Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #170
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Monday, June 30 1997         Volume 02 : Number 170

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 01:01:14 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: SVH (Mr. Lunatic Fringe)

Mr. Lunatic Fringe has been selected as Mad Hatter for Voting Gnome.

I appreciate Alfvaen voluntary tracking this for me; this is the
second player he has reminded me about on this matter, and unless
I remember by blind luck, and then sift through e-mail archives, I
will miss  this.  Thx.  I also realise Bascule may be approaching
2 weeks.

Malenkai
OICoRT

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 00:43:46 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: SVH (Mr. Lunatic Fringe)

> Mr. Lunatic Fringe has been selected as Mad Hatter for Voting Gnome.
> 
> I appreciate Alfvaen voluntary tracking this for me; this is the
> second player he has reminded me about on this matter, and unless
> I remember by blind luck, and then sift through e-mail archives, I
> will miss  this.  Thx.  I also realise Bascule may be approaching
> 2 weeks.

Yes, on the 30th.  Then nothing until Red Barn on the 6th or 7th of July,
but with any luck by then Silly Vacations Hats might be gone.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Song In My Head--Depeche Mode:It's No Good
Current Book--Colin MacInnes:Absolute Beginners
You have just begun reading this sentence that you have just finished reading.

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 22:46:08 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Heat Wave!!! 

Some of you may be interested to know that the tempature in anchorage
reached 88 degrees farenheit today breaking the Record High for today of
78, set in 1930.  We have been experiening a heatwave recently with
tempatures into the eighties every day.  We even had high humidity and
thunderstorms we're on the ocean next to mountains, so normally that
cancels out any possibility of thunderstorms)

Now, before you think "Damn alaskans think 80 is hot :" I gotta tell you
something, and this is a fact: Becuase of the high lattitude here, the sun
actulally (and I kid you not) feels hotter.  The sun strikes the earth
almost horizontally, not vertically, and boy can you feel the difference.

Any tourist (or GI) who has ever been up here in the summer can vouch for
this.  70 alaskan degrees feel like 85 in the lower 48.  88 degrees is
almost unbearable :)

Anyway, that's why you haven't heard much from me lately.  Gotta enjoy the
sun while it last.

Mr. Lunatic Fringe

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 22:49:06 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: SVH for Voting Gnome 

Voting Gnome's silly vacation hat is a live Manatee, an endangered sea cow,
worn firmly, but slightly tipped, above his brow.  It is an endangered
species, both as a mammal and as a hat. A sign hangs from it's real flipper
that reads "Save the Manatee, save the SVH."

Mr. Lunatic Fringe
Endangered Mad Hatter
Possibly the last of his kind?

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 10:53:37 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Treasure Trinkets  

I am creating eight trinkets, noe particularly harfy, called Mr. Lunatic
Fringe's Treasure Togas #1-8, each valued at A$5.  Each is a a toga of the
roman style.  Ownership of one of these trinkets will allow its owner to
participate in the upcoomming murder mystery treasure hunt.

It is too much hassle to offer eight seperate auctions, so I am going to do
it informally.  Each of the togas is hanging on a hook in my closet.  In
order to find one, you must first come to my house (I hereby grant
permision for any treasure finding hopeful to come to my house) and claim
one.  If more than eight people come to my house and claim togas, we will
play a couple rounds of ghost with the winner getting the toga.

Hopefully this will save work for all the various harfers.

Mr. Lunatic Fringe

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #1: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #2: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #3: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #4: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #5: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #6: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #7: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

#trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #8: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
murder mystery treasure hunt.

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 10:57:11 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: SFJ REsults 

THe most recent internomic SFJ (#8, I believe) has been judged TRUE by
MicroNomic II (MacroNomic).

Mr. Lunatic Fringe
Ambassador

>
>MacroNomic determines the SFJ to be: True. Nowhere in the rules is the
>moderator given any authority to act on behalf of Internomic.  The only
>entity which can act on behalf on Internomic is Internomic.  (This could
>lead to a problem if Internomic wins...)

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 13:00:32 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Treasure Trinkets

> It is too much hassle to offer eight seperate auctions, so I am going to do
> it informally.  Each of the togas is hanging on a hook in my closet.  In
> order to find one, you must first come to my house (I hereby grant
> permision for any treasure finding hopeful to come to my house) and claim
> one.  If more than eight people come to my house and claim togas, we will
> play a couple rounds of ghost with the winner getting the toga.

Having admired Vynd's new Cheez-Whiz to my heart's delight, I make my way
over to snowgod's beach cottage, eager to don(or at least obtain, since
they're not Garments or anything)a Treasure Toga.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Current Album--Icehouse:Man of Colours
Current Book--Colin MacInnes:Absolute Beginners
A sine curve goes off to infinity or at least the end of the blackboard.

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 15:23:14 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Treasure Trinkets 

> #trinket Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #2: 5 A$ : Ownership of one  \
> of these trinkets will allow its owner to participate in the upcoomming \
> murder mystery treasure hunt.

I go to snowgod's beach cottage and claim the above Trinket.  I'm not
sure of the rules, but it seems like an open trade based on meeting
the condition, so, in that case:

#transfer Mr. Lunatic Fringe,Malenkai : Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Treasure Toga #2

if not, I apologize to the entity harfer.

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 15:28:44 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  P2147-2152 

>Active players who did not vote:
>	Mr. Lunatic Fringe
>	You can call me Al
>	mr cwm
>	Robert Sevin

I believe I set my default vote to PRESENT, so I should have had a vote
listed for all of these proposals.

Robert Sevin

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 15:39:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jason Orendorff <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Silver Moon Results

On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Jazz Jackrabbit wrote:
> #award Vynd : 75 A$,silver moon : can I do that in one command?
	Yes, but it may or may not make things difficult for /dev/joe,
who is doing all the actual work.

- -- 
Mohammed
A zombie from another planet and the famous lion from Brazil barely
escaped from a violent Russian.

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 15:54:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Lunatic Toga

I am going to Mr Lunatic Fringe's home and helping myself to one of
his mysterious togas

#transfer: Mr Lunatic Fringe, breadbox: Lunatic Fringe's Toga #3

[Sorry if I got the name of the trinket wrong ... I accidentally
deleted the email.]

breadbox

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 19:44:48 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 420 Verdict

CFJ 420 has been judged FALSE.

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

Call For Judgment 420
  Subject: Non-voting Player Votes
Initiator: Mohammed
    Judge: Malenkai (selected Jun 26, 1997, 19:13h EDT)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:

Votes that were legally cast on a proposal are counted (in determining
whether the proposal is accepted) regardless of whether some those
votes were cast by voting players who subsequently became non-voting
players under Rule 254.

Mohammed's Reasoning:

I can see this going either way, but I tend to see it as TRUE.

Rule 104:
> As soon as possible after a proposal's prescribed voting period
> ends, the votes on that proposal shall be posted publicly. The
> proposal is then accepted if a quorum has been achieved and the
> required number of YES votes were cast on the proposal.

Rule 106 defines "required number", but makes no mention of voided
votes.

Rule 254:
> 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;  [etc.]

Now, you could say that Rule 104 does not really specify that *all*
votes are counted, and that it leaves enough room for other rules to
cancel votes without problems.  That way, the statement above is
FALSE.

Or, you could say that the idea of "cancelling" a vote does not
conflict with Rule 104, but it doesn't have any effect either-- since
Rule 104 says "if the required number of YES votes were *cast*"
(emphasis mine), not "...cast and not later cancelled".  In this case,
the statement above is TRUE.

Or, you could say that Rule 254's attempt to "cancel" votes *does*
conflict with Rule 104, and therefore it fails (since R254 doesn't
claim precedence).  This also means the statement is TRUE.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

The issue of this CFJ is game custom, and its scope and applicability.
This is a very difficult CFJ, IMO.

The clause in question from rule 104 has remained pretty much unchanged
since the initial ruleset:

>  (2) the required number of votes must have been cast in favor
> of the proposal;

Rule 106 was amended to add the following language as early as proposal
1412 (Nov 96), and possibly earlier:

> Voting Players may change their vote up until the end of the prescribed
> voting period, but in any case are limited to one vote per proposal.

Rule 106 has always had subordinate precedence to rule 104 via the
numerical method, or, before proposal 1539, was subordinate via
the immutable/mutable inconsistency axe of rule 108, which, if there 
was a conflict, would have made rule 106 (then 390) wholly void and
without effect.

Why all this discussion about rule 106 when the case seems to involve 
the interactions between rules 104 and rules 254?  I find the parallel
between the two cases to good to ignore. 

Rule 104 says that a proposal is accepted if some number of YES votes 
are *cast* on the proposal, and, as the initiator of this CFJ points
out, provides no qualifying language with that regulation.

Rule 106 says that a player may change their votes on a proposal.  It
has said this for a long time, as I pointed out.  We've been interpreting
that there is no conflict between rules 106 and 104 in the matter of
casting votes, changing votes, and then counting the changed votes 
for the purpose of determining whether a proposal has been accepted as
described in rule 104 (or, more accurately, game custom has provided
a resolution of the possible inconsistency).  I judge that it is beyond 
reasonable doubt that players have changed their votes from time to time
since the time that language was added via proposal 1412 (e.g. breadbox's
3rd Silver Moon proposal); thus this customary interpretation is well
established.

There are 3 things to consider when using game custom:  scope,
correctness, and applicability.

I argued in my appeal of CFJ 415 that the game custom used applied to
a specific case, and did not scope to the general case.  I am going to
argue the opposite case here, because I judge the game custom discussed
in interpreting the interaction between rule 104 and 106 is general,
and applies to *any* reasonable qualifying circumstances involving 
rule 104 and subsequent changes to the votes, simply because there is
no reasonable reason to assume it applies only to rule 106; indeed, it
was game custom at one point, and may still be, that votes by players
who have left the game do not count.  It has been argued that the rules
have changed in this arena, but it is certain that there was never a 
rule that said: "votes by players leaving the game are disregared,
this qualifies rule 104".  There may have been a rule that said: "votes
by players leaving the game are disregarded", or it may have just been
(or still be) simple custom.  I'm not here to judge CFJ 417, but I have
shown the general nature of the custom surrounding rule 104 and 
potentially inconsistent qualifying circumstances.  At least in this
case, the qualifying circumstance is a rule; I will let CFJ 417's judge
worry about that matter.

Its as if rule 104 has a customary rendering of "cast" to be 'cast,
unless changed by some other factor'.  CFJ 220 has established that
game custom can establish implicit qualifiers in the absense of 
explicit ones, especially if the custom is long standing.  I thus
judge the 'cancelled' of rule 254 to be little different than the
'changed' of rule 106, and the custom established in one case to
scope to the general case, as there is no explicit custom or example
in the case of rule 254 to indicate otherwise.
  
I'm not going to spend alot of time discussing the "correctness" of
this custom.  Custom is correct by definition unless it can be shown
to be directly countermanded by the rules (e.g. CFJ 113, correct
incorrect custom).  I do not see a mandate in the current rules against
the custom of the rule 104/106 interaction.  I acknowledge that this
interaction could have been interpreted differently when the 'change'
language was added to rule 106 (along the lines of the initiator's
TRUE agrument), but it was not, hence we have *this* custom as opposed
to something else.

Finally is the issue of applicability.  Game custom applies in two
instances: players following the rules (from 101):

> All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the
> form in which they are then in effect, and interpreted in accordance
> with current game custom.

and making judgement in accordance with the rules (from 215):

> When the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the statement
> in question, however, then the Judge shall consider currently existing
> game custom and the spirit of the game in reaching a decision. 

Rule 101 does not apply because this is not a question of players following
the rules, but a question of how various voting events affect the 
Platonic game state. 

The rules are not silent or unclear, but the doubt surrounding this
CFJ arises out of an apparent inconsistenty between 254 and 104.  I
have shown how game custom has been used to resolve this inconsistency
in two similar instances for a long time, and have no clear mandate
from the rules to judge that it does not resolve it the same way here,
hence my judgement of FALSE.  (I note that I have not addressed the
potential precedence conflict between 104 and 254 that the initiator
points out the possibility of; suffice it to say that cancellation of
an event is not a precedence conflict with that event).

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 20:18:41 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 422 (two-star)

two-star has been selected for CFJ 422.

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

Call For Judgment 422
  Subject: Azpiazu Lives?
Initiator: Alfvaen
    Judge: two-star (selected Jun 29, 1997, 20:18h EDT)
   X-Gizz: Push the yellow button
Judgement:

Statement:

Azpiazu was not destroyed by the Blueprint rule.

Alfvaen's Reasoning:

While /dev/joe's amendments to the Blueprint rule was intended to make
inconsistent Blueprints, like most Frankenstein Monsters, destroy
themselves, I don't believe it did so in the case of Azpiazu, for the
simple reason that R597 contains the sentence "This rule takes precedence
over the Rules generally governing Blueprints."

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 19:42:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 422 (two-star)

> Call For Judgment 422
> Azpiazu was not destroyed by the Blueprint rule.

Alfvaen wrote:
> While /dev/joe's amendments to the Blueprint rule was intended to make
> inconsistent Blueprints, like most Frankenstein Monsters, destroy
> themselves, I don't believe it did so in the case of Azpiazu, for the
> simple reason that R597 contains the sentence "This rule takes precedence
> over the Rules generally governing Blueprints."

Nothing in R597 states that the Blueprint for a Frankenstein Monster will
continue to exist indefinitely.  Indeed, the rule even provides one way for
the Blueprint to be destroyed (if the monster is ever destroyed, section xi).
Thus the precedence clause in R597 does not matter.

[The rest is mainly help for the judge.]
The relevant text from the current R594 is:

  Each Blueprint defines a different type of gadget.  This definition
  consists of naming the type of gadget and unambiguously describing the
  behavior of such a gadget.  [2nd paragraph, section (i)]

and

  When a Blueprint violates or conflicts with one or more Rules, the
  Blueprint is destroyed, as are any extant Gadgets made from that
  Blueprint. [start of section (ii)]

The blueprint in question is:

  All sentences that follow this one are, or describe, attributes
  of Azpiazu, and they conflict with this one.

which fails to describe the behavior of the Azpiazu at all.

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:23:03 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  P2148 accepted (A random walk through the rules.)

Come to IRC and waste some bandwidth :)

>         First, take all Runestone of Jukkasjarvi Fragments that are not
> owned by currently active players or vacationing players, and disperse
> them randomly amongst the currently active non-vacationing players.

RoJ 3 is transferred to /dev/joe
RoJ 6 is transferred to Rex Mundi
RoJ 11 is transferred to Karma
RoJ 14 is transferred to ThinMan
RoJ 15 is transferred to fnord
RoJ 17 is transferred to mr cwm
RoJ 18 is transferred to Niccolo Flychuck
RoJ 21 is transferred to Robert Sevin
 
>         Then transfer the trinkets that were transferred by rule 2079
> to Niccolo Flychuck, if there is such a player, and there are such
> trinkets.

RoJ 13 and 16 are transferred to Niccolo Flychuck.

RoJ ownership is at http://www.itw.com/~malenkai/ackabta9.htm
RoJ treasure is at http://www.itw.com/~malenkai/ackabta.htm#122

Malenkai
OICoRT
unoffcial treasure harfer

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:23:57 -0400
From: jordan james <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Treasure Trinkets

- -----Original Message-----
From:	Aaron Humphrey [SMTP:[email-masked]]
Sent:	Sunday, June 29, 1997 3:01 PM
To:	[email-masked]
Subject:	Re: Acka: Treasure Trinkets

> It is too much hassle to offer eight seperate auctions, so I am going to 
do
> it informally.  Each of the togas is hanging on a hook in my closet.  In
> order to find one, you must first come to my house (I hereby grant
> permision for any treasure finding hopeful to come to my house) and claim
> one.  If more than eight people come to my house and claim togas, we will
> play a couple rounds of ghost with the winner getting the toga.

Having admired Vynd's new Cheez-Whiz to my heart's delight, I make my way
over to snowgod's beach cottage, eager to don(or at least obtain, since
they're not Garments or anything)a Treasure Toga.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Current Album--Icehouse:Man of Colours
Current Book--Colin MacInnes:Absolute Beginners
A sine curve goes off to infinity or at least the end of the blackboard.

Being everything short of exiled 'cuz of my email gizz (sorry vynd, and 
again sorry to all I'm doing my best) I hesd down to snowgods to seek a 
treasure toga, I'm looking forward to getting in touch with my sensitive 
side and I heard those togas make u feel sexy! I meander to snowgod's

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 22:08:37 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Gadgets

In continued compliance with the Destination Moon rule, I am
building a Silver Spaceship.  It will be done in 3 days.

I am also bidding A$10 on the Cheez-Whiz.

Malenkai

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:03:32 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Points 'n' Stuff

Firstly, I note that we just had a Chrome Streak, broken by one of my
proposals.  Not that I'm bitter.  :-)

Secondly, I don't know if the breadbox/Malenkai duel result scores have
been entered.  Not that it's going to affect my score any, of course...

Thirdly, while the Whamiols may have been triggered by AZTEC GOD's voting,
since I believe the Whammy Oil proposal passed, they should only be
yielding 7 points each, since they were last triggered on the 22nd by Rex
Mundi.

Fourthly, Guy Fawkes seems to have 9 Bonus Votes...

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Current Song--Alison Moyet:Take of Me
Current Book--Colin MacInnes:Absolute Beginners
"And it was Monday!  Magazine day!  Nearly put the son of a bitch in a coma!"
      ["Einstein & The Polar Bear"]

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

Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 00:08:08 -0400
From: Jazz Jackrabbit <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Potato + Aliens

AZTEC GOD has found the Magic Potato.

Alien rolls:

1512
1512 (again)
1075

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 00:41:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: retraction (acrobot)

#retract proposal 2188

I did it again... sigh.

                                  - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #170
*******************************