Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #84
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Wednesday, May 14 1997        Volume 02 : Number 084

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 09:31:58 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Registrarness (&Tarzan & Mentor)

On Mon, 12 May 1997, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> On Sun, 11 May 1997, Phil Ackley wrote:
> 
> > Now, let me introduce you to CV1701, real name John Doe (until he tells me
> > otherwise), email adress [email-masked]. He is a taurus, is not affiliated
> > with webtw.net and has never heard of epondimonas (or so I hope).  In his
> > spare time he likes to dive for rocks.
> > 
> > Guy Fawkes has been randomly selected to ment for him.
> 
> Since I will be going on what could become Permanent Vacation when the 
> semester ends at the end of this week, it would be irresponsible of me to 
> accept this mentorship.

Nacho said the mentor pool was empty, last time  I checked I was in the
pool, and not mentoring anyone.
> 
> Still, welcome to the game, and have a very good time!
I welcome all new marks, er.. players.
> 
> In related news, I offer to sell Tarzan's Tree House to Niccolo Flychuck 
> for A$1, 
I ack this, only I still haven't got the trade syntax down.

Niccolo Flychuck

> and I would like very much if there was a volunteer to take over 
> my position on the viruses board beginning Saturday.

> 
> Guy Fawkes
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 09:34:51 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  work

On Mon, 12 May 1997, Jason Orendorff wrote:

> I have to go cut the grass now.  The bot is in a state of up-ish-ness.

#cut grass

> I made best guesses at everyone's status.  I don't know how many
> people are missing; certainly the entity list has no bearing on reality.
Alien activity?

NF

> 
> - -- 
> Moh
> p.s.  Should I change my nameto Muhammad?
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 23:50:39 -0700
From: **Alexandre Muniz <[email-masked]>
Subject: just crazy

Hey! Nobody told me I had to judge a stupid CFJ. All of you are changing 
the rules when I'm not looking.  That's not fair! I say that Snow Nacho 
Boy should be impeached! And then you went and changed the Crazy French 
Scotsman rule on me so that this wouldn't be a legitimate complaint 
because it doesn't involve a loss of ackadollars or points. I swear that 
wasn't there before! And you give me Phoebe, the magic potato and this 
CFJ all on the same day just to confuse me. You'll probably put in some 
penalty for not posting something into the rules, and make the penalty 
occur right *after* the Crazy French Scotsman period ends, so I won't be 
able to complain then, either. How come breadbox gets the easy CFJ? He's 
probably part of your conspiracy too, isn't he? That's ok. Laugh at me 
now. One day you'll all be sorry.
**two-star

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 12:05:47 -0700
From: **Alexandre Muniz <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: really crazy

And then you give me snowgod's disease, and just to top it off, there 
isn't any penalty for it, so I can't complain about that either! I swear 
there was a penalty in there last time I looked. This proves that you 
keep changing the rules behind my back!
**two-star.

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 00:41:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 380 (breadbox)

> Call For Judgement 379
> Subject: Non-Volunteering Mentor Payments
> Initiator: /dev/joe
> Judge: breadbox

I respectfully remind our acting CotC that as a recently-appointed
Justice of the Supreme Court, I am regretfully ineligible to be
selected to judge CFJs.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:22:48 -0500 (CDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Dividends

On Mon, 12 May 1997, Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:

[dividends deleted]

The Church of the Markovian Dream should get a dividend from the 25 PFGuy 
it owns.  By my calculations, it should come out to A$11.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:24:57 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 379 (two star)

Nacho Man wrote:

> Atilla the Pun jumps right in to claim the Chartruese Goose.  Gotta
> love
> those new players.  -Acting CotC
> 
Well, yes and no.

> Call For Judgement 379
> 
> Statement:
> 
> The legality of an Acting Senator voting to confirm the appointment of
> a
> Justice, in the case where the Senator replaced by the Acting Senator
> is not
> on Vacation, cannot be determined with finality.
> 
I would have to consider the case, but I am pretty sure it would turn
out False.  Nevertheless, I cite R601 (Winning by Paradox): "A call for
judgement whose statement alleges that further play is impossible, that
changing the rules is impossible, or that a player action which would
affect the game state appears equally legal and illegal is a
'Paradox Win CFJ.' Only those CFJs so specified by the rules are
Paradox Win CFJs."  CFJ 379 does not qualify as a Paradox Win CFJ under
that criterion, and no other criterion is established in the rules.
CFJ 379 is therefore not a Paradox Win CFJ, Attila the Pun's reasoning
notwithstanding, and Attila will not get the Goose (or a win)
regardless of the judgement.

ThinMan
Expert on the Judicial System

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:37:12 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Machine

Oh, yeah:

The Machine that goes *ping* has turned up in CarsesraC's house.

ThinMan
Acting OICRT

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:37:54 -0500 (CDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 379 (two star)

On Tue, 13 May 1997, Bollinger, John C. wrote:

> Nacho Man wrote:
> 
> > Atilla the Pun jumps right in to claim the Chartruese Goose.  Gotta
> > love
> > those new players.  -Acting CotC
> > 
> Well, yes and no.
> 
> > Call For Judgement 379
> > 
> > Statement:
> > 
> > The legality of an Acting Senator voting to confirm the appointment of
> > a
> > Justice, in the case where the Senator replaced by the Acting Senator
> > is not
> > on Vacation, cannot be determined with finality.
> > 
> I would have to consider the case, but I am pretty sure it would turn
> out False.  Nevertheless, I cite R601 (Winning by Paradox): "A call for
> judgement whose statement alleges that further play is impossible, that
> changing the rules is impossible, or that a player action which would
> affect the game state appears equally legal and illegal is a
> 'Paradox Win CFJ.' Only those CFJs so specified by the rules are
> Paradox Win CFJs."  CFJ 379 does not qualify as a Paradox Win CFJ under
> that criterion, and no other criterion is established in the rules.
> CFJ 379 is therefore not a Paradox Win CFJ, Attila the Pun's reasoning
> notwithstanding, and Attila will not get the Goose (or a win)
> regardless of the judgement.

Even though the "cannot be determined with finality" clause has been 
removed from the Paradox Win criteria, it is my (non-Expert) opinion 
that asserting "The legality of [some game-state affecting player action] 
cannot be determined with finality" is equivalent to saying that the 
action appears both legal and illegal under the ruleset -- its legality 
cannot be determined with finality.  R601 does not explicitly that its 
exact language must be used; IMO, the _content_ of this CFJ's statement 
is sufficiently equivalent to one of the criteria to qualify as a paradox 
win CFJ.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:45:57 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 379 (two star)

Guy Fawkes wrote:

> Even though the "cannot be determined with finality" clause has been 
> removed from the Paradox Win criteria, it is my (non-Expert) opinion 
> that asserting "The legality of [some game-state affecting player
> action] 
> cannot be determined with finality" is equivalent to saying that the 
> action appears both legal and illegal under the ruleset -- its
> legality 
> cannot be determined with finality.  R601 does not explicitly that its
> 
> exact language must be used; IMO, the _content_ of this CFJ's
> statement 
> is sufficiently equivalent to one of the criteria to qualify as a
> paradox 
> win CFJ.
> 
Your point is acknowledged, but I am not sure I agree that R601 does
not explicitly require the particular language it describes.  Perhaps
it does not.  In any case, however, I think that "appears equally legal
and illegal" is a much stronger claim than "cannot be determined with
finality," and thus that the two are _not_ equivalent.  For example, an
action for which most, but not all, indications were in agreement about
its legality would not appear _equally_ legal and illegal to me, but
its legality could not be determined with finality.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:58:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Dividends

Guy Fawkes wrote:
> The Church of the Markovian Dream should get a dividend from the 25 PFGuy 
> it owns.  By my calculations, it should come out to A$11.

Unfortunately the dividends rule says that it yields a dividend to the
*player* who owns it.  This should be changed, and it's far from the only
thing that is poorly worded because it still assumes only players own stuff.
There's a big proposal for somebody who cares to do the work in the rule
set.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:04:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: My Soul's in Jeopardy, baby..

I wish to donate the following items to the Church of Seleya:

5 BPJammer
40 BPUncle Sam

IB

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:05:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Ooooo-ooo-ooo-ooo.

I wish to donate the following items to the Church of the Markovian Dream:

5 BPStrider
50 BPWayne

IB
covering his bases in the afterlife

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 16:41:47 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Status

> >>I hereby change my status from Non-Voting Player to Voting Player.
> >>
> >>fnord
> >>
> >
> >  Zorf, me, as well.
> >
> >-Red Barn
> 
> "And I suppose if all your friends became voting players, you would as
> well?"
> 
> Um ... yes.  Please make me a voting player.

That last remark is very well. I hate to do what the rest of the 
world do so. I will keep a non-voting players until the whole acrobot 
thing is solved and that the acrobot follows the rules instead of 
make up rules of it own. 

IMHO were all the votingperiodes extented with a week, but all what 
is done is that the aliens took away the acrobot and altered the 
software a little bit.

I really hate those aliens. Is it not possible to build a defense 
system accest them. 

Im think of special defense systems to give rules a chance to fight 
back. Special power to the president to declare a subsitute rule with 
a time limit of a week and that is in effect directly. 

CarsesraC    

- --               |
 \.             /;       
 \`--.._      //:        
 '\/////\  __/;' 
   '\////\`\`)' [email-masked]          
       \/'  |    
       :'_\'\    
      / | '" "'  
      ~~~

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 17:59:04 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Forming a new Organization

I am forming a new Organization. I name it MetaMorph.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:05:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: My Soul's in Jeopardy, baby..

IdiotBoy wrote
> I wish to donate the following items to the Church of Seleya:
> 
> 5 BPJammer
> 40 BPUncle Sam

I accept these on behalf of the church of seleya.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 09:04:04 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Status

> That last remark is very well. I hate to do what the rest of the 
> world do so. I will keep a non-voting players until the whole acrobot 
> thing is solved and that the acrobot follows the rules instead of 
> make up rules of it own. 

Well, it would help, in my case, if our absent-minded Promoter hadn't made
me a Non-Voting player, so that I have to resubmit my last batch of votes
and last two proposals again as soon as he puts me back to Pending...
(Then again, poor Sunflare isn't even on the Acrobot player list...)

> IMHO were all the votingperiodes extented with a week, but all what 
> is done is that the aliens took away the acrobot and altered the 
> software a little bit.

And I _though_ that I had submitted a CFJ to the Acting CotC on that
subject; did it not go through, should I send it again?  (If I were the
type to go Crazy French-Scotsman, which I'm not, I'd rant here about the
total lack of organization which is discriminating against new players by
keeping them second-class citizens...)

> I really hate those aliens. Is it not possible to build a defense 
> system accest them. 

Vote for P1997, "Xenophobia"!

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Song In My Head--Klaatu:Knee Deep In Love
Current Book--Wild Cards XI:Dealer's Choice
I browse, you browse, we all browse for eyebrows!

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 11:06:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Dividends

>#award Red Barn: -1 A$: dividends

  'Award', eh?

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 11:09:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  work

>> Moh
>> p.s.  Should I change my nameto Muhammad?

  Missed this the first time.  Sounds good to me...

- -Red Baren.

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 11:09:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: just crazy

>Hey! Nobody told me I had to judge a stupid CFJ. All of you are changing 
>the rules when I'm not looking.  That's not fair! I say that Snow Nacho 
>Boy should be impeached! And then you went and changed the Crazy French 

  MuHaHaHaHa!!!  I shall have my REVENGE!!!!

- -Red Barn

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:10:12 -0700
From: Joshua Nave <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Status

Aaron Humphrey wrote:

> > I really hate those aliens. Is it not possible to build a defense
> > system accest them.
> 
> Vote for P1997, "Xenophobia"!
> 

Heck, I almost came back as a returning player just to vote for that
one....

Narf

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:24:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: Status

Alfvaen wrote (in response to CarsesraC, I believe):
> > I really hate those aliens. Is it not possible to build a defense 
> > system accest them. 
> 
> Vote for P1997, "Xenophobia"!

Xenophobia is P1996, actually.  P1997 is something Niccolo Flychuck
wrote about the senate for about the 4th or 5th time (failed once
long ago, failed in the aliens bit recently, and also submitted
recently as P1982 but with some errors -- Niccolo should retract P1982).

Vote for P1996, Xenophobia!

/dev/joe
Maybe I should have called it Agoraphobia?

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 20:36:18 -0700
From: **Alexandre Muniz <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: really crazy

And now I look it up and you changed snowgods disease to mean posting a 
private message to the public forum, not failing to put Acka: in the 
header. That was different last time I looked at the rules. That goes 
beyond cruelty to change a rule on me just so that I look foolish. 
Anyway, I retract my impeachment paper on snow nacho boy. Don't tell me, 
it wasn't a legal impeachment paper because there is no such player, or 
it wasn't properly posted to the public forum, or I didn't specify the 
office he should be impeached from. I know you'll think of something. 
Knowing how cruel you all can be, you've probably done something that I 
could complain about, and put it somewhere I wouldn't think to look,
something like a negative dividend hidden neatly in an innocuous looking 
post. But that would be preposterous. Whoever heard of negative 
dividends? 
**two-star

**Alexandre Muniz wrote:
> 
> And then you give me snowgod's disease, and just to top it off, there
> isn't any penalty for it, so I can't complain about that either! I swear
> there was a penalty in there last time I looked. This proves that you
> keep changing the rules behind my back!
> **two-star.

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 09:31:57 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Status

> Alfvaen wrote (in response to CarsesraC, I believe):
> > > I really hate those aliens. Is it not possible to build a defense 
> > > system accest them. 
> > 
> > Vote for P1997, "Xenophobia"!
> 
> Xenophobia is P1996, actually.

D'oh!  I thwap myself once again with the Salmon of Correction.  (Hmmm, I
should create that as a trinket sometime.)  Well, I knew it was either this
year or last year...

> Vote for P1996, Xenophobia!

Just as soon as Acrobot realized that I can vote...

> /dev/joe
> Maybe I should have called it Agoraphobia?

Wouldn't that be an Internomic proposal declaring us to be an Enemy of
Agoranomic?

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Song In My Head--Klaatu:Knee Deep In Love
Current Book--Wild Cards XI:Dealer's Choice
Palindromic taglines are not on erase nilgatci mordnilap!

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 12:03:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: MetaMorph

If it is legal for me to do so, I would like to join MetaMorph.

IB

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:33:01 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 380 (breadbox) 

>> Call For Judgement 379
>> Subject: Non-Volunteering Mentor Payments
>> Initiator: /dev/joe
>> Judge: breadbox
>
>I respectfully remind our acting CotC that as a recently-appointed
>Justice of the Supreme Court, I am regretfully ineligible to be
>selected to judge CFJs.
>
>breadbox

OH.  Grazi.  Forgot about that rule change.

Mr. SnowNacho

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:39:06 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 380 (breadbox) 

breadbox never was selected to judge CFJ 380.  It was all just a bad dream,
a nightmare.  While I was laboring under the illusion that breadbox had
been selected, what I meat to say was that Niccolo Flychuck had been
selected.

- ------------------------
Call For Judgement 379
Subject: Non-Volunteering Mentor Payments
Initiator: /dev/joe
Judge: Niccolo Flychuck
Judgement:

Statement:
If a non-volunteering mentor is selected, he receives the A$25 payment for
mentoring only after he accepts the assignment.

Reasoning:
See rules 252 and 253.  It is quite possible that the opposite is true --
that he gets the A$25 immediately, even if he then declines the selection;
in that case, the next mentor selected also gets A$25.  I need to know, one
way or the other.

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:43:41 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ooooo-ooo-ooo-ooo. 

>I wish to donate the following items to the Church of the Markovian Dream:
>
>
>5 BPStrider
>50 BPWayne
>
>IB
>covering his bases in the afterlife

I accept these on behalf of the Church.

NachoGod

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 17:44:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Registrarness 

>I've been doing the registrar thing alot today.  As of now we have two new
>players.  Let me introduce you to Atilla the Pun, real name Micah Smukler,
>email adress [email-masked].  He is an aquarius, and owns three pairs of
>shoes, one for basketball, onbe for work, and a pair of sandals for around
>the house.  In the summer he enjoyus rock climbing and bicycle rugby.  He
>has a dog named spot.

Gee, this is news to me... :-)

Micah Smukler
AKA AtP

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 17:23:44 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka; Clerkliness 

I saw whatzhisname or whosisface say something about a CFJ I might have
missed when I was checking my email this morning.  Wel, I looked all around
and I still can't find it, so I guess resubmit it to me.

Mr. Nacho

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 17:27:53 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Registrarness 

>>I've been doing the registrar thing alot today.  As of now we have two new
>>players.  Let me introduce you to Atilla the Pun, real name Micah Smukler,
>>email adress [email-masked].  He is an aquarius, and owns three pairs of
>>shoes, one for basketball, onbe for work, and a pair of sandals for around
>>the house.  In the summer he enjoyus rock climbing and bicycle rugby.  He
>>has a dog named spot.
>
>Gee, this is news to me... :-)
>
>Micah Smukler
>AKA AtP

Okay, I might have fudged just a wee bit.  Anhoy, here is Atilla's response
to the Market Research Question:

>2) I was browsing the web and found a link from somewhere (I forget where; I
>think it was some logic puzzle site) to the Nomic FAQ.

Mr. Snow Boy

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 21:03:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ooooo-ooo-ooo-ooo.

Just out of curiosity, what does "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" theme 
have to do with donating bonds of debatable value to religious institutions?

Guy Fawkes
bwg

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 23:09:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ooooo-ooo-ooo-ooo.

It's not the theme from "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly."  It's the
second line from the previous messages.

I don't think their value is very debatable.

IB

On Tue, 13 May 1997, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> 
> Just out of curiosity, what does "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" theme 
> have to do with donating bonds of debatable value to religious institutions?
> 
> Guy Fawkes
> bwg
> 

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

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 19:28:39 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 381 (Guy Fawkes) 

Call For Judgement 379
Subject: Non-Volunteering Mentor Payments
Initiator: Alfvaen
Judge: Guy Fawkes
Judgement:

Statement:
The voting period on proposals 1944-1975 (?) was extended by one week.

Alfvaen's Reasoning:
When Rule 106 was abducted by aliens, it ceased to have any game effect.
Mostly this resulted in players being unable to vote on proposals, but the
clause that "The prescribed voting period on a proposal is seven days" must
also have been affected.  There was therefore _no_ set expiry date for
proposals after the rule was abducted.

Furthermore, in Rule 1131, the Alien Abduction rule proper, it says "All
nomic business related to said rule will be put on hold until the rule is
returned....Any deadlines that would be violated because of the abduction
shall be extended one week."  Now obviously the voting deadlines have been
violated because it was _not_ possible for players to vote for all of the
seven days' prescribed voting period.

Therefore, upon the return of Rule 106, with the added "deferment" clause,
it must abide by Rule 1131 and extend the proposal voting deadlines by one
week.

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #84
******************************