Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #412
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest       Friday, December 12 1997       Volume 02 : Number 412

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 07:38:27
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Congratulations!

WARNING: contains a rant

It seems to me that the recent presidential election was either :

<Rant> A conspiracy to perpetuate institutionalised corruption, or </Rant>
A resounding win (no pun intended) for a truly inspired leader.

After weighing up the matter, I have come to the conclusion that this was
not a conspiracy (but I reserve the right to change my mind...)

Congratulations Alfvaen, the more experienced and capable entity won.

With that in mind I eagerly await my next humiliating defeat in 8 weeks
time....

"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken
seriously" Hubert Humphrey

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 19:34:29 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 485 (/dev/joe)

CFJ 485 has been assigned to /dev/joe.  Note that I do not
believe this has (or will in a few seconds) been retracted
per rule 373, but a judge can always convince me otherwise :)

IAC, the game state will be harfed as if it was not retracted.
Also, assuming I will distribute them in the order you sent
them to me seems like risky strategy :)

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 485
  Subject: Similar to CFJ 394
Initiator: Slakko
Submitted: 97-12-12 17:21
    Judge: /dev/joe (selected 97-12-12 19:32)
Judgement: 

Statement:

A Judge delivering a verdict of TRUE on a CFCJ whose statement was "Slakko
has committed a Crime" is a player action affecting the game
      state which appears equally legal and illegal.

Slakko's Reasoning:

Liar's Paradox.  Neither true nor false implies false implies true implies
false implies true....

This is a Paradox Win CFJ.

Note that it is similar to CFJ 394, but excludes the possibility of a
stable verdict other than true or false.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 19:38:57 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 486 (The Gingham Wearer)

CFJ 486 has been assigned to The Gingham Wearer

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 486
  Subject: Ruling UNDECIDED
Initiator: Slakko
Submitted: 97-12-12 17:53
    Judge: The Gingham Wearer (selected 97-12-12 19:38)
Judgement: 

Statement:

The Supreme Court can never issue a ruling other than UNDECIDED on a
CFCJ that "Slakko has committed a Crime", provided that Slakko does not
commit any Crimes after the submission of this CFJ.

Slakko's Reasoning:

>From CFJ 406 we have that any CFCJs on the basis of Slakko's attempt to
recreate the Liar Paradox in his public actions of December 12 1997 must
be ruled UNDECIDED.

Rule 214 states that:

If the Judgement is Undecided then the CFJ shall be decided by the Supreme
Court as if it had been appealed, except that the original Judge shall not
be penalized for an overturned verdict on that CFJ. 

Rule 710 states that:
Except as detailed in this rule, it shall be like the Call for Judgement
in all ways, including how it is submitted, how judges are selected, how
it is appealed, etc. Any changes to the CFJ procedure will automatically
be "inherited" by the CFCJ procedure when they do not contradict the
exceptions detailed in this rule. 

No such contradiction occurs regarding Supreme Court Appeals.

Rule 217 states that:
After the fourth time a judgement has been returned on a single CFJ, it
may not be appealed further.

These two bits are "inherited" by Rule 710, but do not themselves apply to
CFCJs.  The statement of Rule 710 described above takes the sections on
CFJs which do not have analogues explicitly described in Rule 710, and
make them part of the CFCJ rules.  It does not mean that CFCJs are
beholden to Rules 214 or 217.

Therefore Rule 710 implicitly states that:

If the Judgement is Undecided then the CFJ shall be decided by the Supreme
Court as if it had been appealed, except that the original Judge shall not
be penalized for an overturned verdict on that CFJ. 

and also, with exactly the same priority (its authority derives from the
exact same sentence in Rule 710) that:

After the fourth time a judgement has been returned on a single CFJ, it
may not be appealed further.

All rulings on the CFCJ must be UNDECIDED in accordance with CFJ 406.
Therefore, the Supreme Court must decide the verdict as if it had been
appealed.  It may not be appealed more than four times, however.
Interestingly, though, decision of verdict _as if_ it had been appealed
does not constitute another appeal.  Therefore, all appeal limits are
ignored, and hence, no matter how many UNDECIDED verdicts The Supreme
Court issue, they must always decide the verdict again.

Slakko notes that this is a major problem.  He was looking for a paradox
win, and instead created an infinite loop.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 19:44:47 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Public Actions

On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Duncan Richer wrote:

> I hereby publish the following statement as an article of The Infrequent
> Ackan (being part of Volume 1, Issue 4):
> 
> This statement is false, and knowable, and can be determined as being
> either true or false, but not both.
> 
> 
> I hereby make a public request for the most recent statement published in
> The Infrequent Ackan to be corrected.
> 
> As the owner of The Infrequent Ackan, I refuse to issue a correction for
> the statement in The Infrequent Ackan for which a public request for
> correction was most recently issued. 
> 
> 
> -- Duncan "" Richer aka
> Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
> Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

Ugh, another one of these?

                                      - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 02:56:43 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 474 Appeal Verdict

On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, John Bollinger wrote:

> Slakko wrote,
> 
> >I must admit that I find it intriguing that the Supreme Court found that
> >a win is an object, despite the fact that nowhere in the rules are wins
> >described as entities.  I would be interested to hear from the Supreme
> >Court how they came to this conclusion in particular.  I would also like
> >to hear what the Supreme Court defines an object to be, if not an entity.
> 
> It was the best of a collection of rotten alternative interpretations.
> "Entity" may or may not be a subclass of "object."  There are certainly
> objects which are not entities; to wit: Pumpkin Patch Nomic.  The word

You mean the nomic, the organization of which malenkai is a member,
anything else?
I don't see either one of those as an object.

Niccolo Flychuck

> "object" is not overloaded by the Ackanomic rules as "entity" is.
> 
> 
> ThinMan
> Justice
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 21:30:08 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 147 Verdict

CFCJ 147 has been judged TRUE.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Criminal Judgment 147
  Subject: Partying
Initiator: two-star
Submitted: 97-12-09 20:28
    Judge: The Gingham Wearer (selected 97-12-09 20:41)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:

Malenkai has committed a crime.

two-star's reasoning:

Rule 1009 states: 
"It is a Crime to be a member of more than one Political Party at once."
On Tuesday, Decmber 9, 1997, Malenkai publically posted:
"I join SPAM, then denounce this action, then leave SPAM :-)"
Malenkai is also a member of the organization Vulcan. Both SPAM and
Vulcan own Big Tents, and are therefore political parties.

suggested penalty: the REMOVAL of Malenkai from the organization Vulcan.
[This may be completely ineffective, but appropriate to the
circumstances.]

The Gingham Wearer's Reasoning:

The statement under consideration is "Malenkai has committed a crime."
and is not "Malenkai is committing a crime." Rule 211 states:

"The judge is required only to consider the actual statement provided
and the game state."

Rule 215 states:

"All Judgements must be in accordance with all the rules in effect at
the time judgement was invoked, and with respect to the game state at
that time. 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.
"

The game state at the time the judgement was invoked was that Malenkai
was not committing a crime, however this is irrelevant since that is
not what is being judged. Therefore by rule 211 I should be considering
only the statement. By rule 215 I should also me making the judgement
in accordance with the rules, however, the rules are unclear as to
whether the game state at the time of incident in question is to be
considered so I should go with game custom and spirit of the game.

The thing I have to consider are therefore:

1. The statement, "Malenkai has committed a crime"
2. Game custom
3. Spirit of the game.

2. & 3. can be summarised to the same thing. Game custom and spirit of
the game both suggest that if a player commits a crime then e should
receive the appropriate punishment.

As for 1. Malenkai committed a crime by being a member of two political
parties at once. According to my previous comment, I should therefore
find him guilty.

Actual Penalty:

I judge this TRUE and give a sentence of removal from SPAM and a public
apology of three lines.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 21:31:32 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 485 Verdict

CFJ 485 has been judged FALSE.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 485
  Subject: Similar to CFJ 394
Initiator: Slakko
Submitted: 97-12-12 17:21
    Judge: /dev/joe (selected 97-12-12 19:32)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:

A Judge delivering a verdict of TRUE on a CFCJ whose statement was "Slakko
has committed a Crime" is a player action affecting the game
      state which appears equally legal and illegal.

Slakko's Reasoning:

Liar's Paradox.  Neither true nor false implies false implies true implies
false implies true....

This is a Paradox Win CFJ.

Note that it is similar to CFJ 394, but excludes the possibility of a
stable verdict other than true or false.

/dev/joe's Reasoning:

If I had the luxurious time of a normal CFJ I would be much more
long-winded, but since I'm playing Hubert against the initiator
I'll be brief.

Slakko (implicitly) contends that his recently published self-referential
statement is of indeterminate truth, as treating it as false makes it
appear true, and treating it as true makes it appear false, and treating
it as "neither true nor false" also makes it appear false.

CFJ 394 provided the game custom that "untrue" in the newspaper rule
is interpreted as "false".  I would rather interpret it as "not true",
which can be different from "false" with respect to self-referential
sentences like the one in question, but under either interpretation,
the legality of Slakko's refusal is determinable.

"Is the statement false?" the game asks the statement. No.
Thus the rule which makes the refusal to publish a retraction does not
apply.

[In the interpretation I would prefer, the game asks "Is the statement
true?" No. Therefore it is "not true", or untrue, and the refusal to
post the retraction is a crime.  If there is interest, I may submit a
proposal which explicitly adds my interpretation of "untrue" to the rules,
along with enough additional commentary to head off attempts like this
before they even get started.]

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 21:33:30 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: INP 353 & 354

Acka voted to vote yes on 353, no on 354.  Note
that the Ambassador has to echo this message (or one
similar) back to the Moderator :)

353

Yes
- ---
Slakko
Balsamic Dragon
ThinMan
/dev/joe
Niccolo Flychuck

No
- --
Red Barn
Vynd

- ------
354

Yes
- ---
Vynd

No
- --
Slakko
Balsamic Dragon
Malenkai + EBS
ThinMan
Red Barn
/dev/joe
Niccolo Flychuck
Alfvaen

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 22:09:30 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 147 apology

I apologize 
for trying to make the game
a little more fun

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 22:25:58 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Commission d'Arts

breadbox wins another Silver Moon, for the 
Samizdat Newspaper publication.  Is there a web
page of all the past winners in one place?

> > breadbox's Krykec report for W-File Case #2
> >    http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ifgz711/acka/w-file2.html

K 2

> > Malenkai's description of how to remove Beldin's Pants
> >    http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/acka/smc/beldin.html

Alfvaen
Red Barn

> > breadbox's Samizdat Newspaper publication (June 24, 1997)
> >    http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/acka/smc/samizdat.html

Vynd + EBS
ThinMan
Fortunato

> > Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Public Apology for CFCJ 140
> >    http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/acka/smc/apology.html

/dev/joe
Rex Mundi
Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 22:51:57 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 481 Verdict

two-star did not respond to CFJ 481 in time.  It has been 
assigned to Malenkai (Praetor).

sleep 1

Then it was judged FALSE.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 481
  Subject: Paying for extra heads
Initiator: The Gingham Wearer
Submitted: 97-12-07 18:51
    Judge: else...if (declined)
2nd Judge: two-star (deadbeat)
3rd Judge: Malenkai (assigned sometime afterwords)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:

else...if received A$50 from the treasury an infinitesimal amount of
time after complaining about having to pay for an extra head.

The Gingham Wearer's Reasoning:

[none]

Malenkai's Reasoning:

The rule (presumably) in question, rule 1129, has not changed,
except possible renumbering, since CFJs 329 and 330 established
the customary interpretation of the part of the rule in
question.  To quote from CFJ 329:

> ... it is true that a voluntary purchase or transfer of currency is not 
> considered a penalty under current custom ...

I see no evidence that this custom has changed since that time; I
find that buying the head is a voluntary transfer of currency.

This brings up a couple of questions, that fortunately I don't have to
deal with: 1) how does explicit game custom ever change, and 2) how
do new players know what the (implicit) game custom is?

I see no other evidence that A$50 was transferred after the extra
head purchase; so I judge FALSE.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 20:39:36 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: acka: Shun

> The Church of Azpiazu has, it would seem, -5 A$. So I propose that RexBank
> give it 5 A$. I approve this on behalf of RexBank.
> #transfer RexBank, Church of Azpiazu: 5 A$.

On behalf of the Church of Azpiazu, I accept this offer.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--George Harrison:Extra Texture(Read All About It)
Current Book--Philip Jose Farmer:Dayworld Breakup
Don't touch anything that makes your body feel like Ginger Ale.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 20:58:26 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Guarded

> If Proposal 2475 is not currently Guarded, then as an action I pay the
> appropriate number of A$ in order to make Proposal 2475 Guarded.

The only thread in which anyone has Guarded proposals recently is one
I am not harfing, the CFJ 484 TRUE thread or whatever you call it.  Or
the one that will occur after the SoCRD is selected.  So you therefore
spend A$150 to Guard P2475.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--George Harrison:Extra Texture(Read All About It)
Current Book--Philip Jose Farmer:Dayworld Breakup
St. Dismas' Infirmary for the Incurably Informed

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 20:37:06 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Actions

> > I am strapping my Bonus Vote Add-On to my vending machine.

> > I am setting the price at which my vending machine vends Bonus Votes 
> > to A$2.

>   I am destroying the Storage Battery and buying three bonus votes from
> /dev's machine.  This leaves me at A$0.

Actually, it leaves you at A$9, because of course the Add-On has been
removed, and your previous total was -A$16...

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--George Harrison:Extra Texture(Read All About It)
Current Book--Philip Jose Farmer:Dayworld Breakup
She wrote a long letter...on a short piece of paper

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 21:12:36 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Commission d'Arts

> breadbox wins another Silver Moon, for the 
> Samizdat Newspaper publication.  Is there a web
> page of all the past winners in one place?

No, I do not believe so.  Would the Ackanomic populace like there to be?

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--George Harrison:Extra Texture(Read All About It)
Current Book--Philip Jose Farmer:Dayworld Breakup
If the dictionary misspelled a word, how could we tell?

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 21:15:02 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: INPs

It occurs to me that if there are any recent INP Proposals that were
a) accepted, and b) authored by a player of Ackanomic, I should know
about this so I can score them.  I hope that I haven't missed any _too_
far back, though I might let retroactivity handle them if so(so as not
to reharf bond cycles, etc.)

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--George Harrison:Extra Texture(Read All About It)
Current Book--Philip Jose Farmer:Dayworld Breakup
Old immortals never die, they just...don't.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 23:17:08 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Commission d'Arts

> No, I do not believe so.  Would the Ackanomic populace like there to be?

Well I would :)  I think there have only been 4 or 5.

Brinjal's Poem
Guy Fawkes Tic Tac Toe proof
breadbox scam proposal (17??)
this one.

They don't come up to often.

Malenkai

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

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 23:19:46 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

> I am calling an Auction them Entities hearing on
> the Capital Swinger office in the treasury.

The result was 
> Auction that precious antique
by a 7-2 count.

The auction now begins.

Chief Cheese

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #412
*******************************