Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #422
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest      Tuesday, December 16 1997      Volume 02 : Number 422

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:23:22 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CSR 124

The following is the text of CSR 124, all " marks are used as delimiters, 
and are not to be considered part of the text being altered or added.

Amend Rule 709 Gaol by replacing the phrase "R655 (Treasury and Hard
Money)" with "R505 (Treasury and AckaDollars)" {{[Anyone know how old that
line is?]}}.

Amend Rule 711 Appeal for Pardon by deleting section 3) {{[Redundant]}}.

Renumber Rule 713 Crime to 701.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:50:28 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : The state of grace of Odo

I'll take a look at the rule again and let you know.

Niccolo Flychuck

On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> > > > If it has - then as Church Founder I appoint my self Delegate to the Synod
> > > > Seat owned by Odo on the Wormhole.
> 
> > > Does the Seat still exist, so that you don't have to buy it anew?
> 
> > I think it does exist. At least it does on the entities page. 
> 
> As the maintainer of the page, I'd warn you that it is not always correct.
> That is, maybe I should have removed the Seat from the Cult's possession
> when it became a Cult, and it just never occurred to me to do so.  :-)
> Whether it should have or not, I don't know.
> 
> 
> - --
> - --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
> Current Album--Pink Floyd:The Final Cut
> Current Book--Juanita Coulson:Outward Bound
> If you understood everything I said, you'd be me.
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:10:24 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka :  Share thy wealth breadbox

On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Uri Bruck wrote:

> > If the RuneMaker is a player of Acka, then e must therefore be subscribed
> > to the main list.  If Niccolo Flychuck announced to the main list that e
> > was playing an Otzma Card, then I think that the RuneMaker would know, if
> > e existed.

But e currently doesn't exist and that is my point.

> > 
> > I don't recall anyone complaining when Malenkai played his Map Shard card
> > a few weeks back...
> > 
> RuneMaker is an optional office, which makes the President the
> acting-RuneMaker who can ignore the job if he likes.
> 
> Posting to the main list is the same as reporting to the RuneMaker, 
> The requirement to report to the RuneMaker only requires an additional
> message if the card is not played in the public forum.

Actually, an optional office need not have an acting officer.  If not in
this case, could you please point me to the rule which states that the
President is the default acting officer for either (a) the RuneMaker, or
(b) all _political_ offices.  This ain't a functional office, y'know.

If the seat is vacant and there is no acting officer, then there isn't a
RuneMaker, and my original complaint stands.

> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 
> 
> 

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:38:06 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Null Proposals

What does it mean to "generate" a game effect?
Without my Null Prop 2389 being accepted, the Chrome Streak would have
ended then and there.  It had the game effect of delaying the Brass
Monkey's climb, and the effect of enabling Malenkai to grab his 5 points.

Depending on how you interpret the rules, I suggest that the following are
probably the only two options (I don't want to exclude anyone at this
stage)

P2389 was Null, and Malenkai gains nothing for 2390 being in the Chrome
Streak.
P2389 was not null, because malenkai gained 5 points for 2390 being in the
Chrome Streak (something dependent on the passing of P2389 for its
occurrence).

Yours,
Slakko

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 01:23:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Postmasterness (Balsamic Dragon)

Fellow players, it is my duty to inform you that the evidence is
incontestible: Balsamic Dragon, our fearless Ambassador, has
apparently succumbed to the stresses of her office and Gone Postal.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:33:20 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : I'm retracting 2517

Due to some comments, will resubmit soon.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:37:50 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : Odo and the Synod

The Church rule states that Cult's are ineligible for a Synod Seat,
I intepret this to mean that Odo lost its Synod Seat when it became a
Cult, and now has to purchase a new one. I thing it would be a good thing
to put the affairs of the Synod in order before it is repealed.

So, on behalf of the Church of Odo I am purchasing a Seat in the Synod,
Odo currently has 4 members.

I appoit myself Delegate, there are currently two Delegates in the Synod,
one of which is myself. Being the only Church Delegate, and therefore the
church Delegate representing the largest Church in the Synod, I become
Yor-Delegate.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:49:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Postal Code Change 107

I am hereby suggesting the following change to the Postal Code
(something I should have done months ago). This change will take
effect in three days unless there are two or more objections.

breadbox
Postmaster
________

{{[This change, besides finally removing wilma from the Postal Code
(sorry, /dev/joe), also makes acka-research completely unavailable for
game actions. Not only does this reflect current usage, but it makes
things a little easier on the Harfers. I've also removed all
restrictions on the main list - that is, any game action that is
possible to make on some mailing list is also possible to make on
ackanomic. This doesn't make it easier on the Harfers, but it
definitely reflects current usage, and it seems to be what most people
want. As with my predecessor, I am always open to suggestions.]}}

Replace the current text of the Postal Code with the following:

All addresses below which end in @ should be treated as having
"muppetlabs.com" appended to them.

ackanomic@ is the official mailing list. It is an unrestricted public
forum [but if a message would be more appropriate on a different
mailing list, players are encouraged to use that one instead].

acka-voting@ is the official voting mailing list. It is a public forum
meant for game actions involving proposals. [Thus the Promoter and
Tabulator would send most of the messages on this list, but it is also
appropriate for other voting player actions (such as retracting a
proposal).]

acka-research@ is a public forum meant for discussion only. It cannot
be used for public actions or any other game actions. [In short, no
one *needs* to be subscribed to this list.]

acka-finance@ is a public forum meant for financial actions (trades,
gifts, auction proceedings, etcetera). [In short, actions that the
Financier must track.]

acka-chess@ may only be used for game actions in Party Chess.

acka-games@ is a public forum meant for game actions involving other
subgames. [For example: Grab-a-Donkey, the Machine That Goes *ping*,
and anything in the Games & Contests Rule Suite.]

ackanomic-digest@ is the digest version of ackanomic@.
acka-voting-digest@ is the digest version of acka-voting@.
acka-research-digest@ is the digest version of acka-research@.
acka-finance-digest@ is the digest version of acka-finance@.
acka-games-digest@ is the digest version of acka-games@.

acka-priv@ is an alternate form of ackanomic@.
acka-games-priv@ is an alternate form of acka-games@.
[These are used for public messages needing a private reply.]

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:57:39 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: FYI

rufus, due to difficult boxen that refuse to listen to reason, has
changed his Ackanomic address to [email-masked].

(No, none of you really need to know this; I just want to have this
in the archives.)

breadbox
Postmaster

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 07:58:31 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: SPAM

I request membership in SPAM.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:01:41 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Public Apology

I apologize 
for
criminal ways

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 14:49:14 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : The Otzma of sharing breadbox's wealth

Having read the Otzma Card rule, I believe the Card does exactly what it
says.

In the thread where breadbox received A$50000 from the Treasury, the Card
works, and transfers A$20,000 to me. - in that thread I transfer to
breadbox all the A$ that were transferred from him to me as a result of me
using that Otzma Card.

In the other thread, the posting did not follow the criteria of the Otzma
Card, and it was never even used. If breadbox did not receive A$50000,
then I did not specify part of a sum he received in the three days
preceding my posting, and therefore the Card wasn't used.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 13:35:27 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: SPAM

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> I request membership in SPAM.

*stifle*
*giggle*
*chuckle*
*guffaw*
*guffaw loudly*

Thanks.  I could use a good laugh.

Yours,
Slakko
- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 13:40:06 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Org Creation

I hereby create (and become a member of) an Organization called Religious
Nutcase.

I gift A$110 to Religious Nutcase.

I suggest that Religious Nutcase purchase a Trade Licence.
I approve this suggestion; the action occurs.

Yours,
Slakko

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:46:18 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

I bid A$20

Balsamic Dragon

- ----------
> From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities
> Date: Monday, December 15, 1997 8:21 PM
> 
> > > > > I bid A$1 for the Capital Swinger Office.
> 
> > I bid A$10.
> 
> I bid A$12.
> 
> Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 13:58:51 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Public Action

I suggest that Religious Nutcase allow Balsamic Dragon to become a member
immediately upon eir request to do so.
I approve this action; it occurs.

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:22:04 -0500 (EST)
From: mr cwm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 491 (mr cwm)

I accept appointment.

- -mr cwm

On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, Malenkai wrote:

>mr cwm has been selected.
>
>Clerk of the Courts
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Call For Judgment 491
>  Subject: Founding Chrurches
>Initiator: rufus
>Submitted: 97-12-14 22:20
>    Judge: mr cwm (selected 97-12-14 23:20)
>Judgement: 
>
>Statement:
>
>There is no such church AHH#1.  
>
>rufus's Reasoning:  
>
>some people seem to think that churches can't be founded.
>Enquiring minds want to know
>

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 11:41:48 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

If I haven't (ignore if I did)
Correctly submitted this bid,
If you please would allow
It to be entered now
In the amount of A20 quid.

Please forgive the way it was posed,
I didn't know that I was hosed.
- ----------
> From: Vivian Norwood <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities
> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 1997 8:46 AM
> 
> I bid A$20
> 
> Balsamic Dragon
> 
> ----------
> > From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities
> > Date: Monday, December 15, 1997 8:21 PM
> > 
> > > > > > I bid A$1 for the Capital Swinger Office.
> > 
> > > I bid A$10.
> > 
> > I bid A$12.
> > 
> > Malenkai
> 

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 11:46:10 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka : I'm retracting 2517

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Uri Bruck wrote:

> 
> Due to some comments, will resubmit soon.
> 
> Niccolo Flychuck
> 

How interesting.  Is this really a retraction, since the statement that
Niccolo is retracting 2517 is in the subject and not the body of the
email?  Was this deliberate on Niccolo's part?

                                  - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 11:56:28 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Public Action

> I suggest that Religious Nutcase allow Balsamic Dragon to become a member
> immediately upon eir request to do so.
> I approve this action; it occurs.
> 
> 
> --
> Duncan "" Richer aka
> Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
> Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
> 

Slakko's kind offer
Moves me to request to join
Religious Nutcase.

...

Religious Nutcase
Wants to buy a Synod Seat
Suggest and approve.

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 08:56:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Actions in subject lines.

Hmm. I see that Vynd has attempted to retract proposal 2517, but he is
not the author of 2517. Therefore this action fails.

Okay, seriously now ...

> How interesting.  Is this really a retraction, since the statement
> that Niccolo is retracting 2517 is in the subject and not the body
> of the email?  Was this deliberate on Niccolo's part?

Announcing a public action in the subject line of one's message has
been permitted in the past. It's not the sort of thing that I want to
see people get into the habit of doing, but since his message was
pretty unambiguous, I'm accepting it.

Bear in mind that besides the "echoing" problem of putting actions in
subject lines, email programs will silently truncate subject lines
that are too long. And there is no widely accepted standard for how
long is "too long".

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 17:01:28 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Public Action

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Vivian Norwood wrote:

> > I suggest that Religious Nutcase allow Balsamic Dragon to become a member
> > immediately upon eir request to do so.
> > I approve this action; it occurs.
> Slakko's kind offer
> Moves me to request to join
> Religious Nutcase.

If Balsamic Dragon is not already a member of Religious Nutcase, then I
suggest she is allowed membership, and so it happens.

> Religious Nutcase
> Wants to buy a Synod Seat
> Suggest and approve.

If this suggestion is invalid, then I suggest Religious Nutcase buys a
Synod Seat.  I support the action of Religious Nutcase buying a seat in
the synod, whoever suggested it.

I suggest that Slakko become the Delegate of Religious Nutcase to the
Synod, if and when Religious Nutcase possesses a Synod Seat.
I approve this suggestion.

Yours,
Slakko (glad he doesn't have to rhyme today)
- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:28:17 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Public Action

> 
> I suggest that Slakko become the Delegate of Religious Nutcase to the
> Synod, if and when Religious Nutcase possesses a Synod Seat.
> I approve this suggestion.
> 

I hereby approve
Slakko's nomination as
Synod Delegate

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:48:54 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Synod Stuff

As Delegate of Religious Nutcase to the Synod, I suggest that the Synod
convert its two trinkets, Democracy? and Demoncracy! into cash.
I vote in favour of this suggestion.

Therefore, there are more votes in favour of this suggestion than against
it, and so the Synod is considered to support this action.

As Delegate of Religious Nutcase to the Synod, I suggest that the Synod
gift all its A$ to the Organization called Religious Nutcase.  
I vote in favour of this suggestion.

Therefore, there are more votes in favour of this suggestion than against
it, and so the Synod is considered to support this action.

As a member of Religious Nutcase, I suggest that it gift an amount of A$
equal to half its balance less A$55 to Balsamic Dragon, and that it
simultaneously gift an amount of A$ equal to half its balance plus A$55 to
Slakko, thereby gifting away all of its A$.  I support this suggestion.

Yours,
Slakko-the-looking-for-some-extra-holiday-cash.

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 14:58:24 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Synod Stuff

> As a member of Religious Nutcase, I suggest that it gift an amount of A$
> equal to half its balance less A$55 to Balsamic Dragon, and that it
> simultaneously gift an amount of A$ equal to half its balance plus A$55
to
> Slakko, thereby gifting away all of its A$.  I support this suggestion.
> 
> Yours,
> Slakko-the-looking-for-some-extra-holiday-cash.
> 

Re: the stuff above,
I support this suggestion.
Free money for me!

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 15:25:44 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Synod Stuff

>Therefore, there are more votes in favour of this suggestion than against
>it, and so the Synod is considered to support this action.
	It's definately unclear, but I think the rule means that anyone who
hasn't voted for it has voted against.  I'd CFJ it, but I think I'm in debt
about A$100

- --
Omnium pro iure, ius pro omnio

- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	"I think the true test of a genius is the ability to see the
follies of one's own times.  The ability to change one's own times is the
true test of a leader.  And the ability to do both is the true test of a
visionary who will never be elected."
	-Marilyn vos Savant

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 20:34:17 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Synod Stuff

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Towsner wrote:

> >Therefore, there are more votes in favour of this suggestion than against
> >it, and so the Synod is considered to support this action.
> 	It's definately unclear, but I think the rule means that anyone who
> hasn't voted for it has voted against.  I'd CFJ it, but I think I'm in debt
> about A$100

CFJs are free, CFCJs are not.

But if you haven't voted, how can you vote against?
There is no procedure for changing a vote, just casting one.  Therefore if
all synod members who hadn't voted yet were treated as having voted
against, one could never vote in favour of anything.  I don't see anywhere
where it says, or even implies, that those who have not voted for have
voted against.   There's nothing saying that all members have to vote.

Yours,
Slakko
- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 15:36:36 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Synod Stuff

>But if you haven't voted, how can you vote against?
>There is no procedure for changing a vote, just casting one.  Therefore if
>all synod members who hadn't voted yet were treated as having voted
>against, one could never vote in favour of anything.  I don't see anywhere
>where it says, or even implies, that those who have not voted for have
>voted against.   There's nothing saying that all members have to vote.
	Looks like you're right.  Good work:)

- --
Omnium pro iure, ius pro omnio

- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	"I think the true test of a genius is the ability to see the
follies of one's own times.  The ability to change one's own times is the
true test of a leader.  And the ability to do both is the true test of a
visionary who will never be elected."
	-Marilyn vos Savant

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 15:45:53 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 484 (Balsamic Dragon)

I must decline to judge this time
Judgments should not have to rhyme.

- ----------
> From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
> To: Ackanomic <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Acka: CFJ 484 (Balsamic Dragon)
> Date: Sunday, December 14, 1997 7:29 PM
> 
> CnH deadbeated on CFJ 484.  It has been reassigned to
> Balsamic Dragon.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgment 484
>   Subject: Trinkets
> Initiator: Malenkai
> Submitted: 97-12-11 9:09
>     Judge: Calvin N Hobbes (deadbeat)
> 2nd Judge: Balsamic Dragon (selected 97-12-14 19:29)
> Judgement: 
> 
> Statement:
> 
> Trinkets with a value of negative A$ may not be created.
> 
> Malenkai's Reasoning:
> 
> I'll write even less for Slakko to critique this time :)
> 
> I don't know, a couple people have argued that it was not
> possible, we should at least find out.
> 

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 21:07:00 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Web Page

Seeing as I may or may not have a lot more stuff to do with Acka soon
(already the Party Chess Page, and soon possibly the Map Page, plus my own
newspaper The Infrequent Ackan), I've set up a main webpage from which all
of the above are and will be accessible.  The addresses of the other pages
will remain unchanged, it's just that I'm putting in a "cover sheet" which
tries to make good use of graphics.

This cover sheet is at

http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/
You can add index.html on the end if you like.

It is also accessible from my main page (drop Nomic/Acka/)

Thank you for your time.

Oh, BTW, I will be going on vacation in a few days time, for approximately
two weeks.  I would ask the President to consider appointing Niccolo
Flychuck as acting Chess-Umpire in my absence.  E will have an up-to-date
copy of my webpage when it goes offline (at the same time as my holiday).

Yours,
Slakko

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 16:07:06 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: The Little Lamb

Would the relevant officers please note that the Little Lamb has been
transfered to /dev/joe from two-star, due to actions in the game of Grab A
Donkey.

                                - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 21:13:47 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Vivian Norwood wrote:

> I bid A$20

I believe this bid will be ruled too late.
The 3 day period expired on Monday at 23:19 Acka time.

The last bid prior to BD's was Mal's at 20:21 on Monday,
hence the game expired at 23:21. 

> > From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities
> > Date: Monday, December 15, 1997 8:21 PM
> > 
> > I bid A$12.

It appears that the Chief Cheese won the auction.  How Cheesy.
Please name your office and select 5 pieces, Malenkai.
- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 22:36:19 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CU on IRC

Currently on Acka IRC - if I don't hear anything in the next ten 
minutes I'll give up.  Just letting you know.

Yours,
Slakko

- --
Duncan "" Richer aka
Duncan C. Richer - aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother - Now Really Lost!
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:10:13 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

> > > > > I bid A$1 for the Capital Swinger Office.

> [Malenkai] bid A$12.

The auction is over, this was the high bid.

Chief Cheese

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:12:20 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

> It appears that the Chief Cheese won the auction.  How Cheesy.
> Please name your office and select 5 pieces, Malenkai.

I will choose the pieces within 3 days of the offical announcment
of the auction's completion.  I have very little
time to play nomic now.  I will call the office 
"Malenkai's Loophole Surfer".

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:14:57 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Runemaker

> I would like there to be an election for the position of RuneMaker.

I announce the nomination for the office of Runemaker.  E-mail
me if you wish to volunteer.  All previous attempts to volunteer
were crimes, and should be CFCJed :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:26:58 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 483 Appeal Verdict

CFJ 483 has been overturned to FALSE with a 1 point
penalty to the original judge.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 483
  Subject: Organizational Actions
Initiator: Malenkai
Submitted: 97-12-09 21:14
    Judge: Slakko (selected 97-12-09 21:21)
Judgement: TRUE
   Appeal: FALSE

Statement:

An Organization may change its name as an Organizational Action.

Malenkai's Reasoning:

Not wanting to monopolize the names Pumpkin Patch and
Pumpkin Patch Nomic assuming someone can fix the rules so
that they can be used as nomics, I'd like to know the names
can be changed before investing in organizational powers.

My current use of these names will not conflict with
proposal 2473; the entities in that proposal will be
nameless, as far as I can tell, and may run into the
problems I presented in argument 3 of CFJ 482, but that
is another matter (that is why I tried to present all
those arguments).

Slakko's Reasoning:

First, Malenkai's Reasoning doesn't look at all like reasoning to me.
Just thought I'd let you know that.

However, let's not confuse this with the facts.

Rule 251 says:

A player may change his Ackanomic name, so long as the new name complies
with all applicable rules.

Rule 1005 says:

An Organization can attempt actions. However, the process for an
Organization to attempt an action is somewhat more complex than the same
process for players.

I don't see anywhere in the rules where an Organization is forbidden from
changing its name.  Rule 1005 seems to imply that, provided an action
is not specifically for players only and NOT for organizations, then the
organization can attempt it.  Therefore, given Rule 251 does not say that
Organizations cannot change their name, I see no reason why an
Organization may not change its name as an Organizational Action.

I hereby rule TRUE on this CFJ.

Alfvaen's Appeal Reasoning:

I am appealing this verdict.  I refuse to believe that any action that
may be performed by a player may necessarily be performed by an
Organization.  This may cause more problems than it solves, but I
prefer to think that any action that the Rules do not specify can
be performed by an Organization(or by any class of entity that includes
Orgs, including "all entities")cannot be performed by an Organization.
Otherwise, perhaps I should suggest that the Rebellion attempt to chew
the Gumball.

Supreme Court's Reasoning:

Generally, it is not safe to assume that an action not explicitly
forbidden by the rules is automatically permitted. (If it sounds to
the reader that this contradicts "permissibility of the unprohibited",
the reader is referred to the venerable warhorse that is CFJ 113.)

The procedure in Rule 215 is specifically available to players and no
other kinds of entities. The rules do not provide any method for
changing the name of Organizations in particular, nor is there a
procedure that is available to a superclass of entities that includes
Organizations. Organization therefore do not, at this time, have the
ability to directly change their names.

Penalty to original judge: 1 point.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 20:36:04 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 489 (Supreme Court)

Michael Wren deadbeated.  I am using my priv as Praetor to
send this on to the Supreme Court.  I have added comments,
however (using bronze torch as necessary, although declining
judges have added comments before).

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 489
  Subject: Annoying the CotC
Initiator: Slakko
Submitted: 97-12-13 16:53
    Judge: Michael Wren (selected 97-12-13 19:45)
2nd Judge: Supreme Court
Judgement: 

Statement:

CFJ 485 was retracted.

Slakko's Reasoning:

There are two reasons here.  Either one should be sufficient for a verdict
of TRUE.

Reason 1: There is nothing in the rules which prohibits prospective
actions.  It was clear and unambiguous that whichever CFJ initiated by
me was first distributed by Malenkai after my message calling for a
retraction was to be retracted one second after its issue.  It was clear
and unambiguous (yet to be determined at the time it was issued, but not
ambiguous).  Therefore it was retracted.

Reason 2: There is no proof that /dev/joe accepted judgeship on the CFJ
before the supposed verdict was handed down.  As such, he was not the
judge, and hence the "verdict" did not in fact exist.  Therefore, no
verdict has been issued, and hence the retraction which occurred today
after the "verdict" was successful.

End of Reasoning.

Malenkai's Comments:

Since Slakko is going to appeal this anyway, and I don't really have
much time, I am sending this straight to the Supreme Court.  I will,
however, add my comments as to why it should be judged FALSE.

Second argument first:  Common sense and Ackanomic custom have allowed 
delivering of the verdict to indicate acceptance of appointment.  C'mon
people :)  We also have to assume officers are doing their jobs when
all the information is not publically knowable.

As for the first argument, the Court and I have disagreed on on the 
interpretation of rule 373 in in the past, so I'm not going to spend
much time on it here:  The first part of rule 373:

> Each attempt to perform an action either succeeds or fails.

When?  The rules are silent on the issue, bringing about the imfamous
GC and SotG from rule 215.  Does game custom support prospective actions?
I don't remember any, but the Court will have to fish through the archives
to find out.  If there have been, then this CFJ may be judged TRUE (but
see below), depending on the nature of the specification of the action,
and whether rule 373 existed at the time (attempts before rule 373 do
not count).

If not, that leads to the question of whether it is in the spirit of
the game to construe rule 373 to allow prospective actions.  I argue
that it is not, for the simple reason that it is a pain in the @$$
to deal with.  What about: "One year from today, I chew the gumball",
or "Tomorrow at exactly midnight, I say Hubert, or bid A$20 in
the current auction".  You get the idea.

Consider the case in question.  What if Malenkai goes bankrupt in RL,
and his ISP cuts him off, and he never plays nomic again, leaving the
CFJ and the action in an unread e-mail box.  Then that action just 
sits out there, festering in gamespace.  What if Malenkai resigns,
(thus absolving himself of the CFJs in his queue) then rejoins and
takes the CotC job again in a week, and Slakko submits a CFJ.  Having put
the action in Acka's crontab, if you will, cannot be undone, therefore
that new CFJ would be retracted.  While it is certainly possible to
play the game this way, who wants to?  I personally have very little
time to play nomic, and personally feel it is out of the spirit of 
the game to have to deal with this sort of thing.  If it comes down
to a spirit of the game argument, I urge the Court to give good reason
as to why this sort of gameplay is in the "spirit of the game".

Lets, for the sake of argument, presume future actions are allowed.
In that case, was this action actually unambiguous?  The time that
it was to occur was ambiguous.  The CFJ in question was ambiguous also.
(There were two in the CotC's queue at the time, and the CotC is free
to distribute them in any order e chooses).  If they were
unambiguous, how was it that I, as a nuetral officer, was able
to affect the game state by deciding at what time the loss of point
for the retraction occurred, *and* to which CFJ it applied?  It was
not clear to anyone out there as to what CFJ was actually being 
referred to.  It was ambiguous.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 20:43:30 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 492 (mr cwm)

mr cwm has been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 492
  Subject: Overriding
Initiator: Slakko
Submitted: 97-12-15 10:52
    Judge: mr cwm (selected 97-12-16 20:43)
Judgement: 

Statement:

The last sentence of Rule 216 is overridden by Rule 101.

Slakko's Reasoning:

Rule 101 states that:
Game custom, spirit of the game, and linguistic interpretation are
external concepts and are not regulated or part of the game state. 

Rule 216 is:
If a statement on which Judgement has been called is Judged to be true,
and that Judgement is not overruled, it does not thereby become a rule, or
any part of a rule. It merely becomes an explicit part of currently
accepted game custom. 

The last sentence of Rule 216 attempts to regulate currently accepted game
custom, a subset of game custom.  This is contradictory to Rule 101, which
states that game custom is not regulated.

These two rules specify no means of conflict resolution, and so, according
to "Resolving Conflict", 101 takes precedence over 216.  Hence the last
sentence of Rule 216 is overridden by Rule 101, and hence this statement
should be judged TRUE.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 20:47:35 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 493 (The Gingham Wearer)

The Gingham Wearer has been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 493
  Subject: Those Silly Agenda Hats
Initiator: Vynd
Submitted: 97-12-16 12:06
    Judge: The Gingham Wearer (selected 97-12-16 20:47)
Judgement: 

Statement:

It is permissible for a player to send to the Illuminatus
a number of Agenda conditions fewer than 3 minus the number of Agenda Hats
that player owns.

Vynd's Reasoning:

  This is actually kind of important, because Crackfoo has done
exactly what I have described in my statement.  Rule 431, which governs
the submission of Agenda conditions, has this to say:

"During this [ed. the Agenda Condition submission period] time, any player
may submit a number of Agenda Conditions equal to three minus the number
of Agenda Hats e owns by sending them to them to the Illuminatus.  If a
player sends more than this number of Agenda Conditions, only the first
Agenda Conditions sent will be counted."

The key here is that it requires the number of conditions sent to be
"equal" to 3 minus the number of Agenda hats the player has.  The rule
does go on to override this by saying that more than this number can be
sent, but it never says that it is permissible to send fewer.  I think
that this means that it is not in fact permissible, but I'm not sure.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 21:21:26 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 484 (Balsamic Dragon)

> I must decline to judge this time
> Judgments should not have to rhyme.

You already accepted, which means you are
still obligated to deliver a verdict.

The question is, is this decline also possible
in conjunction with acceptance, meaning another 
judge needs to be selected as well?  I would think not.
Comments?

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 21:24:17 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Nemesis Nomics

Amend rule 940, "Beldin's Pants" to replace "head",
where it appears in the last sentence, with "nomic".

Malenkai
Beldin's Tailor

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 14:08:48 -1000
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: My house

I am building a 35 meter tower on my house. This costs me $105.

My house is a 10x10x10 meter, solid block of steel reinforced  concrete
(12 gauge). Regardless of its external dimensions, it has no interior.
Since the workmen did a shoddy job on the foundations, however, there is
a small hole underneath my house, I call this small cavity my basement.
My basement is lined with black plastic on the floor and walls. The
concrete ceiling has an irregular surface.
The tower that extends from the roof of my house is also a solid block
of steel reinforced  concrete (10 gauge), 10x10x35 meters in dimension.
It integrates seamlessly with the original block of concrete and like
it, it has no interior.
Spaced vertically along the entire building, at intervals of two and a
half average cat heights, are expansion joints.
On the north face of the building is a small flea sized impression.

Should anyone be currently trespassing on my property, I kick them out.
I crawl into my basement and shut the black plastic.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 22:26:11 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: on the road again

I hereby go to Vulcan Headquarters.

ThinMan
Vulcan

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #422
*******************************