Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #462
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest       Tuesday, January 13 1998       Volume 02 : Number 462

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:57:11 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

> From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>

> On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, John Frederic Mc Coy wrote:
> 
> > I am voting in favor of the impeachment of Malenkai from the Office of
> > Speaker.
> 
> I vote YES on this impeachment.
> (2-0)
> 
> Further, I believe that Malenkai's yoke has affected the game
> dramatically!  All eir offices must be removed now!
> 
> I hereby call for the impeachment of Malenkai from the Office of Clerk of
> the Court.
> 
> I vote YES on this impeachment.
> (1-0)

You two are lucky I'm feeling kind and compassionate today. I think you've
both just attempted impossible actions, i.e., calling an impeachment paper
on an undead or voting on an impeachment that isn't currently in progress.
And we all know that impossible actions are illegal, don't we boys and
girls? I was sorely tempted to commit CFCJs against both of you. I would
have done too, if we had a proper CotC and weren't still reeling from
Malenkai leaving the game (allegedly :-)). Which reminds me; submitting a
CFJ at a time like this? Tsk, you should know better Slakko. In the CFJ 513
FALSE thread you can consider yourselves warned.

Incidentally, if there are any impeachment papers pending against Malenkai
for which I am legally able to vote yes then I do so.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:06:25 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 509 Verdict

> > What Malenkai wanted to know was, if you enter the Vault of the Book at
> > 12:00, and the OiCoRT determines at 18:00 that you got an Otzma Card
> > there, whether you get the Otzma Card at 12:00 or at 18:00.  My ruling
> > was that it would be at 12:00(although if you lost 5 points, that would
> > occur at 18:00).  Why would you get _another_ Untouch Me card?
> > 
> > (Hmmm, mistyped that as "Uncouth Me" the first time...that would be a
card
> > that would cause a Politeness Moon to be called on you, wouldn't it? 
:-)

Sounds interesting, I wonder how much people would pay for them?

> Well, Malenkai did the random choice before e left.  If TGW got the Otzma
> Card at the time of reading, it was determined to be Vulcan's Untouch Me
> card (TGW got Niccolo's Untouch Me card in the mini Auction, making it
> _another_ Untouch Me).  If it was at the time of determination, e got the
> Scientist for a Day card from the Auction (not the Treasury, but the
> Auction).

This is not quite right. I was down as already having an Untouch me card. I
auctioned this *to* Niccolo Flychuck so, by my reckoning, I should now have
one. I'm not sure though.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:26:57 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

The Gingham Wearer wrote:

>If this is an official verdict, or ever becomes official then I appeal it
>with the following reasoning (I somehow get the feeling that Malenkai might
>support this appeal:-)):

It is not official until the Clerk of the Courts releases it.  In fact, if
the CFJ statement is true then the CFJ itself does not exist, as it was not
distributed by the Clerk of the Courts, Malenkai.  (Don't you just love
Nomic?)  In any case, prospective actions are not allowed, so if this, or a
similar CFJ is ever judged TRUE then you will have to appeal it at that
time.

>There is some conflict in the rules, that is not under debate. I fail to
>see how rule 1 can prevent any of the Evil Overlords from leaving the game,
>however. The following are snippets from the rules that I consider
>relevant:

Oh, I see how it could be interpreted that way, but I have my doubts as to
whether that is the correct interpretation.

[...]

> Nothing in rule 1 indicates that no Evil Overlords may quit
>Acka so I believe that rule 101 takes precedence.

Well, that's assuming the result.  But determining the inter-rule precedence
is not really the point.  If Rule 1 says that the Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
(retired) cannot quit then they can't.  If it doesn't say that, then they can.
Intra-rule precedence may be applicable, of course.

>"But doesn't this lead to a paradox?" I hear you say. By rule 256 if
>Malenkai did leave the game then e becomes an undead and hence a
>non-player. By rule 1 e would therefore NOT be an Evil Overlord. The first
>quote from rule 1 includes states "Those players who were..." note this is
>not "Those who were members..." It specifically states PLAYERS. Malenkai is
>no longer a player so this does not apply to him. Even if the rule failed
>to specify players I still believe that Malenkai would not be an Evil
>Overlord since the later section from the rule should take precedence.
>
>I also fail to see how Malenkai's leaving the game would change the
>customary interpretation of rule 1. The customary interpretation is not
>that Malenkai, /dev/joe/, ThinMan and Vynd are Evil Overlords. It is that
>all entities who are players and were also members of Vulcan on August 28
>are Evil Overlords. Up until now, the two have been equivalent but there is
>now a significant difference.

This is consistent with my current evaluation.  Once the Clerk of the Courts
situation is sorted out, we shall have to call a CFJ.

ThinMan
I love this game.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:36:31 -0500
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

Following the Gingham Wearer's fine example, if there are any impeachment
papers pending against Malenkai then I vote YES on each of them.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:44:57 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

>Following the Gingham Wearer's fine example, if there are any impeachment
>papers pending against Malenkai then I vote YES on each of them.
	If there are any impeachment papers pending against Malenkai, I
vote YES on all of them.  If not, and Malenkai possesses any offices, than
I will call for the impeachment of Malenkai from all offices he holds.
	Since the CFJ's seem to get us into a problem, we could impeach him
if he is CotC, and then we won't have to worrt about it.

- --
- -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran

	<[email-masked]>

Ne dubita, cum magna petes, impendere parva
Do not hesitate to sacrifice the little things when your goal is great
	-Cato

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:52:59 -0500 (EST)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, Towsner wrote:

> I will call for the impeachment of Malenkai from all offices he holds.
this is not legal.  YOu can only call for an impeachment in one office,
and have only one IP pending.

Having said that, if there is a player named Malenkai, and he is CotC, and
there is not an impeachment pending, I submit the the following IP:

Malenkai should be removed from office as Clerk of the Court.  He has
oppressed us for too long!  He leaves the game, and he still opresses us.
It is time to throw the loser out!

rufus

BTW, has anyone told Malenkai of the trouble he has caused?  I think he
would get a kick out of it.

> 	Since the CFJ's seem to get us into a problem, we could impeach him
> if he is CotC, and then we won't have to worrt about it.
> 
> --
> -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran
> 
> 	<[email-masked]>
> 
> Ne dubita, cum magna petes, impendere parva
> Do not hesitate to sacrifice the little things when your goal is great
> 	-Cato
> 
> 

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 22:07:33 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Call for Useful Information (!)

I noticed when I was putting Malenkai's information in the Hall of Elders
that I had no idea what offices he previously held.  I gleaned some
information from old copies of the website (thanks to /dev/joe for not
removing them :-)) but this obviously was very patchy.  I was wondering if
anyone had a complete list of office holdings in the past.  I doubt that
this is likely, but it never hurts to ask.

Also, I would be very interested to hear from people when they took office
(if they can remember) for any offices they hold or have held in the past.
It would enable me to ensure that no former office is left out of the Hall
of Elders information, and I'm in the process of making what information I
do have available on Yet Another Webpage (offices.html).

Yours asking for information

Slakko
de facto Hall of Elders Harfer

- --
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, 13 Jan 1998 22:18:27 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Duel (Alfvaen / The Gingham Wearer)

On behalf of my esteemed colleage and co-Priest in the Most High
Church of banna, The Gingham Wearer, I extend an invitation to Alfvaen, he
who would defile banna, to a duel, over the content of the message
reprinted below:

> Surely even the dullest banana(though not, of course, banna)on the Net
> could see that "salvor" was a noun, not a verb!  And polishing with
> saliva?  The very idea of the thing!

Alfvaen, choose your second and your weapon, should you accept the
honourable course of action.

<takes off glove>
<drops in brick>
<slaps Alfvaen with a resoundingly satisfying WHACK>

Yours,
Slakko
- --
Duncan "mmmm, duel" 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, 13 Jan 1998 17:43:21 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

>	Okay.  If Malenkai is a player, AND he is CotC, AND, there are no
>impeachment papers against him, then I will call for his impeachment as
>CotC.  If there is an impeachment paper against him as CotC, then I will
>vote for it.
	My fault, I submitted it to research, which I don't think counts.
	If Malenkai is a player, AND he is CotC, AND, there are no
impeachment papers against him, then I will call for his impeachment as
CotC.  If there is an impeachment paper against him as CotC, then I will
vote for it.

- --
- -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran

	<[email-masked]>

Ne dubita, cum magna petes, impendere parva
Do not hesitate to sacrifice the little things when your goal is great
	-Cato

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 23:04:37 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Duel (Vynd)

> Tammany                                 [Vynd bribed Tammany A$25]
(Proposal 2561 rejected due to this)

> I return to my home, The Faceless State, delighted in the knowledge that
> after nearly a year of trying, I have succeeded in making an enemy.
(Referring to else...if)

> Obviously the author was deranged, perhaps hallucinating, when
> he wrote the proposal.  Believe me, I understand, it happens all
> the time I know.  I was merely trying to prevent him, in his
> dimished state, from doing something which he would regret
> when the leprechauns or what have you disappeared.  Really,
> I don't see what all the fuss is about.
(Again referring to else...if, author of proposal 2561)

(All acknowledged to be Vynd)

Despicable comments, I'm sure you'll agree. I was delighted when else...if
got in touch with me informing me of eir intent to challenge Vynd to a
duel. As eir second I convey unto Vynd this challenge from else...if on the
subject of eir distasteful actions and comments about proposal 2561. This
matter must be settled on the field of honour. I await the response from
Vynd's second.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 15:22:06 -0800
From: aaron shapiro <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

Im sure the last part of rule 101 is all fine and good but rule 1 has a much 
longer paragraph about guiding play, and a lower ordinal number.
I know you know this is true.
- ----------
From:  The Gingham Wearer
Sent:  Tuesday, January 13, 1998 12:09 PM
To:  [email-masked]
Subject:  Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

> > CFJ 513 has been assigned to Red Barn.
> 
>   I accept this.  I also return verdict by this message; see below.
> 
> > Acting Clerk of the Courts
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Call For Judgement 513
> >   Subject: Malenkai's playerhood II
> > Initiator: Slakko
> > Submitted: 98-01-13 04:52
> >     Judge: Red Barn (selected 98-01-13 10:34)
> > Judgement:
> > 
> > Statement:
> > 
> > Malenkai is a player of Ackanomic.
> > 
> > Initiator's Reasoning:
> > 
> > Rule 1 says:
> > 
> > The game state may not be altered in such a way as to cause the
customary
> > interpretation of this rule to be changed. 
> > 
> > Earlier in Rule 1 it says:
> > 
> > Those players who were members of Vulcan on August 28, 1997 [/dev/joe,
> > Malenkai, ThinMan, and Vynd] are Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired).
No
> > other players and no non-players are Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
> > (retired). 
> > 
> > The change in the game state from Malenkai being a player to Malenkai
no
> > longer being a player creates a conflict in Rule 1, between the first
> > sentence and the second sentence.  This therefore attempts to change
the
> > customary interpretation of the rule (clearly the interpretation cannot
be
> > the same if a conflict appears from no conflict).  Hence the change to
the
> > game state which caused the change is a figment of everyone's
imagination.
> > Hence Malenkai never left the game of Ackanomic.  Hence Malenkai is
still
> > an active player.
> 
>   I agree that he never left the game; that he is still active remains
> to be shown though it is probably the case.  TRUE.

If this is an official verdict, or ever becomes official then I appeal it
with the following reasoning (I somehow get the feeling that Malenkai might
support this appeal:-)):

There is some conflict in the rules, that is not under debate. I fail to
see how rule 1 can prevent any of the Evil Overlords from leaving the game,
however. The following are snippets from the rules that I consider
relevant:

(From Rule 1)
Those players who were members of Vulcan on August 28, 1997 [/dev/joe,
Malenkai, ThinMan, and Vynd] are Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired).

(From Rule 1)
No other players and no non-players are Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
(retired). 

(From Rule 1)
 If this rule conflicts with any other rule, then this rule shall guide
play.

(From Rule 101)
 A player always has the option to leave the Game of Ackanomic. 

(From Rule 101)
This rule has precedence over all other rules. 

(From Rule 256)
Upon a player leaving, the following procedure takes place, in the order
shown. 
<SNIP>
6) The player ceases to be a player and becomes an Undead. 

Firstly I shall attempt to decide precedence. By right, rule 1 should take
precedence over rule 101 and rule 256, and rule 101 should take precedence
over rule 256. Rule 101, however claims to take precedence over all other
rules. Rule 1 claims to take precedence "If this rule conflicts with any
other rule". Nothing in rule 1 indicates that no Evil Overlords may quit
Acka so I believe that rule 101 takes precedence.

"But doesn't this lead to a paradox?" I hear you say. By rule 256 if
Malenkai did leave the game then e becomes an undead and hence a
non-player. By rule 1 e would therefore NOT be an Evil Overlord. The first
quote from rule 1 includes states "Those players who were..." note this is
not "Those who were members..." It specifically states PLAYERS. Malenkai is
no longer a player so this does not apply to him. Even if the rule failed
to specify players I still believe that Malenkai would not be an Evil
Overlord since the later section from the rule should take precedence.

I also fail to see how Malenkai's leaving the game would change the
customary interpretation of rule 1. The customary interpretation is not
that Malenkai, /dev/joe/, ThinMan and Vynd are Evil Overlords. It is that
all entities who are players and were also members of Vulcan on August 28
are Evil Overlords. Up until now, the two have been equivalent but there is
now a significant difference.

I think that that just about covers everything. Although I feel that any
one of these points should be enough to overturn the judgement, I felt it
necessary to write them all down so as not to be deemed frivolous. I shall
also use this opportunity to point out that if I am wrong then Vulcan ought
to disband, their charter includes the repeal of badly written rules and if
they have made such an elimentary error in a rule which is intended to
remain in the rules for ever then a sense of morality and what is write....
Still I digress, I firmly believe that this should be overturned to FALSE.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 15:15:05 -0800
From: aaron shapiro <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: acka:demo

Yeah uuhhhmmmm....it's not a typo at all.  I made that word up on purpose.
Its similar to depiction but, well figure it out on your own its easy.

- ----------
From:  A.K.A. TheWiz
Sent:  Tuesday, January 13, 1998 7:28 AM
To:  'ackaposts'
Subject:  Re: acka:demo

> I hereby create a trinket, named "DEMO FOR RICO."  It is about 1/8 of a 
> standard cat height long and has a defiction of the steps involved in the making 

  'defiction'?  Hey, I like that word.

___Dan_Knapp____The_Mauve_Baron______________________Beep Blip Bonk_______
<[email-masked]><[email-masked]> http://users.bergen.org/~dankna
Visit ftp://ftp.gmd.de/if-archive/ and find out about text adventures!
Age is wasted on the old.

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

Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 00:02:59 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

> Im sure the last part of rule 101 is all fine and good but rule 1 has a
much 
> longer paragraph about guiding play, and a lower ordinal number.
> I know you know this is true.

I disagree but argue that it is all irrelevant the main bit of my argument
is this, the rest was included just to make sure.

The Gingham Wearer.

> "But doesn't this lead to a paradox?" I hear you say. By rule 256 if
> Malenkai did leave the game then e becomes an undead and hence a
> non-player. By rule 1 e would therefore NOT be an Evil Overlord. The
first
> quote from rule 1 includes states "Those players who were..." note this
is
> not "Those who were members..." It specifically states PLAYERS. Malenkai
is
> no longer a player so this does not apply to him. Even if the rule failed
> to specify players I still believe that Malenkai would not be an Evil
> Overlord since the later section from the rule should take precedence.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 19:12:00 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> > From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
> 
> > On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, John Frederic Mc Coy wrote:
> > 
> > > I am voting in favor of the impeachment of Malenkai from the Office of
> > > Speaker.
> > 
> > I vote YES on this impeachment.
> > (2-0)
> > 
> > Further, I believe that Malenkai's yoke has affected the game
> > dramatically!  All eir offices must be removed now!
> > 
> > I hereby call for the impeachment of Malenkai from the Office of Clerk of
> > the Court.
> > 
> > I vote YES on this impeachment.
> > (1-0)
> 
> You two are lucky I'm feeling kind and compassionate today. I think you've
> both just attempted impossible actions, i.e., calling an impeachment paper
> on an undead or voting on an impeachment that isn't currently in progress.
> And we all know that impossible actions are illegal, don't we boys and
> girls? I was sorely tempted to commit CFCJs against both of you. I would
> have done too, if we had a proper CotC and weren't still reeling from
> Malenkai leaving the game (allegedly :-)). Which reminds me; submitting a
> CFJ at a time like this? Tsk, you should know better Slakko. In the CFJ 513
> FALSE thread you can consider yourselves warned.

All jokes aside, if Malenkai really did fail to quit the game, then it is
of vital importance that he be removed from his offices, post haste.  I
encourage everyone to vote in favor of the impeachments.  If it so happens
that Malenkai decides to come back and quit his offices himself, they can
be retracted.  But if we have Alfvaen acting as speaker for too long
before determining that Malenkai really is still the Speaker, it could
make it very difficult to straighten things out.

> 
> 
> Incidentally, if there are any impeachment papers pending against Malenkai
> for which I am legally able to vote yes then I do so.
> 

I am voting in favor of impeaching Malenkai from the office of the Clerk
of the Court.

                                   - Vynd

[email-masked]

> 
> The Gingham Wearer.
> 

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 19:14:52 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, Towsner wrote:

> 	If there are any impeachment papers pending against Malenkai, I
> vote YES on all of them.  If not, and Malenkai possesses any offices, than
> I will call for the impeachment of Malenkai from all offices he holds.
> 	Since the CFJ's seem to get us into a problem, we could impeach him
> if he is CotC, and then we won't have to worrt about it.

This doesn't work.  You can only call one impeachment paper at a time, and
you ahve to specify the player and the office.  Unless I am misremembering
things, the only two offices Malenkai holds (held) that really need to be
freed up right away are Speaker and Clerk of the Court.

> 
> --
> -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran
> 

                                          - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 00:23:14 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

> All jokes aside, if Malenkai really did fail to quit the game, then it is
> of vital importance that he be removed from his offices, post haste.  I
> encourage everyone to vote in favor of the impeachments.  If it so
happens
> that Malenkai decides to come back and quit his offices himself, they can
> be retracted.  But if we have Alfvaen acting as speaker for too long
> before determining that Malenkai really is still the Speaker, it could
> make it very difficult to straighten things out.

I agree with you 100% here, hence my votes in favour. The reason for my
joking is that I cannot believe a verdict of true could come back from the
two relevant CFJs. They strike me as ridiculous actually, as I pointed out.
The idea behind the IP may be right but ultimately it's misplaced :-)

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:27:13 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Elders

> If, in fact, it is possible for me to do so, I support Malenkai's and mr cwm's
> nominations to the Hall of Elders.  If not possible, then I will just remark
> that it's only because you people sling around too much e-mail to wade through
> with hip boots.

No, in Malenkai's case it's because he's not an undead.  Pot, kettle, black?

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--David Byrne:The Catherine Wheel
Current Book--David Foster Wallace:Infinite Jest
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:22:54 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: Well, Indeed

It appears that in the CFJ 513 TRUE thread, I am not the Clerk of The
Courts and hence cannot distribute the results, or indeed have distributed
the original CFJ.  Didn't something like this happen at the end of May,
the last time there was confusion about who the Clerk of the Courts
was?  In any event, since my acting as Clerk of the Court would result in
a thread where I would not legally be Acting Clerk of the Court, it must
be the case that I am not Acting Clerk of the Court.

In the thread where, if CFJ 513 had been able to be legally distributed,
if such a thread exists, I am voting YES for the impeachment of Malenkai
from the offices of Speaker and Clerk of The Court.  (These would be
Vynd's Speaker IP, and I believe Slakko's(?) CotC IP.  The first ones
out, anyway.)

Very bright of the Vulcans to make it impossible for _them_ to amend Rule
1 when it needs fixing...you'd need a ukase to fix this one.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--David Byrne:The Catherine Wheel
Current Book--David Foster Wallace:Infinite Jest
Holo Graham Crackers--FREE invisible ink pack!

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 14:33:23 -1000
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

For what it's worth, I, Slagothor, vote YES on each, every, and any
impeachment paper that currently legally exists, for any player, and from
any office.  Just to clear up any possible misconceptions.

- -rico

Where do you want to go, toady?

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 19:51:11 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: cfjs

Apparently there is some doubt as to whether I am still
a player, and people have asked me to distribute some
CFJs on the matter, which I will do.

Also, since I got this request, I have tried to read the
archives on muppetlabs.  I cannot read the digest with n461 in
its name (my browser says the file is not there) but read all 
the others, and will attempt to do the things this game state
in which I am a player would have required me to do, with the 
exception, of course, that I do not know what happened in n461.

I see a CFJ 513 forwarded to me, that was judged TRUE,
yet was assigned by a CotC that was not me.  No doubt
someone is discussing this in the digest that I cannot
read, but this verdict by this judge assignment is not
possible; I believe CFJ 513 must be judged other than
TRUE in this case, or the judge must never return a
verdict.

BTW, Markovian Dream is an allusion to JL Chalker

Beldin's Pants is an allusion to Eddings; moreover,
the rule is a metaphor for the allusion, which is 
a metaphor for nomic, and most of life

Mohammed was the only player to be a Justice, Speaker,
Prez and Senator

As for the march 18/20th thing, chess piece face put me
in the game march 18, but announced it on march 20th.
Back then, publically knowable did not exist.  These
sorts of things are the reason we now do things PK.

Malenkai
half-dead?
Jazz Jackrabbit

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 19:57:07 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

> For what it's worth, I, Slagothor, vote YES on each, every, and any
> impeachment paper that currently legally exists, for any player, and from
> any office.  Just to clear up any possible misconceptions.

I vote no on any impeachment paper directed at me in any thread
in which I am a player.

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:02:38 -0500 (EST)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Impeachment papers

On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, Malenkai wrote:

> > For what it's worth, I, Slagothor, vote YES on each, every, and any
> > impeachment paper that currently legally exists, for any player, and from
> > any office.  Just to clear up any possible misconceptions.
> 
> I vote no on any impeachment paper directed at me in any thread
> in which I am a player.
> 
I don't think you can vote in your own impeachment...
rufus

> Malenkai
> 

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:24:40 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 509 + other stuff

CFJ 509 has been judged FALSE.

BTW, I never received a submission of what 
would be CFJ 512 in your reality, but since I
received a CFJ 513, I presume there is something
labelled CFJ 512 somewhere.

The rules do not require CFJs to be distributed
in numerical order, so I will distribute the thing
sent to me as 513 as 513.

Niccolo Flychuck has found the magic potato in
my reality.

Also, if the CPPIA has not yet delivered a verdict,
it is in comtempt.

Oh, and sorry about the museum thing, but somebody
could'a reminded me :)

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:27:33 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 513 (K 2)

In this thread, which calls for a verdict of TRUE,
K 2 has been selected.

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgement 513
>   Subject: Malenkai's playerhood II
> Initiator: Slakko
> Submitted: 98-01-13 05:10
>     Judge: K 2 (selected 98-01-13 20:26)
> Judgement:
> 
> Statement:
> 
> Malenkai is a player of Ackanomic.
> 
> Initiator's Reasoning:
> 
> Rule 1 says:
> 
> The game state may not be altered in such a way as to cause the customary
> interpretation of this rule to be changed. 
> 
> Earlier in Rule 1 it says:
> 
> Those players who were members of Vulcan on August 28, 1997 [/dev/joe,
> Malenkai, ThinMan, and Vynd] are Evil Overlords of Ackanomic (retired). No
> other players and no non-players are Evil Overlords of Ackanomic
> (retired). 
> 
> The change in the game state from Malenkai being a player to Malenkai no
> longer being a player creates a conflict in Rule 1, between the first
> sentence and the second sentence.  This therefore attempts to change the
> customary interpretation of the rule (clearly the interpretation cannot be
> the same if a conflict appears from no conflict).  Hence the change to the
> game state which caused the change is a figment of everyone's imagination.
> Hence Malenkai never left the game of Ackanomic.  Hence Malenkai is still
> an active player.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:34:28 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 514 (K 2)

K 2 has also received CFJ 514.  I note that in the submission
I received from the initiator, no statement was "clearly
labelled" (or otherwise delimited) as the statement on which
judgement is being called.  I have distributed it as the
initiator has sent it to me.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 514
  Subject: cfj 513 cfj
Initiator: rufus
Submitted: 98-01-13 19:57
    Judge: K 2 (selected 98-01-13 20:31)
Judgement: 

This is a paradox win CFJ.

It was both illegal and legal for alfvaen to assign CFJ 513 to Red Barn.

Reasoning: 

If CFJ 513 was ruled false, then the CFJ was perfectly legal, as Alfvaen
is Acting Clerk of the Courts.  However, if the CFJ was ruled true, then
Malenkai is still a player, and still the holder of office of Clerk of the
Court, and thus required to distribute it.  Alfvaen's actions were not
legal.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:40:39 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 514 (K 2)

>This is a paradox win CFJ.
	Personally, I think it was inappropriate for anyone to make a
paradox win CFJ under the cirumstances.  Noone should be adding to the
confusion, and there are plenty of paradoxes floating around which we're
all aware of, so there's no originality involved.

>If CFJ 513 was ruled false, then the CFJ was perfectly legal, as Alfvaen
>is Acting Clerk of the Courts.  However, if the CFJ was ruled true, then
>Malenkai is still a player, and still the holder of office of Clerk of the
>Court, and thus required to distribute it.  Alfvaen's actions were not
>legal.
	It wasn't both, it was one or the other, we just don't know which.

- --
- -Henry Towsner, AKA else...if, The Fearless Alibi Posesser, Laefu, and Yilran

	<[email-masked]>

Ne dubita, cum magna petes, impendere parva
Do not hesitate to sacrifice the little things when your goal is great
	-Cato

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:57:19 -0500
From: Malenkai <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: my status

I'm not sure how the argument goes that I am still
a player, but if it is judged that I am, I shall stay
subscribed to the mailing lists (as it is a crime to do
otherwise).

Also, if I remain, I would like to remain CotC.  I
was always pretty good at that one (note that the
IP can be retracted if you want).  As for the other
offices, which is easier for you folks, to impeach me
or for me to resign?

Malenkai

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:04:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: In Contempt

1) I hereby apologize to my fellow Committee members for not
fulfilling my promise to report the results in time. (The deadline
passed about four hours ago.) FWIW, the vote was unanimously for
"inane"; I believe Crackfoo was the only one who abstained.

2) I am paying A$100 to the Treasury. I am no longer in Contempt.

3) I am hereby destroying the following trinkets:

A$30   Manx Cat
A$15   Military Laser
A$33   Bug Bashing Implement
A$77   Mister Cwm's Bench
A$40   Fon-due Set
A$100  Stormbringer
A$29   The Public Ally

for a total of A$324.

4) I am hereby gifting Balsamic Dragon, K 2, Rex Mundi, Crackfoo,
Alfvaen, and Niccolo Flychuck with A$100 each. I suggest that they pay
this money to the Treasury ASAP if they don't want to go to Gaol for
three days.

5) I also offer an apology to Alfvaen for making morework for him with
this message.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:29:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Can we slow down for a few days please

1. Vynd has filed an IP against Malenkai for the position of Speaker,
   but only in the CFJ 513 TRUE thread. So either Malenkai or Alfvaen
   is Acting Speaker. There is no official Speaker in either thread.

2. Slakko has filed an IP against Malenkai for the position of CotC
   in both threads. This failed in the CFJ 513 FALSE thread. So
   either Malenkai or Alfvaen is Acting CotC. There is no official
   CotC in either thread.

3. Now that Malenkai is resubscribed, I would ask that Vynd and Slakko
   retract their IPs. It will be a *hell* of a lot easier to do this
   directly. I realize that this will cost you some points, but what
   can I say? Filing the IP was hasty. I understand why you did it,
   but right now it's just going to complicate matters. Anyway, maybe
   you'll get your points back in the upcoming Tornado....

4. In the CFJ 513 TRUE thread, the voting results on several recent
   proposals were incorrect, because I erased Malenkai's votes. I will
   have to go back and check to see if this changed anything. This is
   also going to affect the twenty or so proposals that are going to
   leave the queue in the next 24 hours.

5. Malenkai: there's a 15-minute window in which a digest is placed in
   the ftp directory but does not have world-readable permissions. It's
   possible you hit the file at just the wrong time. Try it again; if
   you still can't access it, I'll take a look. Right now, though, I
   have to run. I'll deal with the voting results when I get back....

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 19:56:36 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: my status

> I'm not sure how the argument goes that I am still
> a player, but if it is judged that I am, I shall stay
> subscribed to the mailing lists (as it is a crime to do
> otherwise).

I guess the reasoning is that since you are an Evil Overlord of
Ackanomic (retired), and by Rule 1 no non-player can be an EOA(r),
you must therefore be a player, and hence cannot be an undead.

> Also, if I remain, I would like to remain CotC.  I
> was always pretty good at that one (note that the
> IP can be retracted if you want).  As for the other
> offices, which is easier for you folks, to impeach me
> or for me to resign?

Resignation would be faster, or that "announcing intention to
resign" thing.  Or is that only for Functional Offices?  That way,
we don't have to fill up the public forum with votes that rufus has
to try to count.  If you resign, as Clerk of the Court you'll be
Acting Speaker until a replacement is selected anyway.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--David Byrne:The Catherine Wheel
Current Book--David Foster Wallace:Infinite Jest
Be as redditive as it is in Ys.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:00:22 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 509 + other stuff

> CFJ 509 has been judged FALSE.

> BTW, I never received a submission of what 
> would be CFJ 512 in your reality, but since I
> received a CFJ 513, I presume there is something
> labelled CFJ 512 somewhere.

I received two CFJ submissions this morning, one from Bill the
pirate king and one from Slakko, both basically of the same gist.
At the time, I thought I was Acting Clerk of the Court, and hadn't
yet thought through what would happen if the CFJ's were TRUE...

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--David Byrne:The Catherine Wheel
Current Book--David Foster Wallace:Infinite Jest
It's so fresh, you'll sue it for sexual harassment!

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

Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 14:04:02 -1000
From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 514 (K 2)

I accept.

> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgment 514
>   Subject: cfj 513 cfj
> Initiator: rufus
> Submitted: 98-01-13 19:57
>     Judge: K 2 (selected 98-01-13 20:31)
> Judgement:
>
> This is a paradox win CFJ.
>
> It was both illegal and legal for alfvaen to assign CFJ 513 to Red Barn.

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

Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:04:21 -1000
From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (K 2)

Interesting, if I accept this I _have_ to judge it FALSE...

This situation is rapidly starting to look paradoxical.

I accept this CFJ.

DISCLAIMER
my acceptance of this CFJ in no way predisposes me to a verdict

> Call For Judgement 513
> Subject: Malenkai's playerhood II
> Initiator: Slakko
> Submitted: 98-01-13 05:10
> Judge: K 2 (selected 98-01-13 20:26)
> Judgement:
>
> Statement:
>
> Malenkai is a player of Ackanomic.
>

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #462
*******************************