Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #477
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest      Wednesday, January 21 1998      Volume 02 : Number 477

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 07:37:45 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Clubs

I hereby apply to join the Player Sanctioned Organization Preservation
Society.  It has an open membership policy, so I believe I am now a
member.

Yours,
Slakko

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 08:17:19 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma Auction

On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, Alexandre Muniz wrote:

> I bid 25 A$ on the Share Your Income Otzma Card

I bid 28A$ on the Share Your Income Otzma Card Auction

I bid 22A$ in the Auction for 2 Otzma Card Share My Expenses.

Yours,
Slakko
Chief Cheese
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:29:31 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Finished Otzma Auctions (1 of 2)

Four of the six otzma card auctions have been completed.  The results are
as follows:

Map Shard: The Gingham Wearer for A$20
Grave Robber: The Gingham Wearer for A$20
Skeleton Key: The Gingham Wearer for A$20
Scientist for a Day: The Gingham Wearer for A$35.

The other two auctions are still in progress at the moment.

Yours,
Slakko
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:53:18 -1000
From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma: End of the Day

>

I bid in the following manner :

> Auction B: 2 Share My Expenses  : $A25
> Auction C: 1 Share Your Income  : $A31

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:07:54 +0200 (EET)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka : CFJ with corrected typo ?

This all I got, when I tried to forward it directly, I got an error
message about the body content (could someone please redeistribute):
- ----------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 11:54:36 -0600
From: Crackfoo <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: CFJ with typo corrected.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:09:32 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma: End of the Day

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, K 2 wrote:

> > Auction C: 1 Share Your Income  : $A31

I bid A$35 on the Share Your Income card.

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:12:36 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: PWCFJ?

Can anyone explain how Crackfoo's CFJ is a PWCFJ?
I can't work it out.
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:15:00 -1000
From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma: End of the Day

I bid A$40 on the Share Your Income card.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:35:31 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: A Grand in the Hand (well, almost)

I go to the Museum.

I play an Otzma Card Art Thief, naming the Improved Tasteless Trinket of
Timekeeping.

I go to my home.
I transform the Improved Tasteless Trinket of Timekeeping into A$999.
I create a new trinket, valued at A$900, called The Folly of Fooling with
Slakko, with the following description:

"It is a large cubic zirconia with a carved inscription on the top.  On
closer inspection the inscription reads: Thank Heavens for Sticky Fingers
and Otzma Cards."

- -- 
Duncan C. "the world's biggest cubic zirconia in his home" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:49:57 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> I believe someone said that it would be best if Slakko appealed this
> verdict. I want this appealed but if it would be easier for someone else to
> do it then I shall let them. Can someone who knows what's going on please
> tell me :-).

I'm actually quite happy with this verdict.  If anyone wants to appeal it
they are welcome to, but I'm not throwing away my points to support
something I don't believe in.
- -- 
Duncan C. "but note the threads still aren't unified" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 07:38:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ]

> I retract this due to a typo.
> 
> Crackfoo

Actually, "this" is not a CFJ, in any thread. It was forwarded by
Malenkai to the main list, but without any designation of who was to
judge it. I imagine he was simply directing it to the list so the
actual CotC could grab it. But since it was not sent to the CotC by
its author, the CotC is probably within their rights to not accept it
anyway.

b

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 07:43:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

>> I believe someone said that it would be best if Slakko appealed this
>> verdict. I want this appealed but if it would be easier for someone else to
>> do it then I shall let them. Can someone who knows what's going on please
>> tell me :-).
> 
> I'm actually quite happy with this verdict.  If anyone wants to appeal it
> they are welcome to, but I'm not throwing away my points to support
> something I don't believe in.

Fine. But if the Supreme Court decides to uphold the original verdict,
we're still thread-split. Nothing is solved.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 07:44:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

> I cannot, however, distribute CFJ 512 because, as far as I can tell,
> I never received it directly or through the main list.  The record I
> have of CFJ 512 is a message from Malenkai that says that it was
> originally sent to his personal address.

CFJ 512 was distributed by Alfvaen while he was still Acting CotC,
wasn't it? You shouldn't need to distribute it, as far as I can tell.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:47:51 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> >> I believe someone said that it would be best if Slakko appealed this
> >> verdict. I want this appealed but if it would be easier for someone else to
> >> do it then I shall let them. Can someone who knows what's going on please
> >> tell me :-).
> > 
> > I'm actually quite happy with this verdict.  If anyone wants to appeal it
> > they are welcome to, but I'm not throwing away my points to support
> > something I don't believe in.
> 
> Fine. But if the Supreme Court decides to uphold the original verdict,
> we're still thread-split. Nothing is solved.

Hang on.  I thought the Supreme Court deciding a verdict eliminated one of
the threads.  How could we still be thread-split?

Yours,
Slakko
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:20:19 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ]

- ----------
> From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ]
> Date: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 10:38 AM
> 
> > I retract this due to a typo.
> > 
> > Crackfoo
> 
> Actually, "this" is not a CFJ, in any thread. It was forwarded by
> Malenkai to the main list, but without any designation of who was to
> judge it. I imagine he was simply directing it to the list so the
> actual CotC could grab it. But since it was not sent to the CotC by
> its author, the CotC is probably within their rights to not accept it
> anyway.
> 
> b
> 

As Clerk of the Court in this thread, I will not distribute any CFJ that is
sent to another personal address before being forwarded to this list unless
there is some postal situation that I am not aware of that necessitates
this roundabout method.  If Crackfoo wants to submit a CFJ in this thread,
he should send it to me directly (preferable) or to the public list
(acceptable).  Otherwise I have to assume it is being sent to the Clerk of
the Court in the other thread (Malenkai).

Actually, what it appears Crackfoo is trying to do in the paradox win
attempt is claim a paradox win because of events that took place before the
thread split, i.e., Malenkai's alleged resignation.  This might, if
successful, cause a thread split in thread number 1, the
Malenkai-resigned-and-Malenkai-didn't-quit thread and the Malenkai-didn't
resign-Malenkai-didn't-quit thread.  But I'm not sure why he thinks
Malenkai ever resigned before he attempted to quit, at least, I don't
remember anything about that. . .

Confusedly, 

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:21:34 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

- ----------
> From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
> To: Ackanomic <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)
> Date: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 10:44 AM
> 
> > I cannot, however, distribute CFJ 512 because, as far as I can tell,
> > I never received it directly or through the main list.  The record I
> > have of CFJ 512 is a message from Malenkai that says that it was
> > originally sent to his personal address.
> 
> CFJ 512 was distributed by Alfvaen while he was still Acting CotC,
> wasn't it? You shouldn't need to distribute it, as far as I can tell.
> 
> breadbox
> 

I don't have anything on the results of CFJ 512 from Alfvaen in my box, but
guess I could have 
missed it...

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:49:33 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Shameless Promotion

> And in particular, don't forget to vote for Proposal 2595. And note
> that, if this proposal is accepted, I as your Historian will recount
> some of the past events of Ackanomic for the dates of your choosing.
> ("And that's the way it was ...") But, you need to send me your date
> of choice by this coming Wednesday. If you send them to me on
> Thursday, I can't guarantee I'll have the time to do the necessary
> research. (And if you send them to me on Friday, it'll certainly be
> too late.) So pick a date!
> 
> breadbox

Dates to check out:

October 14: 	Balsamic Dragon's Birthday
April 1:		April Fool's Day
August 16:	Day Balsamic Dragon joined Ackanomic

(if you only have time for one, they are in order of preference)

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:54:41 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PWCFJ?

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> Can anyone explain how Crackfoo's CFJ is a PWCFJ?
> I can't work it out.
> -- 
> Duncan C. "" Richer aka

Well, it isn't, if for no other reason than the fact that he included the
statement "This is a Paradox Win CFJ" in his statement (once a common
practice, I might add).  In fact, I'd say it is invalid, since it contains
more than one statement in its, um, statement.

                                     - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 08:57:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

>>> I cannot, however, distribute CFJ 512 because, as far as I can tell,
>>> I never received it directly or through the main list.  The record I
>>> have of CFJ 512 is a message from Malenkai that says that it was
>>> originally sent to his personal address.
>> 
>> CFJ 512 was distributed by Alfvaen while he was still Acting CotC,
>> wasn't it? You shouldn't need to distribute it, as far as I can tell.
>> 
>> breadbox
>> 
> 
> I don't have anything on the results of CFJ 512 from Alfvaen in my box, but
> guess I could have 
> missed it...

Oh, I thought you were referring to the original CFJ itself, not the
verdict.

As far as I know, CFJ 512 has not been judged in the Malenkai-quit
thread. Unless the verdict has been returned but not published, I can
only assume Crackfoo will go deadbeat on it very soon, if he has not
already (presuming that Crackfoo actually accepted it in the first
place.)

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:58:10 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ]

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Vivian Norwood wrote:

> 
> As Clerk of the Court in this thread, I will not distribute any CFJ that is
> sent to another personal address before being forwarded to this list unless
> there is some postal situation that I am not aware of that necessitates
> this roundabout method.  If Crackfoo wants to submit a CFJ in this thread,
> he should send it to me directly (preferable) or to the public list
> (acceptable).  Otherwise I have to assume it is being sent to the Clerk of
> the Court in the other thread (Malenkai).

Unless I am mistaken, you are now the Clerk of the Court in both threads,
and have been for a few days.

                                   - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:03:00 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Treasure

> I am burying the Vegetarian Lasagne with a couple (2) of Share your
> income otzma cards and a Skeleton Key Otzma Card.
> 
> I imagine someone who does the following will find the treasure
> 
> *** **
> **** **
> ** **** ****** ******* **
> 
> K2 :)
> 

Planning on releasing any hints on this one???

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:03:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

>> Fine. But if the Supreme Court decides to uphold the original verdict,
>> we're still thread-split. Nothing is solved.
> 
> Hang on.  I thought the Supreme Court deciding a verdict eliminated one of
> the threads.  How could we still be thread-split?

What are you talking about?

CFJ 513 has a self-invalidating verdict in both threads. If it is
appealed in only one thread, and that verdict is upheld, then CFJ 513
will *still* have a self-invalidating verdict in both threads. Nothing
will have changed at all.

CFJ 513 needs to be appealed in the thread that will become the thread
that we play. Without knowing ahead of time which thread that is, it
needs to be appealed in both.

In fact, if you stopped and thought about it, you would realize that
this appeal is guaranteed not to affect your score. We *know* that the
verdict will be overturned; we just don't know which one.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:09:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: PWCFJ?

> Well, it isn't, if for no other reason than the fact that he
> included the statement "This is a Paradox Win CFJ" in his statement
> (once a common practice, I might add).

Not quite true. The practice was, and basically still is, to include
"This is a Paradox Win CFJ" in the *reasoning*, not the statement.

In any case, Rule 601 explicitly states what CFJs are Paradox Win
CFJs. Any CFJ that does not have a statement that fits the description
therein is not a Paradox Win CFJ, no matter what the initiator may
claim.

> In fact, I'd say it is invalid, since it contains more than one
> statement in its, um, statement.

True, although that is left up to the judge. They can choose to accept
it as a single statement if they wish.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:09:20 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> CFJ 513 has a self-invalidating verdict in both threads. If it is
> appealed in only one thread, and that verdict is upheld, then CFJ 513
> will *still* have a self-invalidating verdict in both threads. Nothing
> will have changed at all.
> 
> CFJ 513 needs to be appealed in the thread that will become the thread
> that we play. Without knowing ahead of time which thread that is, it
> needs to be appealed in both.
> 
> In fact, if you stopped and thought about it, you would realize that
> this appeal is guaranteed not to affect your score. We *know* that the
> verdict will be overturned; we just don't know which one.

Okay.  Just to make it simple.  I thought I'd appealed each of them twice
already.

I hereby appeal any CFJs called 513 which I have not already appealed, in
any and all threads where it is legal to do so.

Happy?

Yours,
Slakko
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:04:51 -0600
From: "Crackfoo" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

I judged cfj512 that was distributed by alvaen.  my judgement was 'false'.
The message to alvaen apparently has been bouncing and may or may not have
reached him yet.

crackfoo.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Vivian Norwood <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Date: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

>
>
>----------
>> From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
>> To: Ackanomic <[email-masked]>
>> Subject: Re: Fw: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)
>> Date: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 10:44 AM
>>
>> > I cannot, however, distribute CFJ 512 because, as far as I can tell,
>> > I never received it directly or through the main list.  The record I
>> > have of CFJ 512 is a message from Malenkai that says that it was
>> > originally sent to his personal address.
>>
>> CFJ 512 was distributed by Alfvaen while he was still Acting CotC,
>> wasn't it? You shouldn't need to distribute it, as far as I can tell.
>>
>> breadbox
>>
>
>I don't have anything on the results of CFJ 512 from Alfvaen in my box, but
>guess I could have
>missed it...
>
>Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:20:32 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Results of INP Voting (358, 359)

Ackanomic will vote FOR both INP 358 and 359.

The voting was heavily one sided and was as follows:

INP 358

FOR:		Slakko, Balsamic Dragon, Niccolo Flychuck, ThinMan, Red Bard, K2
AGAINST:  	None

INP 359	

FOR:		Slakko, Balsamic Dragon, Vynd, Vynd's EBS, ThinMan, Niccolo Flychuck,
K2
AGAINST:	Red Barn

Balsamic Dragon
Ambassador

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:21:40 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ]

> Unless I am mistaken, you are now the Clerk of the Court in both threads,
> and have been for a few days.
> 
>                                    - Vynd
> 
> [email-masked]
> 
> 
> 
Ummm, nobody has told me that yet!   Alfvaen?

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:30:23 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ]

>> Unless I am mistaken, you are now the Clerk of the Court in both threads,
>> and have been for a few days.
> 
> Ummm, nobody has told me that yet!   Alfvaen?

You must have missed it:

> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 13:35:47 -0700 (MST)
> From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
> Subject: Acka: Prompt
> 
> In the thread where Malenkai never left, and announced eir intention to
> resign as Clerk of the Courts, I appoint Balsamic Dragon the new Clerk
> of the Courts.  So now e is CotC in both threads.  And so it won't be
> paradoxical for em to release either version of the results for CFJ
> 512 or 513 or whatever.  (I presume e would be able to, since while the
> results may have been distributed to me, I never posted them, and somebody
> has to...)

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:26:11 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

> In an attempt to make things less (more?) complicated, I publish this
> official result if a) I am Clerk of the Courts, b) it is in my power to
> distribute this, and c) it will make the lives of any ackanomians easier.
> 
> I cannot, however, distribute CFJ 512 because, as far as I can tell, I
> never received it directly or through the main list.  The record I have
of
> CFJ 512 is a message from Malenkai that says that it was originally sent
to
> his personal address.

I am appealing this CFJ. For my reasoning see the post I made when I first
attempted to appeal this.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:36:52 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Otzma Auction Results (Part 2 of 2)

The other two auctions have now finished.

#transfer K 2:Treasury:40 A$: Otzma Card Share Your Income
#transfer K 2:Treasury:25 A$: Otzma Card Share My Expenses
#transfer Slakko:Treasury:22 A$: Otzma Card Share My Expenses

Yours,
Slakko

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Ackanomic - RuneMaker - Chess-Umpire - Map-Harfer - Senator - Swinger

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:47:10 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: first time!

Okay, the following post should be my first official CFJ distribution.  
Please let me know ASAP if I didn't do this right :)

PS, I'm going to see if I can sort out the thread stuff, but I could use
some input on how I should label these things.  I figure if I don't say
what thread it is in, it will probably go in both.

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:47:51 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 514 (Vynd)

Vynd has been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 514
  Subject:  This is a paradox win CFJ
Initiator: Crackfoo
Submitted: 1/21/98, 12:11 pm
    Judge: Vynd (selected 1/21/98)
Judgement:

Statement:  CFJ's distributed by Malenkai are invalid.

Reasoning: Malenkai resigned as CotC before quitting the game.  The
question of whether Malenkai could quit or not has nothing to do with him
being the CotC.  Since Malenkai resigned as CotC, it is no longer his duty
to distribute CFJ's.  Malenkai also resigned as Speaker, so the duties of
CotC do not fall to Malenkai in that way either. Any thread splits caused
by the uncertanty of who was the CotC are invalid, and in my opinion, never
happened.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:48:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

>> In an attempt to make things less (more?) complicated, I publish
>> this official result if a) I am Clerk of the Courts, b) it is in my
>> power to distribute this, and c) it will make the lives of any
>> ackanomians easier.
>> 
>> I cannot, however, distribute CFJ 512 because, as far as I can
>> tell, I never received it directly or through the main list.  The
>> record I have of CFJ 512 is a message from Malenkai that says that
>> it was originally sent to his personal address.
> 
> I am appealing this CFJ. For my reasoning see the post I made when I first
> attempted to appeal this.

The above two sentences constitute the text of your appeal reasoning.

From Rule 373, "Public Actions":

> Referring to information contained in other documents or data
> sources does not constitute including that information in the
> message.

Forgive me if I seem pedantic, but referring to text in old messages
just passes the job of wading through the FTP archives off onto
someone else. (In this case, me, since I'm both the Justice who is
supposed to read your reasoning and the Assistant Web-Harfer in charge
of the CFJ archives.) In fact, it was players doing this sort of thing
to excess that motivated the above addition to Rule 373.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:01:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 514 (Vynd)

> Vynd has been selected.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgment 514
>   Subject:  This is a paradox win CFJ
> Initiator: Crackfoo
> Submitted: 1/21/98, 12:11 pm
>     Judge: Vynd (selected 1/21/98)

Ouch.

In the Malenkai-stuck thread (and only in that thread), there is
already a CFJ 514.

It was assigned to K 2, who has not yet returned a verdict (to the
best of our knowledge).

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 13:11:47 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 515 (Vynd)

Well, can't expect to get it all right the first time ;)  Here it is again,
officially.  Obviously anything that purported to be CFJ 514 was a figment
of the Clerk of the Court's imagination.

> Vynd has been selected.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgment 515
>   Subject:  This is a paradox win CFJ
> Initiator: Crackfoo
> Submitted: 1/21/98, 12:11 pm
>     Judge: Vynd (selected 1/21/98)
> Judgement:
> 
> Statement:  CFJ's distributed by Malenkai are invalid.
> 
> Reasoning: Malenkai resigned as CotC before quitting the game.  The
> question of whether Malenkai could quit or not has nothing to do with him
> being the CotC.  Since Malenkai resigned as CotC, it is no longer his
duty
> to distribute CFJ's.  Malenkai also resigned as Speaker, so the duties of
> CotC do not fall to Malenkai in that way either. Any thread splits caused
> by the uncertanty of who was the CotC are invalid, and in my opinion,
never
> happened.
> 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:55:30 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

> > I am appealing this CFJ. For my reasoning see the post I made when I
first
> > attempted to appeal this.
> 
> The above two sentences constitute the text of your appeal reasoning.
> 
> >From Rule 373, "Public Actions":
> 
> > Referring to information contained in other documents or data
> > sources does not constitute including that information in the
> > message.
> 
> Forgive me if I seem pedantic, but referring to text in old messages
> just passes the job of wading through the FTP archives off onto
> someone else. (In this case, me, since I'm both the Justice who is
> supposed to read your reasoning and the Assistant Web-Harfer in charge
> of the CFJ archives.) In fact, it was players doing this sort of thing
> to excess that motivated the above addition to Rule 373.

Sorry about that. I was only trying to avoid posting things multiple times.
And, as I keep having to remind myself, I still don't know nearly as much
of the rules as I like to think.

If it is possible for me to perform both the following actions then I do
so. Otherwise I do neither of them. I retract my appeal of this CFJ. I now
appeal this CFJ with the following reasoning:

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: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:27:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

> If it is possible for me to perform both the following actions then
> I do so. Otherwise I do neither of them. I retract my appeal of this
> CFJ. I now appeal this CFJ with the following reasoning:

"If"? It was your proposal that made this possible.

But I understand. That seems ages ago to me too....

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:33:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Thread tracking

Here's an update (including corrections) on the game-thread situation.
If there are any errors in the following, or if I missed any other
thread-dependent data, speak now. Please.

In both threads:

* Malenkai's status is vacationing.
* Balsamic Dragon is the Clerk of the Court.
* CFJ 513 has been appealed by Slakko.

In the Malenkai-quit thread:

* Alfvaen is the Speaker.
* CFJ 512 was assigned to Crackfoo, and has not yet been returned.
* CFJ 514 does not exist.
* Malenkai changed from pending to active upon the acceptance of
  Proposal 2594. (Apologies to Alfvaen for not noting that fact in the
  voting report.)

In the Malenkai-stuck thread:

* Alfvae is the Acting Speaker.
* CFJ 512 was judged False by Vynd, and has been appealed, retracted,
  and appealed again by The Gingham Wearer.
* CFJ 514 was assigned to K 2.
* Vynd and Slakko both authored and retracted Impeachment Papers.
* rufus created a trinket called thread spaghetti, valued at A$1,
  which he gifted to Malenkai.

breadbox

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:39:20 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)

- ----------
> From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 513 (Red Barn)
> > If it is possible for me to perform both the following actions then
> > I do so. Otherwise I do neither of them. I retract my appeal of this
> > CFJ. I now appeal this CFJ with the following reasoning:
> 
> "If"? It was your proposal that made this possible.
> 
> But I understand. That seems ages ago to me too....

It wasn't the retraction I was unsure of, it was the appeal. I thought
there might have been something preventing me from appealing it more than
once in the same "round". I didn't want to retract it if it wouldn't be
possible for me to appeal again.

Anyone think its appropriate that I'm the first to use this rule? On a
similar front, isn't it a bit ironic that I create the rule to enable white
water rafting on the Acka river and then get the Nemesis Eggplant for this?
Doh!

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:47:42 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 514 (Vynd)

I accept.

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Vivian Norwood wrote:

> Vynd has been selected.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgment 514
>   Subject:  This is a paradox win CFJ
> Initiator: Crackfoo
> Submitted: 1/21/98, 12:11 pm
>     Judge: Vynd (selected 1/21/98)
> Judgement:
> 
> Statement:  CFJ's distributed by Malenkai are invalid.
> 
> Reasoning: Malenkai resigned as CotC before quitting the game.  The
> question of whether Malenkai could quit or not has nothing to do with him
> being the CotC.  Since Malenkai resigned as CotC, it is no longer his duty
> to distribute CFJ's.  Malenkai also resigned as Speaker, so the duties of
> CotC do not fall to Malenkai in that way either. Any thread splits caused
> by the uncertanty of who was the CotC are invalid, and in my opinion, never
> happened.
> 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:47:10 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Thread tracking

> In the Malenkai-stuck thread:
> 
> * CFJ 512 was judged False by Vynd, and has been appealed, retracted,
>   and appealed again by The Gingham Wearer.

No. It was CFJ 513 I appealed.

> * rufus created a trinket called thread spaghetti, valued at A$1,
>   which he gifted to Malenkai.

I'm pretty sure it was Slakko who did this but I'm not sure.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:14:05 -0500 (EST)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 515 (Vynd)

I accept this then.  Please consider my verdict quoting the "figment of
the Clerk of the Court's imagination", already submitted, to be the
verdict for CFJ 515.

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Vivian Norwood wrote:

> Well, can't expect to get it all right the first time ;)  Here it is again,
> officially.  Obviously anything that purported to be CFJ 514 was a figment
> of the Clerk of the Court's imagination.
> 
> 
> > Vynd has been selected.
> > 
> > Clerk of the Courts
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Call For Judgment 515
> >   Subject:  This is a paradox win CFJ
> > Initiator: Crackfoo
> > Submitted: 1/21/98, 12:11 pm
> >     Judge: Vynd (selected 1/21/98)
> > Judgement:
> > 
> > Statement:  CFJ's distributed by Malenkai are invalid.
> > 
> > Reasoning: Malenkai resigned as CotC before quitting the game.  The
> > question of whether Malenkai could quit or not has nothing to do with him
> > being the CotC.  Since Malenkai resigned as CotC, it is no longer his
> duty
> > to distribute CFJ's.  Malenkai also resigned as Speaker, so the duties of
> > CotC do not fall to Malenkai in that way either. Any thread splits caused
> > by the uncertanty of who was the CotC are invalid, and in my opinion,
> never
> > happened.
> > 
> > 
> 

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:29:02 -1000
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma Bids

On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> > I bid A$30 on the Scientist for a Day Otzma Card Auction.
> > 
> > -rico
> 
> I bid A$35 on this.

I bid A$45.  :-p

- -rico

Where do you want to go, toady?

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:36:50 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 515 FALSE

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgment 515
 Subject:  This is a paradox win CFJ
Initiator: Crackfoo
Submitted: 1/21/98, 12:11 pm
Judge: Vynd (selected 1/21/98)
Judgement:  FALSE

> > 
> > Statement:  CFJ's distributed by Malenkai are invalid.
> > 
> > Reasoning: Malenkai resigned as CotC before quitting the game.  The
> > question of whether Malenkai could quit or not has nothing to do with
him
> > being the CotC.  Since Malenkai resigned as CotC, it is no longer his
duty
> > to distribute CFJ's.  Malenkai also resigned as Speaker, so the duties
of
> > CotC do not fall to Malenkai in that way either. Any thread splits
caused
> > by the uncertanty of who was the CotC are invalid, and in my opinion,
never
> > happened.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Reasoning:  Malenkai is one of two things right now.  He is either an
> undead, or he is a player on vacation.  In the former case, it is not
> possible for him to distribute CFJs.  In the other case, he cannot
> distribute CFJs because (a) he is on vacation, and (b) he resigned from
> the office of Clerk of the Courts.  So it is not possible for Malenkai to
> distribute CFJs.  Anything that Malenkai distributes now that looks like
a
> CFJ is not.  The only player which can distribute CFJs, at the time this
> CFJ was made, is the Clerk of the Courts, namely Balsamic Dragon.  This
is
> true regardless of anything that happened before Malenkai attempted to
> leave the game, and regardless of whether or not he succeeded in leaving
> at that time.  For the record, let me note that with this judgement I am
> *not* trying to say that Malenkai could never distribute CFJs, or that
any
> CFJs he distributed in the past were or were not invalid.  With that
said,
> I am ruling this CFJ FALSE.
> 
> So why am I returning a verdict of FALSE?  Well, when it comes to CFJs,
> Invalid has a very specific meaning.  It is a judgement which can be
> returned on CFJs, and only under specific circumstances (see Rules 211,
> 212, and 214).  It does not mean that the CFJ was not a legitimate
> CFJ.  Since Malenkai simply cannot distribute CFJs at all, it isn't
> possible that they would be invalid.  They aren't anything, they
> don't exist.  Not as CFJs anyway.
> 
> 
> Now that I have ruled on the statement, a few words on what the reasoning
> seems to be addressing.  It is not the case that Malenkai resigned from
> his offices before leaving the game.  Rule 256 decalres that, once a
> player has left the game, then the following steps, including removal
> from office, occur.  Interestingly, however, the steps listed in Rule 256
> are applied in order.  The second of these steps is: "The player is
> removed from all offices."  The last of the steps is: "The player ceases
> to be a player and becomes and undead."
> 
> As I understand it, the arguement for Malenkai not being able to quit the
> game is that it would cause him to simultaneously be a non-player
(Undead)
> and an Evil Overlord of Ackanomic (Retired), which is against Rule 1.
> What a careful reading of Rule 256 reveals is that, by applying the steps
> in order, it is only *after* Malenkai is stripped of his offices that
Rule
> 256 attempts to make him a non-player.  Thus, even if Rule 1 prevented
> Malenkai from quiting the game, it did not prevent him from being removed
> from all of his offices.
> 
> It is unfortunate that the language surrounding CFJs is such that I have
> to read Crackfoo's statement as FALSE.  His reasoning demonstrates well
> that Malenkai ceased to be the Clerk of the Courts (or hold any other
> office, or money, or etc) when he tried to leave the game.  I applaud him
> for his perceptiveness, as it is clear no one else in Acka caught this
> fact.  I feel I must apologize for returning a FALSE verdict, but legaly
> the reasoning for this CFJ (both Crackfoo's and my own) is not binding,
> while the statement is.  If it is any consolation, I do not believe that
> this judgement meets the requirements to be a Paradox Win CFJ, so
Crackfoo
> does not recieve the Goose.
> 

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #477
*******************************