Subject: Ackanomic Digest V2 #219
From: [email-masked] (Ackanomic Digest)
To: ackanomic-digest

Ackanomic Digest         Sunday, July 27 1997         Volume 02 : Number 219

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

Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 21:44:04 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Request for explanation 

>
>I am hereby requesting an explanation of the terms "Aarimakat",
>"ruwopeki", "inkelika", and "dodobykiykipoombah" from the Church of
>the Markovian Dream, in accordance with section 5c of rule 1301.
>

The terms are part of a language, a secret language if you will
decipherable only by Markovians, so far :).  It is a language with real
grammer and vocabulary (two forms, both the High and the Low) forms.  The
language is known to its practitioners as Eldurian.

I must do a little consulting on a few of the terms, I admit that since CnH
went on vacation and Bascule left the church, my Eldurian is a little rusty.

Arimakat, though, I can tell you.  An arimikat is a player, a point
gatherer.  Aarimkat is its plural form.

Mr. Luanatic Fringe
hjaarfArimikat

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

Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 21:38:28 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: More Offices 

>The simplest way for you to devote this space is to keep the old proposal
>and cfj archives.  The officer who keeps the more recent pages can keep a
>menu of the archives (like mine) and just link them in, transferring a
>new block of files to you every few months.  I can prepare a package of
>web pages for this use, fixing most links that would break, so that you
>can download it from wilma and plop the whole thing in your html directory
>on your ISP.  Let me know what type of access you have to your web space
>(shell access, ftp only, etc.) and I can set it up appropriately (if you
>have shell access I can make a tar archive -- one big file to transfer
>instead of dozens of little ones, and one easy command to unpack, and
>you can go directly from your ISP to wilma instead of making the slow
>trip across your modem twice).

I have complete shell access to my ISP, as well as FTP access.  I think the
only thing I CANT do from my ISP shell is initiate a ping (but I can from
my own Mac, hmm).  However, I don't know to much about how to use it.  I
know how to use the shell FTP client, and the IRC client, and telnet and
PINE, and lynx, and things like that, but beyond that someone would have to
give me instructions.

Also, I have a VMS account at school (which I rarely use) and I think I
have about a meg of quota there.  I would have no probalem actually handing
over my password to that one (as long as I handed it to someone I could
trust) because I never use it.  However, that is in violation of School
policy (I think) so I better think about it (BTW - It's
[email-masked] if anyopne ever needs to reach me with an alternate
method).

I have abn account on one of IdiotBoy's computers, too, that he says I can
use for whatever I want, but I have never closely examined the thing to see
what it will do.

Mr. Lunatic Fringe

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 12:00:49 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 411 Verdict

CFJ 441 has been judged TRUE.

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

Call For Judgment 441
  Subject: brain-stoppingly obvious
Initiator: Alfvaen
    Judge: /dev/joe (selected Jul 25, 1997, 22:00h EDT)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

It is permissible for Church Policy to force a Church member to leave a
Church.

Alfvaen's Reasoning:

Rule 1301 says that Church Policy cannot prevent a Church member from
leaving, but it says nothing about the converse.  Rule 1003 is similarly
silent on the matter.  Therefore, I would assume that it is permissible,
since Church Policy is allowed to regulate admission policies, and hence by
implication the membership of the Church in general, with the single
restriction already mentioned.

This may be brain-stoppingly obvious, but I'd still like it cleared up.

/dev/joe's Reasoning:

I begin by noting that there is weak precedent for a TRUE verdict by
CFJ 140, but the rules in this area have changed so much since then
that I feel an examination of the current rules is in order.  (That CFJ
actually concerned parties; churches didn't exist yet.  Sorry that
that CFJ's reasoning doesn't describe the situation more; Mohammed tried
to join FOOZBALL against their will and they tried to throw him out.)

The content of church policy is only regulated by a few sections of R1301.
By section 3d, church policy can only change according to church policy.
By section 3f, it cannot take the power to ordain priests away from
the founder, nor give that power to anyone else.
By section 3g, it cannot prevent a member from leaving a church.

There are a few other places where Church Policy is mentioned, but none of
them restrict its content or effect.  I do note, though, that except for
a couple definitions -- most senior priest, methods for pristhood making
decisions, methods for accepting new members, and methods of managing the
church's policy and assets -- which are explicitly referenced, the only
power given to church policy is section 3c, which makes it a crime
(Iconoclasm) for a member of a church to disobey the church's policy, and
makes it impermissible for a player to take an action which violates church
policy (though Iconoclasm can still occur by inaction).

Thus, though it is permissible for church policy to require a member to
leave the church, if that member does not do so, he is guilty of
Iconoclasm and still a member of the church.  Perhaps "removal from
an organization" should be added to the list of possible penalties
in Rule 710.

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 12:48:41 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: P 2242

I am still rather out of touch, but on checking the
voting digest, I see myself listed as not voting on
P2242.  On Thursday I attempted to designate /dev/joe
as my voting proxy.  Did this fail for some reason?
If it was successful, then my one additional vote
against P2242 would be enough to reject it.

ThinMan

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 12:42:24 -0600 (MDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: P 2242

> I am still rather out of touch, but on checking the
> voting digest, I see myself listed as not voting on
> P2242.  On Thursday I attempted to designate /dev/joe
> as my voting proxy.  Did this fail for some reason?
> If it was successful, then my one additional vote
> against P2242 would be enough to reject it.

Rule 106 states that to define a Proxy, "A Voting Player must send a
message to the Tabulator stating who will be their proxy".  Whether a
public message qualifies as sending to the Tabulator or not, I'm not sure.
However, considering that, I believe, a publicly posted Proposal is
considered to be sent to the Promoter and can thereby be distributed(I
think that's what happened with "Wich Which", and I seem to recall from the
mail logs seeing some from Clairence as well), I don't see why this
wouldn't have worked.  Unfortunately for my proposal.  :-/

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Song--Icehouse:Hey Little Girl
Current Book--Joel Rosenberg:The Silver Stone
A splash and hiss beyond my measuring

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 15:31:36 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: P 2242

> Rule 106 states that to define a Proxy, "A Voting Player must send a
> message to the Tabulator stating who will be their proxy".  Whether a
> public message qualifies as sending to the Tabulator or not, I'm not sure.

A message is considered sent to all people it was sent to :-) we've been
doing it that way forever.  An interesting question would be, however,
if the officer was not subscribed to the list, and that non-subscription
was not publically knowable (even though it was a crime).

Malenkai
interpreting the rules with common sense forever ;-)

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 22:56:42 +0100
From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: *ping*

I had a very strange dream last night.

When I awoke, all I could remember (apart from the hedgehog, but I'm not
going to talk about _that_ (shudder)) was this great truth imparted to me
by the Machine That Goes *ping*:

IF AND ONLY IF today *** * **** ***** ****** **** *** ******* * ** *, THEN
the Machine That Goes *ping* shall go *ping*.

Rex Mundi.
Scholar of *ping*

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 21:50:46 EDT 
From: [email-masked] (Ed  Graham)
Subject: Acka:  from the digest

It has been a long day,  and appears to be a longer evening ahead,  so I
will try to get everything in one post.

First:  to Malenkai,  I'm not trying to be unreasonable nor a
"pretzel-bender".  If the Rules are interpreted to prevent my being the
Ambassador,  so be it;  no skin off my shins.  I just thought I saw a
couple of tiny loopholes that I could take advantage of and increase the
fun of this game.  The other possible loophole was the failure in
Internomic to specify that Liason Players could not have identical names.
 (As a matter of fact,  I was at one time hoping to rejoin Pumpkin Patch
and become their GRAPE with the same name.)  Only having access at this
time to a hopelessly outdate copy of Rule 419 (and it being 150 miles
away as I write this),  I would never question the wording of the Rules
as put forth by you,  Karma,  or the Supreme Court.  But at the same
time,  I think the specific wording of R419 could use a little
examination.  I have expended my arguments in this area,  and if the
ruling goes against my being able to become the Ambassador,  I shall wish
you,  or whoever ultimately gets the job a hearty good luck.

Second:  for Karma,  and a possible explanation to Malenkai for my even
attempting to gain the Ambassadorship.  My reasons for registering as
Non-Voting were essentially two-fold.  First,  the Rules allowed it and
no-one else was doing it.  Second,  immediately after being challenged to
a pseudo-Duel by Robert Sevin while still an Observer,  I began to wonder
how much the Gamestate could be affected by a NVP.  So far,  not overly
much,  except for the use of my whamiols and participation in Auctions. 
Also,  as we just found out recently (my thanks to you for a wonderful
job BTW) NVP *can*  submit CFJ's and CFCJ's.  I might just have a lot of
fun with this area alone,  especially since I can't be picked as a
judge.:)

Third:  a quick note to the Supreme Court;  I am *not* fanatical about
becoming the Ambassador to Internomic.  I have no true feelings about my
CFJ in the slightest,  I am just trying to identify and manipulate a
possible loophole  I found in my copy of the Ruleset,  not create one. 
Please feel free to consider Malenkai's Expert argument against my
Reasoning  without rebutal from me.

Voting Gnome sugar tonight in my coffee

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 18:08:19 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: New OS 

Righ after I hit thge "Queue" button and send send this peice of mail off
into the oblivion, I will begin installing Mac OS 8 into my system.  Just
wanted to post a message letting you guys know in case something terible
happens (what are the odds? :) and I drop offline for a while.

Wish me luck.

Mr. Lujnatic Fringe

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 18:23:13 -0900
From: Phil Ackley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Freeze 

Antimatter did not return form his vacation on the 24th, and is on Ice.
Darth Vader was R271'd on ice.

Mr. Lunatic Fringe
Registrar

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

Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 00:04:07 -0400
From: jordan james <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka:  from the digest

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC9A20.9B2BC820
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

- -----Original Message-----
From:	Ed  Graham [SMTP:[email-masked]]
Sent:	Saturday, July 26, 1997 9:51 PM
To:	[email-masked]
Subject:	Acka:  from the digest

It has been a long day,  and appears to be a longer evening ahead,  so I
will try to get everything in one post.

First:  to Malenkai,  I'm not trying to be unreasonable nor a
"pretzel-bender".  If the Rules are interpreted to prevent my being the
Ambassador,  so be it;  no skin off my shins.  I just thought I saw a
couple of tiny loopholes that I could take advantage of and increase the
fun of this game.  The other possible loophole was the failure in
Internomic to specify that Liason Players could not have identical names.
 (As a matter of fact,  I was at one time hoping to rejoin Pumpkin Patch
and become their GRAPE with the same name.)  Only having access at this
time to a hopelessly outdate copy of Rule 419 (and it being 150 miles
away as I write this),  I would never question the wording of the Rules
as put forth by you,  Karma,  or the Supreme Court.  But at the same
time,  I think the specific wording of R419 could use a little
examination.  I have expended my arguments in this area,  and if the
ruling goes against my being able to become the Ambassador,  I shall wish
you,  or whoever ultimately gets the job a hearty good luck.

Second:  for Karma,  and a possible explanation to Malenkai for my even
attempting to gain the Ambassadorship.  My reasons for registering as
Non-Voting were essentially two-fold.  First,  the Rules allowed it and
no-one else was doing it.  Second,  immediately after being challenged to
a pseudo-Duel by Robert Sevin while still an Observer,  I began to wonder
how much the Gamestate could be affected by a NVP.  So far,  not overly
much,  except for the use of my whamiols and participation in Auctions. 
Also,  as we just found out recently (my thanks to you for a wonderful
job BTW) NVP *can*  submit CFJ's and CFCJ's.  I might just have a lot of
fun with this area alone,  especially since I can't be picked as a
judge.:)

Third:  a quick note to the Supreme Court;  I am *not* fanatical about
becoming the Ambassador to Internomic.  I have no true feelings about my
CFJ in the slightest,  I am just trying to identify and manipulate a
possible loophole  I found in my copy of the Ruleset,  not create one. 
Please feel free to consider Malenkai's Expert argument against my
Reasoning  without rebutal from me.

Voting Gnome sugar tonight in my coffee
Well that puts things into perspective thanx gnome
- -karma

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC9A20.9B2BC820
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC9A20.9B2BC820--

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

End of Ackanomic Digest V2 #219
*******************************