Hearing

> The elvis was found to be unique, the other two copies.  The rules
> describe what happens to the copies; as I recall, they are destroyed
> (but not retroactively), and /dev/joe loses some points.

I lose two points for each of the two destroyed foreheads, and
snowgod loses A$5 for the elvis hearing.

#award snowgod: -5 A$: forehead tribunal penalty (elvis)

/dev/joe

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:43:12 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 371 Appeal

Malenkai wrote:

> Imagine 4 people on a desert island with a gun.  One of them
> is shot, and the police (presumably some sort of deep sea
> desert island police with jet skis) show up, and no one will
> confess to the murder (details ommitted for simplicity).  Are
> they all guilty?  This seemed to be the implication of that
> statement alluded to in the preceeding paragraph, but like I
> said, I did not look  into it; it may be a different case.
> 
The "all Scientists guilty" scenario that I proposed is one I now like
less than the "no individual Scientist guilty" scenario.  Nevertheless,
you do the former an injustice by your analogy.  A better one might be
this:

Four people alone on a desert island, one an invalid.  There is plenty
of food and water available by scavenging, but when the coast guard
finally arrives, the invalid is dead of starvation while the other
three are all adequately fed.  Any one (or more) of the three survivors
could have fed the invalid, but did not -- perhaps because they
expected one of the others to do so.  Now, who, if anyone, is guilty?

ThinMan

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 14:32:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 371 Verdict

breadbox wrote:
> I presume this means that I am now responsible for tracking the keys
> to the Vault? Is this going to be a problem, seeing that Narf hasn't
> been terribly active in the game lately? (Sorry if this is a stupid
> question, but I'm afraid I get the Crystal Chalice and the other
> Treasure hunts mixed up sometimes.) I guess what I'm asking is, do I
> need to know anything about the current state of the keys besides who
> owns which at this point in time?

You need to know the history of who has had the keys in order to
satisfy this:

  No Player may possess any Key more than once as long as there are
  eligible Players who have not yet possessed that Key since the conditions
  for finding the CV have been divined.

Malenkai initially distributed the keys as follows:

gold key: Robert Sevin
silver key: snowgod
bronze key: ThinMan
chartreuse key: /dev/joe
purple key: Narf

Narf buried the purple key, dug it up himself, and the goose came to Narf 
for digging up his own treasure, so the key returned to the goose and
Narf distributed it to Niccolo Flychuck.

snowgod buried the silver key, and Malenkai found it.
Malenkai buried the silver key again, and it's still buried.

3 of the keys periodically eat stuff in their owners' possession, and all
have some sort of restriction on owning them; see the rule (607).

/dev/joe

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 371 Verdict

> You need to know the history of who has had the keys in order to
> satisfy this:

As always, I am in your debt.

breadbox

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 18:12:54 -0500 (CDT)
From: Thierry Joffrain <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 371 Verdict 

>> CFJ 371 has been judged false without comment.
>
>Hmph. Have I been snubbed?

Oh no, please don't think that! I had spent a long time writing up a
reasoning but when I sent it to Malenkai it got lost. I think I didn't paste
it in or something crazy. I've been very busy these past few weeks and after
Malenkai pointed it out to me, I tried to see if I had time to rewrite it.
But alas I just couldn't. The Justices can add their reasoning at the end if
they want.

It was a very interesting CFJ and it took me a while to do a half decent
write up for it (which would have been unsatisfactory to many people anyway
I think) and rather than throw an ever poorer job together, I felt it was
better to just let it stand, given ThinMan's comments on it which I
basically agreed with.

If only the deadline had been just a bit later, I could have done it
tonight. One more of a thousand regrets.

Calvin N Hobbes

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 22:53:21 EDT 
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka:  Duel

OK,  where's the little weasel? Come and get it!  What's going on Robert
Sevin,  getting a little CHICKEN?  Did Alopecic's taunting frighten you
off?  

I've been sitting here on the steps of the Senate for days,  waiting with
a perfectly good limerick.  It's time to put up or shut up.  Either give
me your best shot,  or I demand an appology,  for the shameless way you
have besmirched my reputation in front of all Ackanomia.

Habeus Corpus
not bothering with seconds,  now,  just wanting to get it over with.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 19:36:52 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Poet? 

In the tradition of continually worsening, and coincedentally more and more
delinquent Party Hall Party poems, I present to you, this:

We have rules

Rules that protect us
Rules that seems stale
Rules that offend us
Rules that throw us in the Gaol
Rules that make us laugh

Rules that require me
to write this awful poetry

snowgod
gaoler

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #55
******************************