Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #95
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest        Thursday, April 9 1998        Volume 03 : Number 095

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 01:28:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: The SHEEP says.

I approve of this suggestion.

Niccolo Flychuck

On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Matt Miller wrote:

> Ummm, it has been pointed out to me privately that maybe an Open
> Admissions Policy is a Bad Idea.
> 
> So, with the consent of the (suddenly) 3 other memebers, SHEEP will close
> its doors to new members.
> 
> 
> IB
> vacillator
> 
> ------------------------------
> 

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 02:03:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: GAD Prop RFC

- --------------9C1EC06BF1D21FEB3C446347
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is essentially direct plagiarism of the ideas bandied about after
the termination of the most recent game of GAD. I would like to take
this chance to encourage comments and additional ideas.

#submit Proposal

Append the following text to the first paragraph of rule 1213
"Grab-a-Donkey" :
The Wrangler is permitted to distribute fairplay awards during a game of
GAD, as described in 1250.1 section XIII

Amend section A of rule 1213 "Grab-a-Donkey" to read in full (***
delimited):
***
A. When a new game of Grab-a-Donkey starts, all Players of Ackanomic,
excluding the Wrangler, those exempted as noted
above, or those who publicly decline participation, will be placed on
the Grab-a-Donkey Active List ("GAL" hereafter). Each player has a herd
size of one.
***

Amend section C of rule 1213 "Grab-a-Donkey" to read in full (***
delimited):
***
C. If exactly one player ("A") chose to Grab another player's donkey
("B"), and if B did not Cover their donkey,

  1. ) and if B is currently in possession of the little lamb and has
     not possessed it previously during the current game of GAD then, A
     will become confused and grab the lamb by mistake. The Little Lamb
     is then transferred to player B.
  2. ) Otherwise, A successfully grabs one of B's donkeys and eir herd
     is increased by one at the end of the round. During the    noise
     and confusion of the grab (if B had two or more Donkey's) one of
     B's donkeys will become terrified and flee into the Wilds of
     Ackanomic. B's herd is reduced by two at the end of the round.

If more than one player attempted to grab B's donkey, none of those
attempts is successful.
If a player's herd is reduced to less than 1 donkey, e is removed from
the GAL.
***
#end proposal

- --------------9C1EC06BF1D21FEB3C446347
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
This is essentially direct plagiarism of the ideas bandied about after
the termination of the most recent game of GAD. I would like to take this
chance to encourage comments and additional ideas.

<P>#submit Proposal

<P>Append the following text to the first paragraph of rule 1213 "Grab-a-Donkey"
:
<BR>The Wrangler is permitted to distribute fairplay awards during a game
of GAD, as described in 1250.1 section XIII

<P>Amend section A of rule 1213 "Grab-a-Donkey" to read in full (*** delimited):
<BR>***
<BR>A. When a new game of Grab-a-Donkey starts, all Players of Ackanomic,
excluding the Wrangler, those exempted as noted
<BR>above, or those who publicly decline participation, will be placed
on the Grab-a-Donkey Active List ("GAL" hereafter). Each player has a herd
size of one.
<BR>***

<P>Amend section C of rule 1213 "Grab-a-Donkey" to read in full (*** delimited):
<BR>***
<BR>C. If exactly one player ("A") chose to Grab another player's donkey
("B"), and if B did not Cover their donkey,
<OL>
<LI>
) and if B is currently in possession of the little lamb and has not possessed
it previously during the current game of GAD then, A will become confused
and grab the lamb by mistake. The Little Lamb is then transferred to player
B.</LI>

<LI>
) Otherwise, A successfully grabs one of B's donkeys and eir herd is increased
by one at the end of the round. During the&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; noise and
confusion of the grab (if B had two or more Donkey's) one of B's donkeys
will become terrified and flee into the Wilds of Ackanomic. B's herd is
reduced by two at the end of the round.</LI>
</OL>
If more than one player attempted to grab B's donkey, none of those attempts
is successful.
<BR>If a player's herd is reduced to less than 1 donkey, e is removed from
the GAL.
<BR>***
<BR>#end proposal
<BR>&nbsp;</HTML>

- --------------9C1EC06BF1D21FEB3C446347--

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 02:23:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Stuff

I'm going away for 4 days, but i've decided _not_ to put myself on
vacation :)

The previous times I did this someone perpetuated some enormous scam -
pls don't do it this time ;)

K 2

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 02:26:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Stuff

K2 wrote:

> I'm going away for 4 days, but i've decided _not_ to put myself on
> vacation :)
>
> The previous times I did this someone perpetuated some enormous scam -
> pls don't do it this time ;)
>
> K 2

Oh yes, and while I'm at it, I wish to publicly announce my desire to
nominate for president.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 02:42:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Old and Foolish Now

On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Hubert wrote:

> 
> Several points richer and A$180 poorer, I would like to publicly announce
> the following:
> 
> The new Silly phrase is "contains monosodium glutamate".

Monosodium glutamate
Zinc disodium algenate
Wholegrain flour, yeast and fat
Time to eat it
               W: I'll do that!
- -- 
Duncan C. "A! references ya us" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President "Gumball" Web-Harfer RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 02:43:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Wizard

I accept the wizard office from ThinMan.

I am beginning construction of a plunky monkey wrench.

/dev/joe
Wizard

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 04:53:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Another Earthquake

This tremor, set off by the acceptance of Proposal 2817, was relatively
minor compared to that caused by the creation of the Ackanomic Printing
Guild.

Antimatter's land was moved to G1.

The worst victim of the earthquake was Hubert.  His house and land, at G3
and G4, was catapulted through the air to land, relatively intact except
for the cracks caused by the Big Blue Thing that Doesn't Do Much, Really
while it was there, at L6 and L7.

The Town Hall now occupies kaas F&G 2,3 and 4.

Yours,
Slakko
Map-Harfer
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President "Gumball" Web-Harfer RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 06:30:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Stuff

> Oh yes, and while I'm at it, I wish to publicly announce my desire to
> nominate for president.

I don't think that you can do this; you need to wait for the nomination to be
called. Fortunately rule 402 allows the officer in question to specify a
period for a nomination other than three days, so you'll probably get a
chance to nominate yourself anyway.

TGW, soon to be Presidential Candidate, soon to be Count Tabula.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 07:12:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 558 (TRUE)

This has been judged TRUE

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 558 - April 5, 1998
Subject: DeeJay
Initiator: Slakko (sent April 5, 1998, 08:40)
Judge: K 2 (selected April 5, 1998, 11:40)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:
Hubert is the DeeJay.

Initiator's Reasoning:
While Rule 950 states that an Election is held for the Office of DeeJay on
the first of every even-numbered month, it makes no mention of when an
existing DeeJay is removed from Office.  No rule has specified that Hubert
should have been removed from Office on the 1st of April, and Hubert has
not resigned as DeeJay.  Therefore, e remains DeeJay.

I would also note (although this is not part of the CFJ proper) that the
election part of Rule 950 is seriously flawed.  It states an election will
take place, but does not vacate the seats beforehand.  Therefore,
regardless of the result of the election, unless the DeeJay voluntarily
vacates eir office, there will be 0 vacant Seats, and hence no new DeeJay
will be elected.

Judge's Reasoning:
I am in agreement with the initiator's reasoning. When rule 950 called for an
election, it failed to remove Hubert from the position. The election rule
(402) likewise does not cause the office to become vacant, thus Hubert is and
will remain the DeeJay, until e steps aside.

This CFJ is ruled TRUE.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 07:12:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 559 (FALSE)

To nobody's surprise (I'm sure) this has been ruled FALSE

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 559 - April 5, 1998
Subject: Winning
Initiator: The Gingham Wearer (sent April 5, 1998, 17:50)
Judge: JT (declined)
Second Judge: K 2 (selected April 6, 1998, 08:18)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:
The Gingham Wearer has won the most recent cycle of Ackanomic.

Initiator's Reasoning:
I can't really see it, but I might as well give it a go. It won't hurt to
try. On the fourth of April I posted a message containing the following text:

"As a further experiment I make A$10000 that is currently unowned
become owned by me. I then create a trinket called "This can't work, can it?"
valued at A$5000. I believe I may be in the museum at the moment, in which
case I donate "This can't work, can it?" to the museum."

I was indeed at the museum and so if I managed to create the trinket then I
donated it to the museum, which would raise my benefactor value to A$5000.
According to rule 850, this would cause me to win. I very much doubt I had
enough money to create the trinket but you never know, I've been wrong
before. If it is possible then it's probably something to do with whatever
isn't explicitly disallowed is allowed (rule 101).

Judge's Reasoning:
>From Rule 505 II:
The Treasury is a named, unownable entity that serves as a storing house
for entities that belong to no Player, except for those entities for
which the rules explicitly state are not in (or considered to be in)
the Treasury. Items owned by the Treasury are said to be "in the
Treasury", and they may not be manipulated in any way except as
explicitly allowed by the Rules.

Thus if a player does not own a particular AckaDollar and the rules do
not specify other wise, the treasury owns it (being a named entity it is
permitted to do so). Given that to be the case to which set of 100000
'unowned' AckaDollars was TGW referring to? The Museum is a building and
thus a nameless entity and (by rule 500.2) may not own anything, so any 
thing in the Museum is unowned (possibly Somewhere Else by rule 500).
If TGW was referring to the unowned acka represented by the trinkets
in the museum then e attempted the impossible by section IX of rule 850, 
since only rule defined movement of acka from the museum is permissible.

Alternatively TGW meant unowned, as in - not owned by a player (although
the rules do not distinguish in this way between named player entities
and any other type of named entity). Such a action runs a foul of rule
505 II

Either way TGW did not posses sufficient acka to create "This can't
work, can it?" (due to rule 506). The ensuing donation failed and e did
not 'buy' emself a win.

No other events that occurred prior to 5th of April could have resulted
in a win for TGW, thus this CFJ is ruled FALSE.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 07:12:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 562

JT  has been selected. Interesting to note that my dice once again tried to
select K 2, but I realised I had the wrong number on it (I'd left AtP on so
it was one too big) so I had to redo it.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 561 - April 9, 1998
Subject: Step to it
Initiator: Attila the Pun (sent April 8, 1998, 22:57)
Judge: JT (selected April 9, 1998, 06:54)
Judgement: 

Statement:
It is impossible to determine whether or not the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe"
is inscribed on any given one of the risers of the steps leading up to the
Town Hall without going outside the Rules.

Initiator's Reasoning:
Rule 2819, which governs the Town Hall, states the following:

...
> At any moment in time there is exactly one more
> step than there are players enshrined in the hall of Elders (material and
> labour required for construction is generously provided by the Ackanomic
> Construction Guild Inc.). Engraved on the riser of each step in gold
> lettering is the name of an Elder, starting with the most recently inducted
> on the top most step. On the bottom most step in the language of the
> ancients is the phrase "Said the Tensor: Let Their Be Harf".
...

No other rule appears to forbid any of this, so it is true.

The name on the top step is that of the most recently inducted Elder. 
However,
the rule makes no specification as to the order in which the remaining names
are assigned to the remaining steps.  Thus nothing forbids the name "Mr.
Lunatic Fringe", which is the name of an Elder, from going on any step other
than the top and the bottom.  Therefore the possibility cannot be ruled out
from this rule that the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe" appears on any riser other
than the top or bottom ones.  Since no other rule makes mention of the Town
Hall steps, there is no Rule-sanctioned mechanism for determining the
position
of the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe" or any other Elder's name.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 07:12:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: GAD Prop RFC

***
A. When a new game of Grab-a-Donkey starts, all Players of Ackanomic,
excluding the Wrangler, those exempted as noted
above, or those who publicly decline participation, will be placed on
the Grab-a-Donkey Active List ("GAL" hereafter). Each player has a herd
size of one.
***

You might want to change that to something like "or who have publicly
declined to participate during the past three days". It seems a bit vague as
it stands. And you might want to insert the word "initially" after the word
"player" in the final sentence. It shouldn't make any difference but you can
never be too careful.

***
C. If exactly one player ("A") chose to Grab another player's donkey
("B"), and if B did not Cover their donkey,

  1. ) and if B is currently in possession of the little lamb and has
     not possessed it previously during the current game of GAD then, A
     will become confused and grab the lamb by mistake. The Little Lamb
     is then transferred to player B.

The "and has not possessed it previously" bit seems a little vague. You might
want to change this entire bit to something along the following lines "A
player may only avoid having eir donkey grabbed in this method once per game
of GAD, since after that the other players have become used to eir backhand
tactics."

  2. ) Otherwise, A successfully grabs one of B's donkeys and eir herd
     is increased by one at the end of the round. During the    noise
     and confusion of the grab (if B had two or more Donkey's) one of
     B's donkeys will become terrified and flee into the Wilds of
     Ackanomic. B's herd is reduced by two at the end of the round.

It might well be worth noting that the donkeys that run off into the wilds
are considered destroyed. You may as well get rid of the extra space between
"the" and "noise" too.

Other than that, it all seems fine. One last thing, could you try not to
write emails in HTML since it makes it awkward for me to read.

TGW.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 07:55:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: GAD Prop RFC

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, K2 wrote:

>   1. ) and if B is currently in possession of the little lamb and has
>      not possessed it previously during the current game of GAD then, A
>      will become confused and grab the lamb by mistake. The Little Lamb
>      is then transferred to player B.

I agree with Guy Fawkes' original comments that the Little Lamb is not
appropriate.  It gives far too much power to the winner of a weekly
Hubert, and should be eliminated from the game of Grab a Donkey.

The rest of the ideas I am happy with.

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President "Gumball" Web-Harfer RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 08:48:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Last Speech in Office

Fellow Ackans,

I thank you for the opportunity you have given me to be President of
Ackanomic over the last eight weeks.  During these weeks, I have tried to
put a firm hand on the wheel of this ship of state, but fortunately there
have been few rocky outcrops for the ship to founder on.  I have done my
best with the office, choosing Functional Officers without fear or favour,
awarding Stripes whenever they are applicable, and with ceremonies which
have not been seen before by Ackans.

I just hope that you would have enough fond memories of this term to be
willing to vote me in for another.

Yours,
Slakko
who will no longer be president at approximately 9:25am Ackan time today.

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President "Gumball" Web-Harfer RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 09:18:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 160 (TRUE)

>Call For Criminal Judgment 160 (April 05)
>Subject: Zuriti'ili
>Initiator: The Gingham Wearer  (sent April 05, 1998, 16:47)
>Judge: Illusion (selected April 05, 1998, 17:50)
>Judgement: TRUE
>
>Statement:
>Guy Fawkes committed the crime of Zuriti'ili on April 05, 1998 AD.

I'm getting tired of seeing a Zuriti'ili CFJ whenever any player
does something that is otherwise legal but which some other player
doesn't like.  Moreover, I don't personally find the Zuriti'ili
game even mildly amusing any more.  Is anyone else ready to dump
it?

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:07:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFJ 562

>Call For Judgement 561 - April 9, 1998
>Subject: Step to it
>Initiator: Attila the Pun (sent April 8, 1998, 22:57)
>Judge: JT (selected April 9, 1998, 06:54)
>Judgement: 
>
>Statement:
>It is impossible to determine whether or not the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe"
>is inscribed on any given one of the risers of the steps leading up to the
>Town Hall without going outside the Rules.
>
>Initiator's Reasoning:
>Rule 2819, which governs the Town Hall, states the following:
>
>...
>> At any moment in time there is exactly one more
>> step than there are players enshrined in the hall of Elders (material and
>> labour required for construction is generously provided by the Ackanomic
>> Construction Guild Inc.). Engraved on the riser of each step in gold
>> lettering is the name of an Elder, starting with the most recently inducted
>> on the top most step. On the bottom most step in the language of the
>> ancients is the phrase "Said the Tensor: Let Their Be Harf".
>...
>
>No other rule appears to forbid any of this, so it is true.
>
>The name on the top step is that of the most recently inducted Elder. 
>However,
>the rule makes no specification as to the order in which the remaining names
>are assigned to the remaining steps.  Thus nothing forbids the name "Mr.
>Lunatic Fringe", which is the name of an Elder, from going on any step other
>than the top and the bottom.  Therefore the possibility cannot be ruled out
>from this rule that the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe" appears on any riser other
>than the top or bottom ones.  Since no other rule makes mention of the Town
>Hall steps, there is no Rule-sanctioned mechanism for determining the
>position
>of the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe" or any other Elder's name.

Two comments:

1) I don't know whether it was AtP's intent, but this does not appear to be
   a paradox win CFJ.
2) It is not unmistakably spelled out in the rules how to determine which
   step has MLF's name on it, but it is nonetheless quite possible that it
   may be determined by CFJ.  That would render it possible to determine.

ThinMan

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:19:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 160 (TRUE)

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, John Bollinger wrote:

> I'm getting tired of seeing a Zuriti'ili CFJ whenever any player
> does something that is otherwise legal but which some other player
> doesn't like.  Moreover, I don't personally find the Zuriti'ili
> game even mildly amusing any more.  Is anyone else ready to dump
> it?
> 
> 
> ThinMan
> 

BAA!

IB

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 11:40:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 160 (TRUE)

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, John Bollinger wrote:

> I'm getting tired of seeing a Zuriti'ili CFJ whenever any player
> does something that is otherwise legal but which some other player
> doesn't like.  Moreover, I don't personally find the Zuriti'ili
> game even mildly amusing any more.  Is anyone else ready to dump
> it?

The idea itself had some potential at the beginning, but since then I
think it has been abused.  I admit, I may have had something to do with
this trend, writing the Zuriti'ili accusations during the Vulcan coup --
though the intent there was to produce enough Zuriti'ili cases that at
least one of them could fall to a judicial body that could add a
coup-ending guideline to the guideline list (which was at the time part of
the Zuriti'ili rule itself) -- still, that intent wasn't exactly obvious,
even after the scam was tried and misexecuted.

Still, I wouldn't mind seeing Zuriti'ili go -- it might be interesting to
replace it with a Crime (with a specified very minor maximum punishment)
that only the Caped Crusader knows -- and say one other person -- the
Speaker perhaps, if you feel it would help keep things honest.  Then, at
the end of each week, the Crusader could publish a list of all those who
committed the Crime during that week.  It could be arranged into sort of a
game of Eleusis involving public actions instead of cards.  The difference
here would be that what the Crime actually was would be predetermined, so
that unlike the Zuriti'ili case, you wouldn't just see the accusations fly
whenever someone did something other people didn't like.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 11:46:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Appeal for Pardon

I am appealing for pardon with respect to my recent Zuriti'ili conviction.
My actions were completely legal, as far as was knowable in any sense of
the Rules.  If some parties felt they were inappropriate, they should have
accused me of Spam and let the judges rule on that -- as it is, Zuriti'ili
was used only as a trumped-up charge to personally harass me for playing
completely within the Rules -- and apparently non-Annoyingly as no-one
felt that any Annoying charge could be held against me.  This is blatant
anti-harf, indeed, I ask the President to redeem Acka's Harf by pardoning
me.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 12:18:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT Traub <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 160 (TRUE)

Guy Fawkes wrote:
>On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, John Bollinger wrote:
>
>> I'm getting tired of seeing a Zuriti'ili CFJ whenever any player
>> does something that is otherwise legal but which some other player
>> doesn't like.  Moreover, I don't personally find the Zuriti'ili
>> game even mildly amusing any more.  Is anyone else ready to dump
>> it?
>
>The idea itself had some potential at the beginning, but since then I
>think it has been abused.  I admit, I may have had something to do with
>this trend, writing the Zuriti'ili accusations during the Vulcan coup --
>though the intent there was to produce enough Zuriti'ili cases that at
>least one of them could fall to a judicial body that could add a
>coup-ending guideline to the guideline list (which was at the time part of
>the Zuriti'ili rule itself) -- still, that intent wasn't exactly obvious,
>even after the scam was tried and misexecuted.
>
>Still, I wouldn't mind seeing Zuriti'ili go -- it might be interesting to
>replace it with a Crime (with a specified very minor maximum punishment)
>that only the Caped Crusader knows -- and say one other person -- the
>Speaker perhaps, if you feel it would help keep things honest.  Then, at
>the end of each week, the Crusader could publish a list of all those who
>committed the Crime during that week.  It could be arranged into sort of a
>game of Eleusis involving public actions instead of cards.  The difference
>here would be that what the Crime actually was would be predetermined, so
>that unlike the Zuriti'ili case, you wouldn't just see the accusations fly
>whenever someone did something other people didn't like.

I as a new player didn't see much point to the Zuriti'ili rules as they
currently are set up.  I could see the intent of them was to be kind of
fun, but they didn't seem to be tending that direction.  I kind of like
Guy Fawkes' suggestion and would extend it further with that as soon as
a player can state publically the crime, they would gain some benefit from
it and would start off the next round (almost like Eleusis, but not
quite).  This would make it more akin to the machine that goes *ping* game
which seems fun although I haven't yet gotten particularly involved in it.

- --JT

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 13:12:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appeal for Pardon

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Guy Fawkes wrote:

> 
> I am appealing for pardon with respect to my recent Zuriti'ili conviction.
> My actions were completely legal, as far as was knowable in any sense of
> the Rules.  If some parties felt they were inappropriate, they should have
> accused me of Spam and let the judges rule on that -- as it is, Zuriti'ili
> was used only as a trumped-up charge to personally harass me for playing
> completely within the Rules -- and apparently non-Annoyingly as no-one
> felt that any Annoying charge could be held against me.  This is blatant
> anti-harf, indeed, I ask the President to redeem Acka's Harf by pardoning
> me.

Who?  There is no President.

Yours,
Slakko
grinning maniacally
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Acka - President "Gumball" Web-Harfer RuneMaker ChessUmpire Map-Harfer

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 14:48:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appeal for Pardon

> I am appealing for pardon with respect to my recent Zuriti'ili conviction.
> My actions were completely legal, as far as was knowable in any sense of
> the Rules.  If some parties felt they were inappropriate, they should have
> accused me of Spam and let the judges rule on that -- as it is, Zuriti'ili
> was used only as a trumped-up charge to personally harass me for playing
> completely within the Rules -- and apparently non-Annoyingly as no-one
> felt that any Annoying charge could be held against me.  This is blatant
> anti-harf, indeed, I ask the President to redeem Acka's Harf by pardoning
> me.

I feel I probably ought to make a comment here, so I will. Firstly, as Slakko
pointed out, there is no present at the moment, and probably won't be for at
least a week, so this will unfortunately fall on deaf ears. My reasoning for
calling the CFCJ was not that I thought your actions were "inappropriate" but
that I wanted to stop you from trying to impeach Alfvaen again. I'm almost
certain that a charge of being annoying would have come back with a verdict
of FALSE, which is why I plumped for Zuriti'ili. In my own defense though,
that my actions were also completely legal (unless someone decides they want
to convict me of Zuriti'ili too :-)). Perhaps they were in slightly bad
taste, and if they were then I apologize, but I don't see them as being any
more so than Guy Fawkes' impeachment papers. As was pointed out previously,
it's a case of scam and anti-scam. Alfvaen/Hubert attempted the original
scam, Guy Fawkes attempted a counter to it, and I attempted a counter to
Guy's counter (got all that?). I take slight offense, therefore that Guy has
accused me of "a trumped-up charge to personally harass me" and "blatant
anti-harf". As I said, I realise it may not have been in the best of taste
but I think that these charges are exaggerated and ask Guy to remember that
his impeachment papers against Alfvaen could be considered in the same light.
Alfvaen too was "playing completely within the Rules". That said though, I
think that the penalty imparted by the judge was a tad harsh; I would have
seen no reason to charge Guy Fawkes any Ackadollars. Also, I will add at this
point that I too would support a repeal of Zuriti'ili, and indeed have
proposed this. In my stay in Acka it has been used three times (and I've had
something to do with all three, perhaps using it inappropriately) but has
certainly not lived up to it's potential. It's another of those rules which
cause more trouble than they solve.

Again, sorry for any offense caused, and Guy, no hard feelings.

TGW.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 14:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 561 (FALSE)

JT has judged this FALSE

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 561 - April 9, 1998
Subject: Step to it
Initiator: Attila the Pun (sent April 8, 1998, 22:57)
Judge: JT (selected April 9, 1998, 06:54)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:
It is impossible to determine whether or not the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe"
is inscribed on any given one of the risers of the steps leading up to the
Town Hall without going outside the Rules.

Initiator's Reasoning:
Rule 2819, which governs the Town Hall, states the following:

...
> At any moment in time there is exactly one more
> step than there are players enshrined in the hall of Elders (material and
> labour required for construction is generously provided by the Ackanomic
> Construction Guild Inc.). Engraved on the riser of each step in gold
> lettering is the name of an Elder, starting with the most recently inducted
> on the top most step. On the bottom most step in the language of the
> ancients is the phrase "Said the Tensor: Let Their Be Harf".
...

No other rule appears to forbid any of this, so it is true.

The name on the top step is that of the most recently inducted Elder. 
However,
the rule makes no specification as to the order in which the remaining names
are assigned to the remaining steps.  Thus nothing forbids the name "Mr.
Lunatic Fringe", which is the name of an Elder, from going on any step other
than the top and the bottom.  Therefore the possibility cannot be ruled out
from this rule that the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe" appears on any riser other
than the top or bottom ones.  Since no other rule makes mention of the Town
Hall steps, there is no Rule-sanctioned mechanism for determining the
position
of the name "Mr. Lunatic Fringe" or any other Elder's name.

Judge's Reasoning:
  There are two possible ways to read the rule quoted.  One interpretation
is the purely literal which Attila the Pun has chosen.  However, there is
another consistant reading which if a little bit of common sense is used
can also provide a useful and consistant interpretation of the rule while
at the same time providing a logical ordering over Elder's names as applied
to steps.
  This second ordering assumes the intent for new steps to be placed at
the top of the staircase (newest inductee is always at the top) and not
to change the order of any lower steps.  With this, all future inductees
are most certainly ordered correctly.  Applying the same assumptions, it
should be obvious that the ordering intended of the steps was newest
inductee at the top, and then next newest inductee, down to the first
inductee on the step above the first step and the words on the bottomost
step.
  Since there is an intelligble ordering, albeit implicit from the wording
and intent of the rule, I judge this CFJ to be FALSE.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 16:09:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Guy Fawkes <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appeal for Pardon

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> I take slight offense, therefore that Guy has
> accused me of "a trumped-up charge to personally harass me" and "blatant
> anti-harf".

Only slightly offended?  Indeed!  Wert thy Deeds not verily blatant
Anti-Harf, thou wouldst be offended quite mightily, and would fall down
upon me with furious Invective in the Extreme.  Instead, thou art truly so
steeped in the UnHarfiness of thy Actions that thou canst not muster more
righteous Indignation than a most pathetic Atom of mild Offense.  Alas,
that thou art Untouchable, or thou wouldst see my Second challenge thee
quite boldly, and with such Taunting that it would be remembered in vivid
Detail by my grandchildren's Grandchildren, to a Duel, though worthy you
are not to share a gentleman's Field of Honor with the three-headed
Gloriousness that is myself, and thou wouldst see the mighty Boot of my
surpassing Harfiness crush thee with superlative Thoroughness, yea, even
until thou wert less than a Cat-height in Stature, and truly, I would
leave thee in such a State of shameful Moribundity that later Ackanomians
would bury thee, mistaking thy utterly vanquished Visage for the
decomposing Features of the Exquisite Dead Guy.  But, as thou hast, in thy
inveterate Cowardice, pathetically taken despicable Refuge from the
onrushing Storm of my Harfiness in ignominious Untouchability, I shall
have to forgo my wonted Vengeance.  Instead, I extend to thee the honored
Privelege and Opportunity to come to me, at the top of the Monument to
Futility, and there grovel for mercy, that I might not expose thy cowering
self to such august Taunting, and then this all too condemning Charge of
Anti-Harfiness which clings to you like Naphtha might then be forgotten.

I am creating a trinket, valued at A$25, called "It could have been my
honor to be utterly vanquished in a Duel by Guy Fawkes, but alas, I was
cowardly and took contemptible shelter in Untouchability."  It is a medal,
made of the finest bronze, and I invite The Gingham Wearer to wear it with
pride, for truly, receiving this taunting is doubtless the highlight of
his existence.

I am giving this Trinket to The Gingham Wearer.

Guy Fawkes

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 16:39:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:  Acka: CFCJ 160 (TRUE)

>Still, I wouldn't mind seeing Zuriti'ili go -- it might be interesting to
>replace it with a Crime (with a specified very minor maximum punishment)
>that only the Caped Crusader knows -- and say one other person -- the
>Speaker perhaps, if you feel it would help keep things honest.  Then, at
>the end of each week, the Crusader could publish a list of all those who
>committed the Crime during that week.  It could be arranged into sort of a
>game of Eleusis involving public actions instead of cards.  The difference
>here would be that what the Crime actually was would be predetermined, so
>that unlike the Zuriti'ili case, you wouldn't just see the accusations fly
>whenever someone did something other people didn't like.
	I agree that the time has come for Zuriti'ili to go, and this looks
like a good replacement.

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

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 16:40:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 561 (FALSE)

> JT has judged this FALSE
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgement 561 - April 9, 1998
> Subject: Step to it
> Initiator: Attila the Pun (sent April 8, 1998, 22:57)
> Judge: JT (selected April 9, 1998, 06:54)
> Judgement: FALSE

Sorry everyone, I've done it again; this was in fact CFJ 562. D'oh. D'oh.
D'oh.

TGW.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joel Ricker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Action

*snip*

> we have THREE VOTING MEMBERS.  That is, as soon as Joe
> Java un-Pends emself. :-)

I've been unpended as of Wednesday.  I'm now an active player since I 
voted on Wednesday and Thursday's proposals.
 
> I also suggest that Joe Java build emself a Boomerang before JT and I have
> to thwap em with ours.

Ok, ok.  I create a trinket.

Name: Nerf Razor Boomerang
Description:  A tri-shaped neon green colored Razor Boomerang 
specially created by the Nerf(tm) company.
Value: A$1

- -- Joe Java

- -----------------------------------------------------------------
     Joel Ricker [] [email-masked] [] ICQ# 6244364
                The Imperial Emporer of ImpNom #28
         http://www.Geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/1047/
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
              That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:54:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Appeal for Pardon

> I am creating a trinket, valued at A$25, called "It could have been my
> honor to be utterly vanquished in a Duel by Guy Fawkes, but alas, I was
> cowardly and took contemptible shelter in Untouchability."  It is a medal,
> made of the finest bronze, and I invite The Gingham Wearer to wear it with
> pride, for truly, receiving this taunting is doubtless the highlight of
> his existence.
> 
> I am giving this Trinket to The Gingham Wearer.

I create a trinket also valued at A$25 called "I tried to duck out of a duel
my pretending the other party was trying to weasel eir way out of it" with a
description as follows:

"It is a marble plaque designed specifically to be put up outside of Guy
Fawkes' house reminding everyone that Guy Fawkes attempted to duck out of a
matter of honour as thus described (either that or e was unfamiliar with the
rules, both as bad as each other)."

I give this trinket to Guy Fawkes.

I also note that I am not in fact untouchable since it was I who challenged
Alfvaen to a duel.

TGW.

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #95
******************************