Subject: ackanomic digest V2 #492
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest       Tuesday, January 27 1998       Volume 02 : Number 492

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:26:03 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Over the river and through the woods...

> Well, I might as well do something with these Oars :)
> breadbox (you've got the raft, right?), are you and two other people
> interested in exploring down the Ackanomic River?

I'm interested. With it being my rule I'd like to be on the first
expedition, please.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:27:46 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: hats

I hereby remove any hats I am wearing. I've not checked Slakko's claims but
I don't want to be stuck with this one if he has won.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:03:04 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Over the river...

> Well, I might as well do something with these Oars :)
> breadbox (you've got the raft, right?), are you and two other people
> interested in exploring down the Ackanomic River?

I'd be game...

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--Laurie Anderson:Over The River
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
Been five-o'clock shadowboxin' all around the town

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:35:54 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Re: Over the river and through the woods...

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> > Well, I might as well do something with these Oars :)
> > breadbox (you've got the raft, right?), are you and two other people
> > interested in exploring down the Ackanomic River?
> 
> I'm interested. With it being my rule I'd like to be on the first
> expedition, please.

Put me down on the team.

I've got to try that white water.

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
Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:02:14 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 152 (Niccolo Flychuck)

> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Criminal Judgement 152 - January 27, 1998
> Subject: Zuritiili
> Initiator: The Gingham Wearer
> Judge: Niccolo Flychuck (selected January 27, 1998, 9:30 a.m.)
> Judgement:
> 
> Statement: 
> 
> K 2 has committed the crime of Zuriti'ili on January 25th.
> 
> Reasoning:
> 
> I think that too much anti voting should constitute Zuriti'ili. It's
> starting to annoy me.
> 
> Suggested penalty: Deduction of 50 points. This is probably less than e's
> gained from anti-voting but seems about right.

This is trivially FALSE unless it can be shown that another player
committed the crime of Zuriti'ili at the same instant, since it is
well-known that Zuriti'ili has always been committed a prime number
of times, and since it has certainly been committed more than twice,
it must always occur two or more times at once.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--Gentlemen Without Weapons:Rain of Terror
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
The one bright star lit feebly this wick.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:16:08 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: End of Cycle

Here's the End of Cycle events:

a) Ackanomic play is suspended(this took place right around 02:27 Ackatime
this morning)

b) All Chartreuse Goose Eggs, Right-Handed Grapefruit, and Agenda Hats
that were not being worn are destroyed.  This is most of the Agenda Hats,
and the corresponding Eggplants, I imagine.

c) Slakko is given the title of winner of the cycle, and a Right-Handed
Grapefruit and a Champion's Cloak are created in that player's possession.

d) No player has zero or fewer points, thanks to us having had two parade
recently, so no Chartreuse Goose Eggs are given out.

e) Due to my Voodoo Economics proposal from a while back, there is no
End-of-Cycle tax.  (Ha-ha!  Eat that, George Bush!)

f) Money is awarded according to point totals; I won't list those here,
but it'll happen.

g) Fortnightly dividends are held in suspension.

h) Each player's score is set to zero.  (Although I think that Rule 607
means that Malenkai, Rex Mundi and I will start with -40 instead.  This
will mean that the next bond cycle will be harsh to us, since...)

i) Fortnightly Dividends are reinstituted as if all players' scores
were zero.  Time to reintroduce "Eggplant Weight", I guess...

j) The cycle started on November 27th, so about 61 days long.  Nobody
has been on Vacation that entire time, without having been removed from
being On Ice for 60 days.

k) The Base Magic Number is reduced to 339.

l) Game Cycle number is incremented to 18.

m) Nobody is in Gaol; Slagothor is returned to eir home from the Ackanomic
Afterlife(assuming that e was burned when the Witchhunt results were
reported, not when I announced the burning).

n) Slakko does not get the Chartreuse Goose, since e would not win again
right away due to the destruction of eir Agenda Hats.

o) The Office of Archaeologist is transferred to Alfvaen, since my score
of 211 was the highest prime, and I'm not already a Scientist.  (Oh boy,
I get to be a Scientist!)  Also, a "Commission d'Arts" is called by
Rule 670, so the Senate has a job to do.

p) Ackanomic play then resumed.

Welcome to Cycle 18!

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--Laurie Anderson:Over The River
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
Abandon hope, all ye who enter messages here.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 09:37:30 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Over the river and through the woods...

> Well, I might as well do something with these Oars :)
> breadbox (you've got the raft, right?), are you and two other people
> interested in exploring down the Ackanomic River?

Sorry. This player isn't going anywhere until the game has settled
down a bit. Several thread splits are waiting on appealed CFJs and
there are seventeen proposals to tabulate this weekend. I really can't
afford a Gaol sentence right now. Maybe some other time.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 09:43:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 152 (Niccolo Flychuck)

>> Statement: 
>> 
>> K 2 has committed the crime of Zuriti'ili on January 25th.
>> 
>> Reasoning:
>> 
>> I think that too much anti voting should constitute Zuriti'ili. It's
>> starting to annoy me.
>> 
>> Suggested penalty: Deduction of 50 points. This is probably less than e's
>> gained from anti-voting but seems about right.
> 
> This is trivially FALSE unless it can be shown that another player
> committed the crime of Zuriti'ili at the same instant, since it is
> well-known that Zuriti'ili has always been committed a prime number
> of times, and since it has certainly been committed more than twice,
> it must always occur two or more times at once.

Actually, I suppose one could argue that Zuriti'ili can be committed
in other places besides Ackanomic. In fact, one would have to argue
that if anyone is ever to convicted of Zuriti'ili ever again.

However, what I think is even more important is the original
guideline: namely, that Zuriti'ili involves ownable entities. This
CFCJ is clearly False.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:47:47 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: End of Cycle

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

> Here's the End of Cycle events:
> 
> c) Slakko is given the title of winner of the cycle, and a Right-Handed
> Grapefruit and a Champion's Cloak are created in that player's possession.

Thank you.  Here is a description of my cloak:

On first inspection, it looks not so much like a cloak as an Anorak.  To
ensure that whatever Malenkai can put in his pockets, I can in mine, I
have ensured that it has omega_1 pockets on the inside :-).  It is a
shade of sky-blue on the outside, with a tricoloured blue,red and yellow
stripe around the middle to look like a belt.  When pressed, this stripe
lights up giving the final score from the 1997 AFL Grand Final, and booms
out the phrase "Go You Crows!".  The inside of the cloak is done in a
velvet-trim black and yellow check.

I don my Champion's Cloak.
I ask to be addressed as Slakko. :-)

> e) Due to my Voodoo Economics proposal from a while back, there is no
> End-of-Cycle tax.  (Ha-ha!  Eat that, George Bush!)

I can't believe there was opposition to the proposal.

> j) The cycle started on November 27th, so about 61 days long.  Nobody
> has been on Vacation that entire time, without having been removed from
> being On Ice for 60 days.
> 
> k) The Base Magic Number is reduced to 339.

Hang on - I thought it had to be prime.  339 = 3 * 113.

> n) Slakko does not get the Chartreuse Goose, since e would not win again
> right away due to the destruction of eir Agenda Hats.

That's handy.

> 
> o) The Office of Archaeologist is transferred to Alfvaen, since my score
> of 211 was the highest prime, and I'm not already a Scientist.  (Oh boy,
> I get to be a Scientist!)  Also, a "Commission d'Arts" is called by
> Rule 670, so the Senate has a job to do.
> 
> p) Ackanomic play then resumed.
> 
> Welcome to Cycle 18!
Thank you.
- -- 
Duncan C. "3rd time lucky" Richer aka
Slakko the Really Lost Warner Brother - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/
Queens' College -- PhD, Pure Maths, Graph Theory -- Cambridge University
Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 11:47:40 -0600
From: AARON KEESLER <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: Loose Ends And Tied Ends

I'm pretty sure I did as well.  If I did not, I do so now.

>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Duncan Richer [SMTP:[email-masked]]
>Sent:	Tuesday, January 27, 1998 10:53 AM
>To:	Ackanomic
>Subject:	Re: Acka: Loose Ends And Tied Ends
>
>On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:
>
>> 
>> I would like to note, for the benefit of a few orgs, that the following
>> actions have not yet been approved:
>> 
>> K 2's admission into SPAM (rufus suggested and approved on Tue, Jan 20
>> 12:50, Slakko approved automatically)
>
>Balsamic Dragon also approved this explicitly.
>
>-- 
>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
>Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat
>

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:33:34 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Mentor pool

> 	I join the mentor pool, or ask the registrar to put me in it, or
> whatever the rules are for entering it.

Yes, I think I shall do likewise.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:46:12 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Fat Lady

> Unless anyone can give just cause as to why Slakko's claim to have
> satisfied eir winning conditions(the "attributes" thing is the only
> really iffy one, to me), then I hereby announce the following to
> have occurred:

From rule 340:

"I. Unambiguous spelling errors shall be treated as if the mispelled word
were spelled correctly, except during the process of rule-sanctioned
spelling correction."

I therefore believe that Slakko has failed to achieve the conditions for
his agenda hat to do with mis-spelt words. This is because all the words in
it were spelt correctly according to this rule. I shall be submitting a CFJ
on this matter, and may also look into the attributes one whilst I'm at it.

The Gingham wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:36:15 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: God-Like Status (Malenkai)

> I point interested Nomickers to Proposal 337 of .Nomic, available for
your
> perusal from a link on the main .Nomic page, which is:
> 
> http://www.interalpha.net/customer/jefferis/nomic/
> 
> I'm sure TGW must have submitted it, and its very funny (I just hope
> enough .Nomickers understand it and vote it in).

Yes, I did indeed submit it. Incidentally, anyone care to guess the origins
of any of the other names? All but one of the others has a reason behind
the name.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:38:21 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 153 (/dev/joe)

> Call For Criminal Judgement 153 - January 27, 1998
> Subject: Being Annoying
> Initiator: The Gingham Wearer
> Judge: /dev/joe (selected January 27, 1998, 9:30 a.m.)

Are you sure? I don't recall submitting this. I submitted the other two
CFCJs but you might want to check who submitted this one.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:26:15 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: God-Like Status (Malenkai)

TGW wrote:
> > I point interested Nomickers to Proposal 337 of .Nomic, available for
> > your perusal from a link on the main .Nomic page, which is:
> > http://www.interalpha.net/customer/jefferis/nomic/
> Yes, I did indeed submit it. Incidentally, anyone care to guess the origins
> of any of the other names? All but one of the others has a reason behind
> the name.

Vegas is pretty obvious.
Aphrael is the Child-Goddess from Eddings' Sapphire Rose series.
I think Ulath was one of his characters too, but not a god...

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:37:13 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: Archaeology

From an ancient, disused Blueprint, I hereby announce that I am going
to construct a Butler.  It will be completed in three days.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--Laurie Anderson:Over The River
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
So take the wheel, and I will take the pedals...

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:38:05 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Fat Lady

> I gift the Consolation Prize for Alf to Alfvaen, in recognition of his
> being the machinery behind the last two Cycle wins.

Hey, no problem.  Could I perhaps have some Right-Handed Grapefruit
Juice, too?

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--Laurie Anderson:Over The River
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
How come they call them buildings if they've already been built?

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 13:48:39 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 153 (/dev/joe)

> > Call For Criminal Judgement 153 - January 27, 1998
> > Subject: Being Annoying
> > Initiator: The Gingham Wearer
> > Judge: /dev/joe (selected January 27, 1998, 9:30 a.m.)
> 
> Are you sure? I don't recall submitting this. I submitted the other two
> CFCJs but you might want to check who submitted this one.
> 
> 
> The Gingham Wearer.
> 

Doh!  You are correct, CFCJ 153 was submitted by else..if.  However, if I
were to have to resend this with a new judge, it would really suck because
/dev/joe already judged it (tho I haven't distributed that verdict).  If
there are no objections, I'm going to let the error pass.  But I'll hold
the verdict to give people time to object if they want to.

Balsamic Dragon

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 11:13:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 153 (/dev/joe)

> Doh!  You are correct, CFCJ 153 was submitted by else..if.  However,
> if I were to have to resend this with a new judge, it would really
> suck because /dev/joe already judged it (tho I haven't distributed
> that verdict).  If there are no objections, I'm going to let the
> error pass.  But I'll hold the verdict to give people time to object
> if they want to.

Well, if you really want to play it safe, distribute the original CFCJ
again with the initiator listed correctly, and then distribute the
CFCJ with the verdict. I would argue that you have in fact distributed
the original CFCJ already, just with incorrect information about its
initiator. You've committed Malpractice and that's all. This exact
sort of error has occurred in the past, so game custom supports my
argument.

breadbox

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 19:37:42 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Fat Lady

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> > Unless anyone can give just cause as to why Slakko's claim to have
> > satisfied eir winning conditions(the "attributes" thing is the only
> > really iffy one, to me), then I hereby announce the following to
> > have occurred:
> 
> >From rule 340:
> 
> "I. Unambiguous spelling errors shall be treated as if the mispelled word
> were spelled correctly, except during the process of rule-sanctioned
> spelling correction."
> 
> I therefore believe that Slakko has failed to achieve the conditions for
> his agenda hat to do with mis-spelt words. This is because all the words in
> it were spelt correctly according to this rule. I shall be submitting a CFJ
> on this matter, and may also look into the attributes one whilst I'm at it.

But if that were the case then the Illuminatus should not have allowed the
hat, because it contained a condition which was impossible to achieve.

However, I will attempt to refute this argument on the grounds of the
"calling a cow a horse does not make it a horse" argument that has been
used in the past, e.g. you can claim to win but this does not make you a
winner.

The text is treated as if the misspelled words were spelled correctly.
Clearly the words must be misspelled, otherwise they would be unchanged.
Therefore they were changed, but then they're not misspelled.

This creates a paradox unless you interpret it that the text is "treated"
as if it was not misspelled, but the text nevertheless was misspelled.
Anything else creates a liar's paradox problem.  So treating it as spelled
correctly doesn't actually make it spelled correctly.

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
Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 19:40:52 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Message

Ins this massaje wun whitch suffers from toen orr more ambiguous spelling
errors awll involving words with a prime number offf letturc?  I think
soew.

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
Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 19:45:37 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Message

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> 
> Ins this massaje wun whitch suffers from toen orr more ambiguous spelling
> errors awll involving words with a prime number offf letturc?  I think
> soew.

I note the following ambiguous spelling errors:

1: Ins - could be in (2) or is (2)
2: massaje - could be message (7) or massage (7)
3: wun - could be won (3) or one (3)
4: whitch - could be which (5) or witch (5)
5: toen - could be ton (3) or ten (3)
6: orr - could be or(2) or ore(3)
7: awll - could be all (3) or awl (3)
8: offf - could be of(2) or off(3)
9: letturc - could be letters (7) or lettuce (7)
10: soew - could be so (2), sow(3) or sew (3)

I think this would qualify, even if my previous messages have not.

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
Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 20:07:28 +0000 ()
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Fat Lady

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, The Gingham Wearer wrote:

> I therefore believe that Slakko has failed to achieve the conditions for
> his agenda hat to do with mis-spelt words. This is because all the words in
> it were spelt correctly according to this rule. I shall be submitting a CFJ
> on this matter, and may also look into the attributes one whilst I'm at it.

What is an attribute?

Webster defines it as:

(a) a characteristic, or
(b) an object associated with a particular person.

I claim that 15 attributes means "15 different bits on the Player/Entity
page referring to this player, satisfying at least one of (a) and (b)".

The reason I believe both (a) and (b) can be used I will call the
"gooseberry argument".  It goes a little like this:

Merriam-Webster's most up-to-date dictionary has three different
definitions containing the word gooseberry.  They all mention fruit of
some sort, the ordinary gooseberry, the Cape gooseberry, and the chinese
gooseberry (also known as the kiwifruit).  Now, suppose that I have 3 of
each of these.  How many gooseberries do I have?  Clearly the answer in
ordinary English usage must be 9.

So I have more than 15 attributes.  I have 12 characteristics (offices I
hold, and memberships in organisations), and I have at least 5 trinkets
which I own, and are hence objects associated with me.  That gives me more
than 15 attributes.

- -- 
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
Acka - RuneMaker, Chess-Umpire, Map-Harfer, Senator, Wearing Agenda Hat

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:23:08 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 522 (Red Barn)

Red Barn has been selected.  (but should probably wait a bit before
accepting.)

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 522 - January 27, 1998
Subject: Agenda Hats
Initiator: Slakko
Judge:  Red Barn (selected January 27, 1998, 3:30 p.m.)
Judgement:

Statement:

The Agenda Hat being worn by Slakko has a condition which is TRUE.

Slakko's Reasoning:

Slakko was selected for CFJ 471 and declined it.
Slakko was selected for CFJ 508, accepted it, and eir judgement was not
overturned.
Slakko has been selected for CFJ 517, it is impossible to currently appeal
this judgement, and his judgement (because he has yet to issue one) has
not yet been overturned.

Therefore the Agenda Hat Slakko is wearing, which is numbered 30, has a
TRUE condition associated with it.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:25:01 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: 153 (/dev/joe) (really this time!)

/dev/joe as been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Criminal Judgement 153 - January 27, 1998
Subject: Being Annoying
Initiator: else..if
Judge: /dev/joe (selected January 27, 1998, 3:30 p.m.)
Judgement:

Statement:
	
Rex Mundi has commited the crime of being annoying on 1/24/98.

Reasoning:
	
Being annoying is a crime by rule 721.  By attempting to pay the
organization standard harfer fee, instead of paying the amount of the
standard harfer fee, he exploited lexical equivalence.

Suggested Punishment:
	
Harsh!  Two days in gaol, a 15 line apology, and a A$50 fine.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:24:38 -0500 (EST)
From: "A.K.A. TheWiz" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Fat Lady

> "I. Unambiguous spelling errors shall be treated as if the mispelled word
> were spelled correctly, except during the process of rule-sanctioned
> spelling correction."
> 
> I therefore believe that Slakko has failed to achieve the conditions for
> his agenda hat to do with mis-spelt words. This is because all the words in
> it were spelt correctly according to this rule. I shall be submitting a CFJ
> on this matter, and may also look into the attributes one whilst I'm at it.

  Has there ever been a NON thread-split cycle win?

___Dan_Knapp____The_Mauve_Baron______________________Beep Blip Bonk_______
<[email-masked]><[email-masked]> http://users.bergen.org/~dankna
Visit rec.games.video.classic and find out about Pac-Man's contemporaries!
Absolute knowledge does not constitute proof.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:29:47 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 153 (FALSE)

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Criminal Judgement 153 - January 27, 1998
Subject: Being Annoying
Initiator: else..if
Judge: /dev/joe (selected January 27, 1998, 3:30 p.m.)
Judgement: FALSE (January 27, 1998)

Statement:
	
Rex Mundi has commited the crime of being annoying on 1/24/98.

Initiators Reasoning:
	
Being annoying is a crime by rule 721.  By attempting to pay the
organization standard harfer fee, instead of paying the amount of the
standard harfer fee, he exploited lexical equivalence.

Initiators Suggested Punishment:
	
Harsh!  Two days in gaol, a 15 line apology, and a A$50 fine.

Judges Reasoning:

I agree with the initiator's reasoning. The "standard Harfer Fee" in
R 1003 clearly refers to the standard Harfer Fee defined in R505, as
part of the same proposal.  When Rex Mundi created The Moral Kiosk, he
attempted to exploit the lexical equivalence of the org and the term
in R505.  However, this was at Sat, 24 Jan 1998 02:48:39 -0000, which
is Jan 23, 21:48 -0500 Acka Time, so it did not occur on the date listed
in the CFCJ statement.

Furthermore, I note that the creation of the organization named
"the standard Harfer Fee" by Rex Mundi at Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:11:58 -0000
is another incidence of Being Annoying, on that date.  This organization
existed when R505 came to have its current text, so at that time, when
"the standard Harfer Fee" began to be "A$25", the organization must have
been transformed into A$25, which, being unowned, was transferred to the
treasury.  The Financier should check how this interacts with the rule
regarding the total number of A$; possibly that A$25 was taken from the
treasury when the org was transformed into it, and immediately returned.

I looked through other messages and I could not find any incidence of
Rex Mundi Being Annoying on January 24, 1998.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:42:38 -0500
From: "Vivian Norwood" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 523 (Crackfoo)

Crackfoo has been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 523 - January 27, 1998
Subject: Slakkos Alleged Win
Initiator: The Gingham Wearer
Judge: Crackfoo (selected January 27, 1998, 3:45 p.m.)
Judgement:

Statement:

Slakko did not win a cycle of Ackanomic on January 7th 1998.

Reasoning:

I believe that this should be judged true. Rule 340 states:

"I. Unambiguous spelling errors shall be treated as if the mispelled word
were spelled correctly, except during the process of rule-sanctioned
spelling correction."

It is therefore the case, in my opinion, that all the words in the
following message should be treated as if they were spelt correctly:

"Okay.  The Present vote ins reasonable when people submit proposals
dealing with specific pearts of Acka that arre only looked at by a few
people (e.g. Parrty Chess).  Howeverr, I wass nott initially looking to
eliminate the Presentt vote.  I came up with the Devil's Advocate
approach when I was presented with the argument that we don't want to
encourage pressent voting.

So apparently we don't want to encourage present voting, in fact the
ruless technically discourage it becauuse of anti-voting points.  Yet at
the same time we don't want to abolish it.  Is everybody really
sufficiently happy that we're at a happy medium?

After all, if some proposals only appeal to specific parrts of thee
populace, why don't most ov them grab the attention of only a few players?
Maybe people are voting on more proposals than they should?

Please note, I'm just trying to gauge opinions here.  I've suggested three
different tactics now, and the first two got shot down in smoke.  If this
one does too, then I'll shoot down any future attempts to change this on
the grounds that we've already reached the happy medium. :-)"

pearts should be parts
arre should be are
Parrty should be Party
Howeverr should be However
wass should be was
nott should be not
Presentt should be Present
pressent should be present
ruless should be rules
becauuse should be because
paarts should be parts
thee should be the
ov should be of.

I believe these are all unambiguous and hence should be treated as if they
were spelled correctly. This is backed up by the fact that when Slakko
originally posted the message nobody questioned em on any of eir meaning.

Now, looking at Slakko's agenda hat:

"9)The owner of this hat has posted a public message containing at least
10 misspelled words, each of which has, in its correct form, a prime
number of letters."

I believe that since the words are treated as if they are spelled correctly
they can no longer be considered misspelled. Rule 340 seems to back me up
here since it details the manner in which a misspelled words comes to be
considered to be spelled correctly. This indicates to me that the two
states are mutually exclusive. Dictionary definitions would also seem to
convey this meaning.

While this is the main point of my argument I feel that it would be remiss
of me not to mention that one of Slakko's other agenda hats is the
following:

"15)The owner of this hat has at least 15 attributes listed on the
Players/Entities page."

What exactly is an attribute? It is not defined in the rules (nor for that
matter is the Players/Entities page). Why then does Slakko feel that he
qualifies for this agenda condition? I feel that game custom and spirit of
the game make it fairly clear what the Player/Entities page is but
attributes is a different matter entirely. There are three options as far
as I can see:

1) Since attributes are not defined they do not in any way exist.
2) Attributes are things such as titles (e.g. angry villager) or offices
(e.g. web-harfer).
3) Attributes also include things such as being a member of an
organisation.
4) Attributes are both those things described in 3) but also things such as
the owners of certain entities.

Of these I find 1) the most appealing. Attributes are nowhere defined and
the meaning is ambiguous so there is no "common sense/game custom"
interpretation to make. If it is neither defined by the rules nor the
spirit of the game and game custom then it is meaningless.

Failing that I propose that option two is a better than either three or
four. Consider this:
If asked to pick out which of the following statements described my
attributes which would you pick (all of them are true)?
I have brown hair.
I am a pupil at Bolton School Boys' Division.
I own a pair of black socks.

Now, my dictionary describes attribute (as a noun) as:

feeling, condition, object, sign, which is found in somebody/something.
This doesn't really help but I have a vague feeling that ownership of an
object doesn't count.

For this CFJ to be judged false it is necessary for Slakko to have
accomplished both agenda conditions. Either one on its own (or, more
accurately, together with the agenda concerning chrome streaks which I do
not consider contentious) does not give Slakko a cycle win, and so this
must be judged true.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:18:32 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: Loose Ends And Tied Ends

> > K 2's admission into SPAM (rufus suggested and approved on Tue, Jan 20
> > 12:50, Slakko approved automatically)

> Balsamic Dragon also approved this explicitly.

It probably got misplaced with eir CFJ's and other such mail.  Nor did
I see anyone else's.

Maybe I should start checking out the digest archives just so I know that
I didn't miss anything.  Or switch ISP's.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Current Album--China Crisis:What Price Paradise
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
A quick movement of the enemy will jeopardize six gunboats.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 11:49:49 -0700 (MST)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: End of Cycle

> > k) The Base Magic Number is reduced to 339.

> Hang on - I thought it had to be prime.  339 = 3 * 113.

I knew that.  I've spent large chunks of my spare time(usually in
classes...:-)factoring prime numbers.  I meant, of course, 337.

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/ )
Song In My Head--The Muppet Show Theme Song
Current Book--Gregory Benford:Timescape
Careful with that silver hammer, Maxwell.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:13:59 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFCJ 152 (Niccolo Flychuck)

> >> Statement: 
> >> 
> >> K 2 has committed the crime of Zuriti'ili on January 25th.
> >> 
> >> Reasoning:
> >> 
> >> I think that too much anti voting should constitute Zuriti'ili. It's
> >> starting to annoy me.
> >> 
> >> Suggested penalty: Deduction of 50 points. This is probably less than
e's
> >> gained from anti-voting but seems about right.
> > 
> > This is trivially FALSE unless it can be shown that another player
> > committed the crime of Zuriti'ili at the same instant, since it is
> > well-known that Zuriti'ili has always been committed a prime number
> > of times, and since it has certainly been committed more than twice,
> > it must always occur two or more times at once.
> 
> Actually, I suppose one could argue that Zuriti'ili can be committed
> in other places besides Ackanomic. In fact, one would have to argue
> that if anyone is ever to convicted of Zuriti'ili ever again.
> 
> However, what I think is even more important is the original
> guideline: namely, that Zuriti'ili involves ownable entities. This
> CFCJ is clearly False.

Why does that mean it is clearly False? Just because I mentioned
anti-voting in my reasoning doesn't mean that has anything to do with it. I
thought it was tradition that when judging Zuriti'ili CFCJs the judge
should ignore the initiators reasoning. And you are of course correct that
Zuriti'ili could be committed outside of Acka. In fact, it could have been
committed and not punished any number of times. Some of the instances of it
being committed could have occurred at the same time as k 2 committed it.
Probably false? Yes. Clearly false? No.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:03:36 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Purchase

I am purchasing two party chess pieces demon. This costs me A$44.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:11:56 -0000
From: "The Gingham Wearer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Message

> > Ins this massaje wun whitch suffers from toen orr more ambiguous
spelling
> > errors awll involving words with a prime number offf letturc?  I think
> > soew.
> 
> I note the following ambiguous spelling errors:
> 
> 1: Ins - could be in (2) or is (2)
> 2: massaje - could be message (7) or massage (7)
> 3: wun - could be won (3) or one (3)
> 4: whitch - could be which (5) or witch (5)
> 5: toen - could be ton (3) or ten (3)
> 6: orr - could be or(2) or ore(3)
> 7: awll - could be all (3) or awl (3)
> 8: offf - could be of(2) or off(3)
> 9: letturc - could be letters (7) or lettuce (7)
> 10: soew - could be so (2), sow(3) or sew (3)
> 
> I think this would qualify, even if my previous messages have not.

I disagree. These words are not ambiguous in the context which they are
used.

The Gingham Wearer.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:26:24 -1000
From: Rico <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: End of Cycle

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:

Well, this just about tops it all.  I'd just settled back to enjoy the
melodious voice of the Fat Lady (isn't that an old Stones song she's
singing?) and contemplate the peace and calm of the Ackanomic Afterlife,
when I get this message.  Now, with all the CFJs in the works about
whether or not Slakko won, I'm not sure if any of this still applies, but
I felt I had to respond anyway:

> c) Slakko is given the title of winner of the cycle, and a Right-Handed
> Grapefruit and a Champion's Cloak are created in that player's possession.

Congratulations, Brother Slakko.  May your triumph, like the roundness of
the Earth, endure forever!

[ Try burning me NOW, you pointy-haired fools... ]

Now I had no problem with this: as far as I'm concerned, it couldn't have
happened to a better person, except perhaps the Pope. I was (or rather,
my ashes were) quite fine with that.  But it was what followed Slakko's
triumph that really incensed me.  (So to speak.)

> h) Each player's score is set to zero.  (Although I think that Rule 607
> means that Malenkai, Rex Mundi and I will start with -40 instead.  This
> will mean that the next bond cycle will be harsh to us, since...)

What?!!?  Where did this come from?  Where, in the Rules that we all hold
so dear, does it state that players' scores shall be reset to zero at the
end of a...
OH. OH, I see.  You're trying to have some fun with the newbie, aren't
you?  Adding bits like this to the Rules when I'm not looking?  Funny.
No, really.  It's hilarious.  I'm doubled over in laughter.
I thought I was doing so well, having achieved a moderately decent score
for someone who'd been playing less than three weeks (the fact that most
of my score came courtesy of else...if and a Tornado is irrelevant) when
you beings commit this... this conspiracy against me.
You really think it's OK to take advantage of my not being sure about the
Rules to add in sections that make me lose my hard-earned points? Well,
it's NOT FAIR and I won't stand for it.  The only correct and fair 
thing to do would be to give me those points back, and a little extra in
the bargain for picking on me.  I encourage any other rookies who had
this, or similar abominable tricks, pulled on them to complain likewise.  

I'm telling my Mentor!

- -rico

Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes. 

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:10:34 -0500
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:Orgs

>> 	I suggest that Slakko be accepted into all organizations of which I
>> am the sole member and which do not own a Secret Laboratory.
>>  	I approve of all suggestions I made previously in this e-mail.
>
>This is known as "the null approval", since all the organizations of which
>else...if was previously the sole member now also have K 2 as a member...
	Oops.  My fault for being lazy.
	I suggest that Slakko be accepted into all organizations of which I
am a member and there is exactly one member in addition to me.
	I support all suggestions made in this message.

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

	<[email-masked]>

	No iron can stab the heart with such force as a period put just at
the right place.
	-Isaac Babel

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

End of ackanomic digest V2 #492
*******************************