Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #355
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest       Monday, November 3 1997       Volume 02 : Number 355

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 08:41:17 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2341 rejected

> 
> Could people please let me know why they voted against this one?
> 
I probably don't have a good reason, so you can blame me if you like.  The
problem with huge rule-reforming proposals is the basic idea that if it's
not broken, don't fix it.  I guess I didn't see a real need for the
proposal and it didn't seem to add anything really new to the game.  I
might have voted yes on it if I had had time to really go into all of the
details, but that is the second problem with it.  It was just too long and
tried to do to much stuff.  Finally, if there had been more support on it
from the other players, I would have probably abstained instead of voting
no.  That is what I did with the complex chess/swingers rule that went by a
little while ago.  These may not be good reasons, but I thought you
deserved an answer to your question.

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 09:21:07 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: return

I hereby return from vacation.

ThinMan

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 09:31:03 -0500
From: "Bollinger, John C." <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Proposal 2341 rejected

Niccolo Flychuck wrote:

> Could people please let me know why they voted against this one?
> 
> After the RFC there were some objections raised. I left the
> objectionable
> material out, took the time to point it out in a commment before the
> proposal. 
> Anyone?
> 
You did not leave out all the material to which I objected.  It
probably would have been difficult to do so, because I pretty much
objected to your whole approach.  After having voiced my concerns in
the RFC stage, I decided to simply vote against the proposal.  I also
decided not to take any extraordinary measures to attempt to defeat
the proposal.

ThinMan

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 16:34:24 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : An unofficial report from an ex Chess Umpire

Just before I quite the office of Chess Umpire, I left some thing a bit
off. So this is the report I would have posted had I not left that office,
and I post it here for the benefit of the next Chess Umpire. Over the next
day or so I will go over my old logs and correct any necessary
information, for the sake of a smooth transfer of office.
The Party Chess ammendments that were recently accepted should make for a
slightly different style of game, a bit faster, more dynamic. 

Niccolo Flychuck

- ---------------------------------
The next Swinger to play is the Vulcan Swinger. The turn will start as
soon the Chess Umpire anounces it. The turn will end three days later.

The current Swinger Play List:

Vulcan 		/dev/joe

MetaMorph	!WARM!

(None Yet)	!WARM! (for 2nd round)

HARF		!WARM! (for 2nd round)

NAP 		Red Barn

TARZAN's Tree House   Niccolo Flychuck

Ben's Office    !WARM! (for 1st round)

RoundCount=17

                        
Swinger   Party  Weight        off-board                  on-board

Red Barn    NAP      42            			  King, 1 Camel 
		               2 CopyCat, 		  1 Rook	   
                               1 Echo, 5 pawns  	  1 il-Nabi              

Mohammed  (None Yet) 69.5       4 pawns 		   King
		        	1 kamikaze    	    	   1 Rook, 1 Jester
			       	1 il-Nabi	           1  Bishop,1 Camel
			       				   1 CopyCat, 2 Demon
								
/dev/joe   Vulcan    92           			   King
			        	             	   2 Bishop, 1 Rook
	        	       1 Copycat,	   	   2 Camel
			       1 Jester		 	   1 il-Nabi
			       5 pawns, 1 Qball

Bascule   Harf      0            King			   
			        3 Rooks, 3 pawns
				1 Bishop

Niccolo	Tarzan's		1 King, 		     1 Rook
FlychuckTree house 0 		1 Copycat, 1 Archer
				1 Kamikaze, 1 Pawn

Ben		   0		1 King, 2 Rook,		     1 Pawn
Party Board			1 Archer, 1 Bishop
				1 il-Nabi, 1 Demon
				4 Pawns, 1 harfyblob
				1 kamikaze.

  |a |b |c |d |e |f |g |h |i |j |k |l |m |n |o |p |q |r |s |t |

- ---------------------------------------------------------------
20|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |NC|  |  |  |NO|20
  |------------------------------------------------------------
19|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |19
  |------------------------------------------------------------
18|  |  |  |  |  |VK|  |  |  |  |  |VB|  |TR|  |  |  |ND|  |  |18
  |------------------------------------------------------------
17|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |17
  |------------------------------------------------------------
16|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |VB|  |  |  |ND|  |  |16
  |------------------------------------------------------------
15|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |VM|  |  |  |  |  |  |VC|  |  |  |  |  |15
  |------------------------------------------------------------
14|  |  |  |  |NR|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |14
  |------------------------------------------------------------
13|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |13
  |------------------------------------------------------------
12|  |  |  |  |  |VR|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |VC|  |  |  |12
  |------------------------------------------------------------
11|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |11
  |------------------------------------------------------------
10|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |10
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 9|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 9
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 8|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |NK| 8
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 7|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 6|  |  |NJ|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |NB|  |  |  |  | 6
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 5|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 4|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |*C|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |*R|  | 4
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 3|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 2|  |BP|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2
  |------------------------------------------------------------
 1|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |*M|  |*K|  |  | 1
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
  |a |b |c |d |e |f |g |h |i |j |k |l |m |n |o |p |q |r |s |t |

Party Chess web-page http://www.actcom.co.il/~bruck/PartyChess/

Niccolo Flychuck
ex Chess-Umpire

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 10:47:13 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: *ping*

To:   Ackanomians
From: mr cwm, Scholar of *ping*

Today is Monday, the 3rd of November, and the Machine that Goes *ping* Has
Gone *ping* today.  Since I have been Scholar, the Machine has gone *ping*
5 times.

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 15:58:30 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : An unofficial report from an ex Chess Umpire

On Mon, 3 Nov 1997, Uri Bruck wrote:

> The next Swinger to play is the Vulcan Swinger. The turn will start as
> soon the Chess Umpire anounces it. The turn will end three days later.
> 
> The current Swinger Play List:
> 
> 
> Vulcan 		/dev/joe
> MetaMorph	!WARM!
> (None Yet)	!WARM! (for 2nd round)
> HARF		!WARM! (for 2nd round)
> NAP 		Red Barn
> TARZAN's Tree House   Niccolo Flychuck
> Ben's Office    !WARM! (for 1st round)
I believe that the formation of SPAM as a Political Party, and my
"appointment" as its Swinger entitles me to join the game (in fact
automatically puts me in the game).  I will have to email the Chess Umpire
with my choice of initial pieces, but nonetheless am I right in thinking
that I should be put on the bottom of this list?

Yours,
Slakko

Duncan C. Richer -- aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother -- Now Really Lost!
Queens' College  -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory --  Cambridge University
"Equipment malfunction." "Well, whack it." -- Obscure P&TB Quote
CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS, CUANZSS, Archimedeans, CUDipSoc, how do I study?

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 12:34:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 2341 rejected

> Finally, if there had been more support on it from the other players,
> I would have probably abstained instead of voting no.

Please remember that if you wish to simply not voice an opinion on a
proposal, you should vote Present rather than abstaining. The only
difference between the two is that the latter can cause a quorum
failure. This event is not the crisis it once was, but still. And we
have come very close to having one, thanks to all the lurkers with
voting status.

Unless you have a specific reason for wanting a quorum failure, you
should vote Present rather than abstaining.

breadbox

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

Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:09:49 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Ackaphysicist

The following have volunteered for Ackaphysicist.  Reply
to vote:

Alfvaen
Niccolo Flychuck
Red Barn

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

Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:19:23 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them Entities

> I am calling an Auction them Entities Hearing for one of the 100 BPWaynes
> that are cruelly and unfairly languishing in the Treasury.  Mainly just to
> illustrate that it could take a long time to empty the Treasury this way,
> and be a pain for the Count Tabula.  But it's a start.

The responses are:

"Auction that Precious Antique"
"Leave that junk in the Warehouse"

Reply to vote

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

Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:39:07 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 467 (Balsamic Dragon)

Balsamic Dragon has been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 467
  Subject: On Ice
Initiator: Alfvaen
Submitted: 97-11-02 16:39
    Judge: Balsamic Dragon (selected 97-11-03 19:39 EST)
Judgement: 

Statement:

norpan was not On Ice on October 31st.

Alfvaen's Reasoning:

This is the question that P2343 is designed to render moot, but I'd like to
have the matter cleared up before then, since it has potential game effects
(i.e. it affects the date norpan can be removed from the game if e does not
return), and the Proposal probably won't fix that.  (Maybe I should have
put in some self-deleting text that would have done that...ah, well.)

norpan posted the following message on September 10, 1997:

   Due to an enourmous amount of work right now, I am putting myself
   on vacation.  I hope to be back in October.

Rule 255, "Vacationing", states the following:

   A player should specify the expected duration of their vacation. If
   the duration is not specified when they go on vacation, it is assumed
   to be 14 days. If the period specified is longer than 60 days, it is
   assumed, and recorded, as 60 days. If the period specified is shorter
   than 2 days, it is assumed, and recorded, as 2 days. It is a duty of
   the Registrar to keep a record of the expected duration of vacationing
   players.

and

   If a player is still on vacation when their expected duration expires,
   they are put "on ice", and it is a duty of the Registrar to announce
   this fact publically. A player on ice is still considered a
   vacationing player, and their on ice status is removed at the same
   time they return from, or are removed, from vacation.

The question is whether or not norpan specified the expected duration of
eir vacation, and, if so, what that duration was.

If norpan did not specify the duration, then the EDR was set to September
24th, and e became "On Ice" on the 25th.  [BTW, I have always assumed that
Vacation return times were not specified any more finely than to the day,
so that a person would not become "On Ice" until the very beginning of the
day following the EDR.]  In this case, the CFJ should be ruled as FALSE.

If "I hope to be back in October" is to be interpreted as specifying a date
of return, there seem to be two possible dates specified: October 1st(as in
"I hope to be back at the beginning of October")and October 31st(as in "I
hope to be back by the end of October").  The CFJ should be FALSE in the
first case, and TRUE in the second case.

I have been harfing according to the last case, and P2343 is based on that
assumption as well.  However, if it can be decided differently, it should
be settled now.

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

Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:39:38 -0400
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Potato

Karma has found the magic potato

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

Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 00:51:34 -0000
From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: The Rex Times, vol. 18 no. 8

The Flora Amanita should be findable fairly soon... We've published a few
clues now, and it shouldn't be monstrously difficult for any REM fans.

In other news, I got engaged today. Woohoo!

Rex Mundi.

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

Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 23:45:15 -0500
From: "Michael James" <[email-masked]>
Subject: re acka congrats

In other news, I got engaged today. Woohoo!

Rex Mundi
congratulations, I hope to hear about the party in the paper too:)
- - Karma

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #355
*******************************