Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #212
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest        Tuesday, July 22 1997        Volume 02 : Number 212

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 18:11:12 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Land Purchase

> That reminds me...any other volunteers to be Map-Harfer? 

Well, yes, eventually, once I get my own server on-line, and get a bit
more adept with VRML.  For now, if it requires cgi, I cannot do it;
if it does not, I'll be willing to throw it on itw's server for
a while.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 18:13:57 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2256

> What happens to the keys if the rule is repealed? I assume they stick
> around-- the badges of many thanks (and possibly the pulse shovel) are
> precedent-- but they would not remain tradeable.

A CFJ numbered between 160 and 169 (I forget the exact #) established that
they stick around.  However, rule 500 says they are no longer *entities*,
because all entities must be defined in the rules (the pulse shovel is
not an entity either, by my reading of rule 500).  Given this reading,
the treasure map for the treasure that contains the silver key will be
destroyed, although some key-like concept may sit out there buried.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 15:12:18 -0700
From: Alexandre Muniz <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Land Purchase

Aaron Humphrey wrote:
> 
> > I am purchasing the following kaas of land.  L6, L7, L8, L9 for the
> > current price of A$48.454 each, or a total of A$193.816.
> >
> > #award Techno, -194:Land Purchase - L6,L7,L8,L9
> 
> I think that Malenkai put through a Proposal that changed the price of land
> to A$50, in perpetuity...
> 
> That reminds me...any other volunteers to be Map-Harfer?  I can probably
> do it(at least, provide a current Map to the Web-Harfer, etc.), but it's
> more or less official now that Terranet will no longer be a going concern
> in a little while, so my web page access will soon be limited.  (I suppose
> I will still be able to put up a little bit of Web stuff, as long as
> there's no CGI's...)
> 

I think my attempt to break into Cow-town from Sunflare's property is a
testament to my knowledge of Acka-Geography, (if not the rules). I have
my 5 megs and a mule to harf the map on, and I can do html. I promise
that as map-harfer I would take an activist approach, and extend the map
to Acka's Moons and beyond, and to prove my worthinees I will make a map
of Acka's Moons shortly. (Just Kansas, right?)

(that is to say, I volunteer)

**two-star

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:04:44 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 437 (Rex Mundi)

Rex Mundi has been selected.

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

Call For Judgment 437
  Subject: Similarity II
Initiator: Malenkai
    Judge: Mr Lunatic Fringe (declined)
2nd Judge: Karma (declined)
3rd Judge: Rex Mundi (selected Jul 21, 1997, 19:04h EDT)
Judgement:

Statement:

It cannot be determined with finality whether the Church of Seleya is
eligible for a Seat in the Synod.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

This is not a PWCFJ, although it could easily be reworded to be.  Its
the situations, and not the wins, that I find intersting, and by making
winning *not* an outcome, the air can be cleared.  This is just for
fun.

Rule 1303, section 10b, says:

> b. A Church is not eligible for a Seat in the Synod if the total M
> Similarities with all the Churches which are members of the Synod is
> equal to or greater than 80.

CFJ 429 established that self-similarity was undefined.  This rule
establishes eligibility based on, in part, a test that involved calculation
of self-similarity.  Thus the eligibilty cannot be determined with
finality.  What than means, I'll leave to someone else to decide.

Note that none of the other churches, indeed any church, is eligible
either.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:23:51 EDT 
From: [email-masked] (Ed  Graham)
Subject: Acka: OUCH!!

In the middle of downloading today's mail,  My system took a dump from a
nearby lightning strike.  Everything's OK,  but I lost power just as the
mail was being processed.  Therefore,  I have not recieved anything from
Acka in the last 24 hors.  Couls someone please send me an update????

Voting Gnome business like shoe business

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:24:51 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 138 Verdict

CFCJ 138 has been judged TRUE.  A 317 point penalty will be applied in
3 days.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Criminal Judgement 138
  Subject: Big Tenant
Initiator: Mohammed
    Judge: AZTEC G0D (declined)
2nd Judge: Guy Fawkes (selected Jul 14, 1997, 19:10h EDT)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

Robert Sevin has committed a Crime.

Mohammed's Reasoning:

Rule 1009 (Big Tents and Rewarding Party Unity) says:

> An Organization that has a Big Tent is called a Political Party. It
> is a Crime to be a member of more than one Political Party at once.

Robert Sevin is a member of both Metamorph and Harf, two Organizations
each of which owns a Big Tent.

Recommended Penalty:

A DEDUCTION of 10,000,000 points.

Guy Fawke's Reasoning:

Robert Sevin's criminal behavior is easy to verify.
The rules describe what he has obviously done as a Crime, and the
initiator has quoted the relavant section of the rules.

However, the suggested penalty seems slightly severe, especially in
light of Mr. Sevin's recent correction of his criminal status.  (Now,
were he to join yet another organization with a Big Tent, there would be
little doubt in my mind that the suggested penalty is appropriate.

Actual Penalty: 

a PENALTY of 317 points

Note that although this is by no means binding game custom, I would
suggest that future judges restrict their penalties in such situations
to prime amounts.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 00:54:58 +0100
From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Banking

I am going to the bank, and depositing everything I own.

#transfer Rex Mundi, RexBank: 84 A$
#transfer Rex Mundi, RexBank: Laundry Clean Disk(tm)
#transfer Rex Mundi, RexBank: Little Wooden Ship #6

And I am happy to accept these items for safe keeping on behalf of RexBank.

RexBank: we have a 100% customer satisfaction rate.

Rex Mundi.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 00:57:30 +0100
From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: org pages

How do I go about getting a listing for RexBank in the player orgs page?
What info do I need to send, and to who (whom?)?

Rex Mundi.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 01:00:54 +0100
From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Banking

> I am going to the bank, and depositing everything I own.
> 
Actually, now that I think about it...

#transfer RexBank, Rex Mundi: 5 A$
approved
#transfer RexBank, Rex Mundi: Laundry Clean Disk(tm)
approved
#transfer RexBank, Rex Mundi: Little Wooden Ship #6
approved.

I am asking GF Mini Storage to store these items for me. I will pay 5 A$
for this service.

Rex Mundi.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 20:25:30 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 141 Verdict

CFCJ 141 has been judged true, with penalization after a 3 day grace
period.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Criminal Judgement 141
  Subject: Malpractice
Initiator: Mr. Lunatic Fringe
    Judge: Rex Mundi (selected Jul 21, 1997, 00:37h EDT)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

Mr. Lunatic Fringe has commited a crime.

Mr. Lunatic Fringe's reasoning:

On June 26th, the senate reached a decision on the matter of internoic
proposal 342.  I, mistakenly, believed that the senate had not reached a
decision, and was acting under that impression when I abstained while
casting Ackanomic's vote in internomic.  If that isn't the crime of
malpractice, I don't know what is.

Suggested Penalty:

A PUBLIC APOLOGY of 92,000 or more lines by Mr. Lunatic Fringe

Rex Mundi's Reasoning:

Well, this seems to me to be valid, if CFCJ 140 was not submitted
correctly. The issue is then simply is MLF guilty of malpractice. Since he
certainly seems to have performed his duty incorrectly, I find him guilty.

Actual Penalty:

Tempting though it is to uphold the suggested penalty, it might be a little
impractical, so the actual penalty is a public apology of at least 92
lines, and a 92 A$ fine.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 20:56:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P342 Fallout

On 21 Jul 1997 [email-masked] wrote:
> AC>> Senate voting is regulated by rule 1001.
> AC>>
> AC>The Senate has a week long voting period.  However, to quote rule 1001
> AC>"Results may be announced before the alloted time ends, in which case the
> AC>voting period is over when those results are announced."  Thus, once all 4
> AC>Senators had voted, /dev/joe was within his rights to send out the
> AC>results.  Once those results were released, the voting period was over,
> AC>and my attempt to change my vote later was invalid.
> 
> This is interesting.  Since the Senate's internal functioning is
> unregulated by the Rules (a good thing, I think) it could be argued that
> any Senator may make this report on behalf of the Senate.  The fact that
> /dev/joe has taken over this duty over the past several months certainly
> doesn't mean that he alone may do it.  Anyway, since the rule doesn't
> say that to prematurely end the Senate's voting period, all Senators
> must vote, it appears that one Senator could vote, report the Senate
> voting results with his being the only vote, and bypass the rest of the
> Senate.

I realized this at the time, but I was hoping no one would notice... =)

                                   - Vynd

[email-masked]

> 
> Guy Fawkes
> 

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 20:10:23 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: OUCH!!

> In the middle of downloading today's mail,  My system took a dump from a
> nearby lightning strike.  Everything's OK,  but I lost power just as the
> mail was being processed.  Therefore,  I have not recieved anything from
> Acka in the last 24 hors.  Couls someone please send me an update????

We had some lightning here today, but luckily my computer wasn't on or
anything.  Our TV just went off in the middle of Red Dwarf.  :-)

I have found out fairly certainly that Terranet is disappearing, although
when depends entirely on the whim of our upstream internet feed...as such,
I have obtained a new account.  This'll be the first time in five and a half
years that I've had to pay for Net access.  :-/  Hopefully not for long,
since I also need a job, and the kind of job I'm looking for _should_
provide Net access...  Anyway, my new emali address should be
[email-masked], but I haven't tried it out yet, and this one is
still functional, so I'll wait a couple of days before shifting all my
operations over to it.

Oh, yeah, this is mostly non-Acka, but does anyone out there who can run
CGI on their Web Site want to host the vastly popular Random Band Name
Server?

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Current Album--Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman, Howe
Current Book--Robert Jordan:The Dragon Reborn
Pretend the needle thickens.  --lstewart

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 20:51:50 -0600 (MDT)
From: Aaron Humphrey <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Chalice & Agendas

Thinking of the Crystal Chalice rule, and Malenkai's Proposal to repeal
them...

I think one of the major problems with the Chalice rule as it now stands is
the simple fact that to find the Chalice you have, as far as I can tell, to
find the Treasure of Jukkasjarvi.  Which may or may not have been a good
idea, but, since that Treasure has yet to be found, apparently flawed.
Perhaps what is needed is just a new Chalice Divination rule.

Of course, I could be wrong there, too.  That rule is one that confuses me
almost as much as the Synod...:-)  Perhaps it's an interesting, but flawed,
idea.  Perhaps it deserves another chance.

I hate to mention this again, but...what remains to be done on Hidden
Agendas?  I've RFCed them a couple of times, and ideas have been tossed
around as to what they should consist of.  If the components of the Hidden
Agenda should be part of the same Rule(or same Proposal)as the description
of Hidden Agendas themselves, then we should work on them.  Otherwise I
could certainly just make up a HA Proposal in the next few days.  (Assuming
I make a smooth transition over to my new account...)  If there is no set
of Agenda Elements, I can include a clause like "if Agenda Elements are
defined" which will keep the Rule from working until those are set up.  Or
that could all be done unofficially by Malenkai.  I dunno...which way would
it work best?

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.terranet.ab.ca/~aaron/)
Current Album--Summers & Fripp:Bewitched
Current Book--Robert Jordan:The Dragon Reborn
By the pricking of my thumbs, a candle this way comes.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 23:10:37 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Chalice & Agendas

> I think one of the major problems with the Chalice rule as it now stands is
> the simple fact that to find the Chalice you have, as far as I can tell, to
> find the Treasure of Jukkasjarvi.  Which may or may not have been a good
> idea, but, since that Treasure has yet to be found, apparently flawed.
> Perhaps what is needed is just a new Chalice Divination rule.

I disagree.  The two are one in the same, and I think the idea fails
(not either implementation), or acka hasn't the time or the interest
in it.  Acka collectively knows the clues to find the RoJ treasure.  
Also, acka collectively owns the keys.  I see them both as the same
problem really.  One important difference is the JMCLs which were 
intended to dislodge dead fragments (thereby making RoJ easier), and
which there are, in theory, an infinite supply if proposal 2243 
fails.  I do not feel acquiring all the keys, in and of itself, should
be worth a win (assuming a trivial vault solution, such as the chewing
the gumball, which was once proposed).  -- BTW, due to the cycle ending,
one of the keys should be traded now.

> Of course, I could be wrong there, too.  That rule is one that confuses me
> almost as much as the Synod...:-)  Perhaps it's an interesting, but flawed,
> idea.  Perhaps it deserves another chance.

I think it is too complex.  I like the RoJ and HA ideas better.  I'm
not terribly opposed to the idea of giving it another chance, but if a
proposal to repeal it doesn't generate at least enough argument as to
why we should keep it, then I think we should dump it and try something
else.
 
> I hate to mention this again, but...what remains to be done on Hidden
> Agendas?  I've RFCed them a couple of times, and ideas have been tossed
> around as to what they should consist of.

I have definite ideas on how that should work, just not the time and
creativity (not necessarily in that order) to make it go.  I think its
a bigger project that it appears.  Feel free to make a go at it, but
its likely that I'll disagree with parts of it.  You can ignore me if
you want, but you should give me writer's credit if you actually propose
something, IMO.  I have provided alot of feedback to your comments
already (I think) :-)

> Or that could all be done unofficially by Malenkai.  I dunno...which way 
> would it work best?

I am certainly willing to harf it, if it gets off the ground.

Malenkai

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:30:01 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: One Less Observer 

I've unsubscribed [email-masked] from all the acka-lists he was subscribed to
at his request.  Looks like his time was at a premium and acka was too
expensive :)

BTW, is there any reason for me to post a message like this?  Does it make
life easier or harder on anyone.  Should I just drop them and be done with
it?

Mr. Lunatic Fringe
trying to get out of suicidal

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 23:01:52 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <devjoe>
Subject: Acka: Bond Dividends for July 21

The only scoring this bond cycle was one proposal that was rejected right
after Malenkai won the last cycle, and Mr. Lunatic Fringe lost one point
for a CFCJ retraction.  Various zeroes are omitted below.

Score changes used for bond cycle calculation:
- ----------------------------------------------
Alfvaen: 3
Calvin N Hobbes: -7
Guy Fawkes: 3
Malenkai: 3
Mr. Lunatic Fringe: 2
Rex Mundi: 3
Robert Sevin: 3
two-star: 3
Vynd: 3

Bond Dividends
- --------------
Alfvaen: 2.07  -->  69*3 + 10*0
Calvin N Hobbes: -3.5  -->  100*-7/2
Chaos: 0.45  -->  11*3 + 87*0 + 2*0 + 5*0 + 2*3 + 5*0 + 3*2 + 17*0
/dev/joe: 0.06  -->  90*0 + 2*3 + 15*0 + 10*0 + 45*0
fnord: 0.08  -->  1*0 + 2*0 + 93*0 + 1*0 + 1*2 + 1*3 + 1*3
Guy Fawkes: 2.25  -->  75*3
Malenkai: 2.37  -->  79*3
mr cwm: 0.15  -->  2*0 + 5*0 + 1*0 + 94*0 + 5*3 + 1*0
Mr. Lunatic Fringe: 1.11  -->  5*0 + 1*3 + 54*2 + 3*0 + 50*0
Niccolo Flychuck: 0.55  -->  5*3 + 5*0 + 2*0 + 5*0 + 5*3 + 5*2 + 50*0 + 5*0 + 5*3 + 5*0
Robert Sevin: 2.84  -->  1*0 + 1*3 + 10*2 + 85*3 + 2*3
Techno: 0.5  -->  25*2 + 30*0 + 30*0 + 30*0
ThinMan: 0.45  -->  5*3 + 10*3 + 89*0
two-star: 2.97  -->  5*0 + 1*0 + 1*0 + 99*3 + 5*0
Vynd: 2.94  -->  98*3
Ackers: 0.12  -->  4*3
Markovian Dream: 0.75  -->  25*3
Odo on the Wormhole: 0.3  -->  10*3
RexBank: 3.0  -->  100*3

You know, I had always theorized that it should be advantageous to own one
bond each of several different players for the one extra whole A$ you can
sometimes get, but I hadn't imagined this happening.  A$0.06, geez.

#award Alfvaen: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Calvin N Hobbes: -4 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Chaos: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award /dev/joe: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award fnord: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Guy Fawkes: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Malenkai: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award mr cwm: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Mr. Lunatic Fringe: 2 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Niccolo Flychuck: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Robert Sevin: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Techno: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award ThinMan: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award two-star: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Vynd: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Ackers: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Markovian Dream: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award Odo on the Wormhole: 1 A$ : dividend Jul 21
#award RexBank: 3 A$ : dividend Jul 21

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 00:01:19 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Bond Dividends for July 21

> The only scoring this bond cycle was one proposal that was rejected right
> after Malenkai won the last cycle, and Mr. Lunatic Fringe lost one point
> for a CFCJ retraction.  Various zeroes are omitted below.

I don't think CFCJ 140 ever existed.  If it did, then CFCJ 141 never
existed, being substantially similar to CFCJ 140.

Malenkai
Clerk of the Courts
Expert on the Justice System

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 00:38:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Chalice & Agendas

On Mon, 21 Jul 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> > I think one of the major problems with the Chalice rule as it now stands is
> > the simple fact that to find the Chalice you have, as far as I can tell, to
> > find the Treasure of Jukkasjarvi.  Which may or may not have been a good
> > idea, but, since that Treasure has yet to be found, apparently flawed.
> > Perhaps what is needed is just a new Chalice Divination rule.
> 
> I disagree.  The two are one in the same, and I think the idea fails
> (not either implementation), or acka hasn't the time or the interest
> in it.  Acka collectively knows the clues to find the RoJ treasure.  
> Also, acka collectively owns the keys.  I see them both as the same
> problem really.  One important difference is the JMCLs which were 
> intended to dislodge dead fragments (thereby making RoJ easier), and
> which there are, in theory, an infinite supply if proposal 2243 
> fails.  I do not feel acquiring all the keys, in and of itself, should
> be worth a win (assuming a trivial vault solution, such as the chewing
> the gumball, which was once proposed).  -- BTW, due to the cycle ending,
> one of the keys should be traded now.

I have to agree with Alfvaen on this one.  And with Malenkai, too.  The
Jukkasjarvi treasure is too hard to find, period.  I don't buy this "if
people were really interested, then they would have figured it out"
arguement for a second.  All of Ackas best treasure hunters have taken a
stab at it, many stabs, in some cases.  I would imagine that all of ackas
not very good treasure hunters have gone after it as well, I know I have,
but most of us never even got past puzzling over the clues.  At this
point, I don't think anyone will ever find that treasure.  For new
players, there's just too much to learn from scratch, too many screwball
messages, hints, clues, chaff, and then the fragments themselves.  The
established players, I think, have given it their best shots and have no
wshed their hands of it.

I never much liked the fact that the Golden Frog was just tucked away in a
treasure, especially one with this mind boggling behemoth of a treasure
map.  I can agree with Malenkai that perhaps simply getting the keys to
the vault together is too easy a task to merit a win, but it still isn't
exactly easy.  It would require a fair amount of time, effort, and guile.
Tacking on the treasure map just makes it even harder, I often think of it
as "Winning by treasure hunting" now, in my own twisted little head.
except of course, it isn't, it's winngng by treasure hnting AND getting
all the keys.

> 
> > Of course, I could be wrong there, too.  That rule is one that confuses me
> > almost as much as the Synod...:-)  Perhaps it's an interesting, but flawed,
> > idea.  Perhaps it deserves another chance.
> 
> I think it is too complex.  I like the RoJ and HA ideas better.  I'm
> not terribly opposed to the idea of giving it another chance, but if a
> proposal to repeal it doesn't generate at least enough argument as to
> why we should keep it, then I think we should dump it and try something
> else.
>  

Well, first off, I don't see why there is any rush to get rid of it.  The
keys can be kind of annoying, in that no one ever seems to track them
properly, but otherwise this is a pretty innocuous rule.  I havent seen
any attempts to win via palindrome (thank god), but we're not scrambling
to get that out of the ruleset are we?

Malenkai has complained at times that winning by points is too easy.  He
thinks that the Chalice is too easy to win by, without his treasure map
to make it harder.  Palindromes, well, lets not hold our breath.  To the
best of my knowledge, that leaves the Angry Villager, the End of the
World, and Paradox Wins.  I think that we should keep the Chalice if only
because it is really one of only a few options available right now for
winning the game.  If someone really did propose a new, how shall I put
it, quest-like, cycle winning system, and it was accepted, then maybe we
might decide we don't need the chalice.  Until that happens though, I
think it fills a niche in Acka that is worth keeping.  And for those of
you who think that it is too long and too complicated, so what?  Like all
the rules have to be extremely simple?  I think it's complexity is a point
in it's favor.  Who wants to try and write something that complicated to
tkae it's place (Alfvaen).  I don't think we shuld throw out this
potential Rube Goldberg masterpiece before it has ever even really been
put to the test.

I'd like to see the Chailce rule stick around, obviously.  what I think
should go is this treasure business.  Furthermore, I don't like the fact
that the Golden Frog is just a big old trinket with the right name.  I say
ditch the treasure, and give the Frog a new home and better definition in
the rules.

> > I hate to mention this again, but...what remains to be done on Hidden
> > Agendas?  I've RFCed them a couple of times, and ideas have been tossed
> > around as to what they should consist of.
> 
> I have definite ideas on how that should work, just not the time and
> creativity (not necessarily in that order) to make it go.  I think its
> a bigger project that it appears.  Feel free to make a go at it, but
> its likely that I'll disagree with parts of it.  You can ignore me if
> you want, but you should give me writer's credit if you actually propose
> something, IMO.  I have provided alot of feedback to your comments
> already (I think) :-)
> 

I agree with Malenkai that this would be a very difficult, complicated
project, much like I imagine writting the Chalice rule must ahve been
like.  We've been kicking the idea around for quite some time though, and
most everyone seems to like the concept, so if you think your up to it
Alfvaen, I'd say go for it.  Whatever you write, it'll probably need lots
of ammendments (assuming it passes), but I think that's true of most
anything really ambitious in Acka.

So far as actual suggestions go, I kind of liked the whole alignments
thing that was getting kicked around before as well.  I can't remember who
was really pushing the idea, but maybe you two can whomp something up
together (unless the other guy wsa actually you, of course).  Another
possibility might be to allow every organiztion over a certain size to
have some sort of secret goal, perhaps selected from a pre-approved list,
perhaps developed themselves and approved by some sort of, um, Illuminatus
type group, which it's membrs could them try to fulfill.  This would be
especially appropriate for Churches, in my opinion (Our goal...  to spread
the one true faith to all ends of Acka, by building temples on each corner
of the map!).  In any case, good luck with it.

> > Or that could all be done unofficially by Malenkai.  I dunno...which way 
> > would it work best?
> 
> I am certainly willing to harf it, if it gets off the ground.
> 
> Malenkai
> 

                           - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 22:56:44 -0600 
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: A New Me

Okay, I'm sending this from my new account.  Anyone who's not 100% convinced
that it's me can ask me for something private...:-)  The address is
[email-masked] (you can tell I got to choose it myself...:-),
which should be moderately easy to remember.  I suppose I'll be subscribing
to all the mailing lists from here...my only trepidation so far is that the
setup here doesn't seem to allow the obtaining of mail without a POP
client, and I don't know if I have one of those for when I'm logged on in
Linux.  (Anyone who knows of a good POP client for Linux, let me know.)
Otherwise, I'll only be able to read email in Windows, and that's just a
bit unacceptable.  (If I have to, I'll hack one up myself in Perl.  I've
got the RFC's around somewhere...)

Anyway.  I would like to request that my old email address be changed to
this one in all places where it occurs, and, as I said, the mailing lists
I'll do myself.  I'll have mail forwarding set up at Terranet as long as
that stays up...

- --
- --Alfvaen (No web page set up yet)
Current Album--Ray Stevens:I Have Returned
Current Book--Robert Jordan:The Dragon Reborn
[Random tagline generator program temporarily unavailable]

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #212
*******************************