Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #424
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest     Wednesday, December 17 1997     Volume 02 : Number 424

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 16:17:47 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Thank You For Your Patience

> > And finally, remember--_someone_ has to harf all this stuff.  If anyone
> > would care to volunteer for any of my Functional Offices(except perhaps
> > Scorekeeper, which I enjoy the most), then go right ahead.  I don't
> > want to hog all the fun...

> My problem with most of the functional offices is not that I don't have
> time to do the work, it's just that I haven't the faintest idea of how to
> edit the webpages and such.  How many of the functional offices don't
> require web-harfing?  Can't we have just a few web-harfers and have
> everyone else submit reports to them or something?  I enjoy playing by
> e-mail, but I lack some of the technical expertise required for harfing...

With the Scorekeeper/Bond-Harfer and Financier/Undead-Harfer jobs, I
basically log transactions in an appropriate log, and run a script to
automagically generate the web pages therefrom.  'Cause that's the way
/dev/joe did it, mostly, but it makes sense.  So in theory, you could
just maintain the log, and either generate the web pages yourself, or
send the logs to the Web-Harfer(i.e. me)so I could generate the updated
web pages therefrom.

Web-Harfer, of course, requires a fair bit of web-harfing.  :-)

I'd like to mention, though, that HTML is extremely easy to learn; there's
a primer that /dev/joe wrote up which I think I still have a link to from
the main page, and there's tons of others on the Web.  The basics are
quite simple, and you don't _need_ more than that...

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--The Boomtown Rats:Greatest Hits
Current Book--Juanita Coulson:Outward Bound
If I were you, who would be reading this?

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 18:52:32 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

> Check the rules.  Swinger Offices must have Legal Ackanomic Names (tm).

I don't have the time or interest to debate this; quite frankly it
is very boring to me.  I still disagree, however, but the point is
moot, as this office was apparently previously named by Ben.  

If Niccolo remembers that name, perhaps e can share it with us,
otherwise, I will refer to it as "Ben's Office" for now.

Also, you have said to select my pieces, Niccolo has said not to.
You are the Chess-Umpire, which is it?

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 16:56:41 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: Delay

I would like to apologize in advance for the fact that the web pages,
etc. probably won't get updated until tomorrow.  So nobody rely too
greatly on the information that's up there, which is a day or two out
of date already.  This is why we Officers have three days to do our
duties.

I hope that I can manage not to default on my YORL turn, and that I'm
not too late to submit my Eggplant bids...

I blame the delay on my brother being in town from Toronto for a couple
of weeks, and "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" reruns on the Comedy Network.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--The Boomtown Rats:Greatest Hits
Current Book--Juanita Coulson:Outward Bound
'I've got a full gas of tankoline and four good New Year tires.'

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 18:57:08 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 492 Verdict

CFJ 492 has been judged TRUE.

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: TRUE

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.

mr cwm's reasoning:

I find the Initiator's reasoning to be sound.  I wish to point out,
however, that this does not mean that statements Judged TRUE are not an
explicit part of accepted game custom, only that they do not become so by
R216.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:00:17 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 491 Verdict

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: FALSE

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

mr cwm's reasoning:

The requirements for a Church to come into existance are listed in
R1301/18: "A Church officially exists when the player has three Followers
in addition to eirself and publically announces all of the following
details of the Church: ... ." 

The public announcement requirement was met by else...if's message of
December 14.

The question, then, is whether the "three Followers" requirement has been
met.  I note that these three are followers of the player intending to
found the Church, not followers of the Church, so the Church need not be
in existance prior to its founding.  "Followers" is not defined by the
Rules, but, fortunately, there is a long-standing Game Custom that
Followers are those players who have agreed to be listed as members in the
public announcement founding the Church.

All the requirements of R1301/18 were met.  Church AHH#1 exists.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 17:00:55 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Auction them entities

> > > You can't.  It's not a legal Ackanomic name as it has >20 letters.
> > > I could let you call it

> > That restriction only applies to player names.  How is it that
> > we have a Really Big Blue Thing That Doesn't Do Much, Really?

> Check the rules.  Swinger Offices must have Legal Ackanomic Names (tm).

Slakko has apparently made the common mistake of assuming that the
length limits on PLAYER names apply to all entity names, when in fact
they do not.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--The Boomtown Rats:Greatest Hits
Current Book--Juanita Coulson:Outward Bound
'My name is Inigo Montoya.  You stole my .sig quote.  Prepare to die.'

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:19:25 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 494 (two-star)

CFJ 494 has been assigned to two-star.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 494
  Subject: Multiple Judges
Initiator: else..if
Submitted: 97-12-16 22:07
    Judge: two-star (selected 97-12-17 19:19)
Judgement: 

Statement:
        A new judge must be chosen for CFJ 484.

Reasoning:
        The portion of rule 212 in question says: "The player selected has
3 days in which to accept or refuse the appointment by posting to the
applicable officer....If a selected player actively declines appointment,
then a further random selection is made from the remaining pool."  Clearly,
Balsamic Dragon accepted judgement for CFJ 484, and according to rule 213,
must deliver a judgement.  However, in addition, Balsamic Dragon has
declined judgement.  Therefore a new judge must be chosen.  In particular,
it is worth noting that the conjunction "or" in English is ambiguous, and
can mean "A or B," or "A or B, but not both"  In its strict logical context
however, it is taken to mean the latter.  Since there is no indication
other than game custom that both refusing and accepting is impossible, and
using the strictest definition of the word "or" it is indeed possible,
Balsamic Dragon has both accepted and refused CFJ 484, and a new judge must
be selected.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:23:11 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 495 (K 2)

CFJ 495 has been assigned to K 2.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 495
  Subject: This CFJ is Invalid
Initiator: else..if
Submitted: 97-12-17 16:59
    Judge: K 2 (selected 97-12-17 19:23)
Judgement: 

Statement:

This CFJ is false.

Reasoning:

[none]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:49:42 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 496 (two-star)

CFJ 496 has been assigned to two-star.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 496
  Subject: Judging CFJ 495
Initiator: else..if
Submitted: 97-12-17 19:33
    Judge: two-star (selected 97-12-17 19:49)
Judgement: 

Statement:

        CFJ 495 cannot be judged, and causes a paradox.

Reasoning:

        If CFJ is judged TRUE, than it is FALSE, and therefore must not be
judged FALSE, and must be judged TRUE.  This is clearly a paradox.  A
judgement of UNDECIDED does not help the issue because it only moves the
case to the Supreme Court.  It was filed legally and is entirely
legitimate, and so cannot be judged INVALID.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:57:35 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 484(A) (K 2)

CFJ 484(A) has been assigned to K 2.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 484(A)
  Subject: Trinkets
Initiator: Malenkai
Submitted: 97-12-11 9:09
    Judge: Calvin N Hobbes (deadbeat)
2nd Judge: Balsamic Dragon (declined)
3rd Judge: K 2 (selected 97-12-17 19:57)
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: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:58:52 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Actions

I retract proposal 2489.

I request membership in Vulcan.

I proxy my approval to the orgs Pumpkin Patch and Pumpkin Patch Nomic.

I go on semi-vacation for a while, meaning I should really be 
  on vacation, but I don't want to dump more work on breadbox and
  Alfvaen, so I will be around, sporadically, anyway, to do my offices,
  but not to play much nomic (except perhaps bid on those eggplant, if I have
  time).

Malenkai

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 20:05:33 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Forgot (at least) one thing

I appoint Rex Mundi acting senator for mr cwm.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 20:19:42 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Addition to reasoning

	I just wanted to point out that the statement in CFJ 495 is not
"inherently contradictory."  Rule 211 says that CFJs with inherently
contradictory statements are invalid.  However all 495's statement says is
that the CFJ is false.  This statement does not conflict with itself.  Even
if it is argued that the CFJ as a whole is self-contradictory, that does
not make the *statement* self-contradictory, as is required for it to be
invalid.

- --
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: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 16:54:00 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: 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.)

Of course, if I didn't know this, the web pages, including all the
mailto: links, would be out of date.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--The Boomtown Rats:Greatest Hits
Current Book--Juanita Coulson:Outward Bound
Reflections are images of tarnished aspirations.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 16:53:09 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: 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.

> {{[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.]}}

I object strongly to this.  Far from making my job(as one of the people
who has to sift through the mail looking for game actions the most)easier,
it will make it more difficult because I will have to check the headers
to see whether the action succeeded or not.  I will usually forget, and the
result will be a lot of actions discovered days later not to have occurred
(although two-week retroactivity will come to our rescue there, thank
Jara).

It is easier on the Harfers, IMHO, if any action can take place on any
list.  It is easier on the _players_ if it is the other way around,
because a player can potentially pick and choose what aspects of the
Game e cares about.  E may not care about games, so e can unsubscribe to
acka-games without fear that e will get penalized for missing a message
thereon.  But the Financier has to watch acka-games so that e knows
when e has to award a trophy to a winner or a fee to a referee.

Specifically, I think that acka-research is the most _logical_ place to
retract a Proposal, because that is where the discussion that results
in the author realizing the problems with the Proposal are most likely
to occur.

Personally, I'd prefer it if acka-finance went the way of the Dodo,
although not for its high traffic or anything.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--The Boomtown Rats:Greatest Hits
Current Book--Juanita Coulson:Outward Bound
A lot of people are afraid of heights.  Not me.  I'm afraid of widths.

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:35:08 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Actions

Malenkai wrote:
> I request membership in Vulcan.

I suggest Vulcan accept Malenkai as a member, and I approve this action.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 17:54:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Postal Code Change 107

>> {{[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.]}}
> 
> I object strongly to this.  Far from making my job(as one of the people
> who has to sift through the mail looking for game actions the most)easier,
> it will make it more difficult because I will have to check the headers
> to see whether the action succeeded or not.

I think you may have misunderstood me, or I am now miunderstanding
you.

The only restriction I added was to make acka-research off-limits to
everything. (Currently it is only available for retractions, and maybe
public voting.) On the other hand, I removed nearly every other
restriction. It would be legal to post any public action anywhere
*except* acka-research. Right now it is impermissible to post a *ping*
to the main list (for example).

> It is easier on the Harfers, IMHO, if any action can take place on
> any list.

With the exception of acka-research, that is exactly what I've done.
I made all of the restrictions advisory, because I too find it
difficult to remember to always check the headers.

> Specifically, I think that acka-research is the most _logical_ place
> to retract a Proposal, because that is where the discussion that
> results in the author realizing the problems with the Proposal are
> most likely to occur.

I understand, but since this only makes more work for me, I thought it
would be safe....

I dislike making retractions difficult (due to the reply-tos), but I
feel strongly that we *need* to have one list that is used only for
discussion and nothing else, rather than having multiple lists on
which some but not all actions can occur.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 21:39:27 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Delay

On Wed, 17 Dec 1997, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> 
> I would like to apologize in advance for the fact that the web pages,
> etc. probably won't get updated until tomorrow.  So nobody rely too
> greatly on the information that's up there, which is a day or two out
> of date already.  This is why we Officers have three days to do our
> duties.

And thats why you shouldn't even have to apologize.

> 
> I hope that I can manage not to default on my YORL turn, and that I'm
> not too late to submit my Eggplant bids...
> 
> I blame the delay on my brother being in town from Toronto for a couple
> of weeks, and "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" reruns on the Comedy Network.
> 

Cool!  I'm there man!

                                    - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 21:46:17 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 496 (two-star)

On Wed, 17 Dec 1997, Malenkai wrote:

> CFJ 496 has been assigned to two-star.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgment 496
>   Subject: Judging CFJ 495
> Initiator: else..if
> Submitted: 97-12-17 19:33
>     Judge: two-star (selected 97-12-17 19:49)
> Judgement: 
> 
> Statement:
> 
>         CFJ 495 cannot be judged, and causes a paradox.
> 
> Reasoning:
> 
>         If CFJ is judged TRUE, than it is FALSE, and therefore must not be
> judged FALSE, and must be judged TRUE.  This is clearly a paradox.  A
> judgement of UNDECIDED does not help the issue because it only moves the
> case to the Supreme Court.  It was filed legally and is entirely
> legitimate, and so cannot be judged INVALID.
> 

You do realize that this does not qualify as an actual Paradox Win CFJ,
because of the rather strict guidelines such a CFJ must follow, don't you?
I'd file my own PWCFJ, but I don't think it would work, and besides, I'm a
nice guy.  Really, I am.

                                   - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 21:50:37 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Actions

On Wed, 17 Dec 1997, Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:

> Malenkai wrote:
> > I request membership in Vulcan.
> 
> I suggest Vulcan accept Malenkai as a member, and I approve this action.
> 
> /dev/joe
> 

It's REAL tempting, but I guess I approve this action as well.  Like I
said, I'm a nice guy.

                                  - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 22:17:06 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 496 (two-star)

>You do realize that this does not qualify as an actual Paradox Win CFJ,
>because of the rather strict guidelines such a CFJ must follow, don't you?
>I'd file my own PWCFJ, but I don't think it would work, and besides, I'm a
>nice guy.  Really, I am.
	Ahhh!  Every sigle time it's the technicalities!  Thanks for
pointing that out, and for not going for the win yourself (not that it
would do you any good.  I could just withdraw 495.)  I withdraw CFJ 496.

- --
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: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 19:47:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 496 (two-star)

> I withdraw CFJ 496.

Before you submit a replacement, I suggest you re-read what the
rules say about Invalid judgements.

breadbox

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #424
*******************************