Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #136
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest          Monday, May 4 1998          Volume 03 : Number 136

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 01:52:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Preservation Declaration

On Sun, 3 May 1998, Jonathan David Amery wrote:

> On Sat, 2 May 1998, Aaron V. Humphrey wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > As Archivist, I am issuing a Preservation Declaration on the following
> > > possessions:
> > 
> > > The Purple Key to the Vault
> > > The Chartreuse Key to the Vault
> > > The Gold Key to the Vault
> > > The Bronze Key to the Vault
> > 
> > > I am also chiding Alfvaen for changing the P/E page to once again include
> > > these entities halfway through my proposal's voting period.  Bad
> > > Financier! No treat for you!
> > 
>  Can someone else please publically object to this whilst I but together a
> proposal to use the Keys...
> 
>  H*bert.
> 

Yes, thanks for reminding me.  I object to this um, thingie.  I also
object to the one for Silly Vacation Hats, which are now regulated by the
rules again.  Am I too late?

                                    - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 02:54:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

On Sun, 3 May 1998, Eric Plumb wrote:

> On Sat, 2 May 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
> 
> > The FM Nyarlathotep was never created, because its name conflicted with
> > that of an existing Office, the Optional Functional Office of
> > Nyarlathotep.  Hence by Rule 348, which overrides Rule 597, it was illegal
> > for any entity to possess the name Nyarlathotep.
> 
> What FM Nyarlathotep?  Nyarlathotep is called granting Sanctuary of
> Salvation.

No, H*bert would be called granting Sanctuary of Salvation, but that is
too long for a legal name, and hence conflicts with a rule which takes
precedence over it.  When the Blueprint was created, there was no
Frankenstein Monster, but there was an Office, hence the only reasonable
interpretation of all instances of the word "Nyarlathotep" referred to the
Office or its Holder, whichever makes more sense.

> If Slakko is correct on this matter, we probably need a way to prevent
> this from happening again.  (Besides repealing the damn things, Slakko.
  No - two scambait attempted wins is enough.  We have gone through the FM
procedure 4 times, and 50% of the time someone has attempted a scam from
it (once only foiled by Rex Mundi's error over the number of sentences).
TGW pledged to repeat the scam - why should we stand idly by and let it
happen?
- -- 
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, Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 03:52:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Campaign Promises

Oi, Hubert gimmie a trinket :)

erm....

Please Hubert may I have a trinket...

Take your pick

K 2

Eric Plumb wrote:

> If anyone else who voted for Slakko wants one of eir Campaign Promise
> trinkets, let me know (and say my name publically) and I'll give you one.
> Otherwise I'm going to give them back in a day or two, because I'm sick of
> being eir unwitting pawn.  Well, OK, witting pawn.  All right, willing
> accomplice.  But the point stands: the little joke has somewhat outlived
> its usefulness (although did I remember K 2 mentioning jailing Slakko for
> lexical equivalency?) and humor.  So if you want one, let me know.  Should
> I stay or should I go.
>
> -Hubert
>
> If Jesus laughed while drinking water, would wine come out his nose?

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 04:04:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Campaign Promises

On Sun, 3 May 1998, K2 wrote:

> Oi, Hubert gimmie a trinket :)
> 
> erm....
> 
> Please Hubert may I have a trinket...

Very well.  Since you asked nicely.  I gift to K 2 the trinket known as "A
Hundred Dollars."  All the rest of you naughty boys and girls could take a
lesson in politeness from this mountain of virtue.

Especially since I know you're all just waiting for me to slip up and type
one of these without the "trinket known as" clause and accidentally end up
giving away all my hard-earned money.

- -Mother Hubert

Christmas has been cancelled--Joseph confessed.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 04:22:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

On Sun, 3 May 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> precedence over it.  When the Blueprint was created, there was no
> Frankenstein Monster, but there was an Office, hence the only reasonable
> interpretation of all instances of the word "Nyarlathotep" referred to the
> Office or its Holder, whichever makes more sense.

Again, if this is true, it should be fixed somehow before future
monsters are built.

>   No - two scambait attempted wins is enough.  We have gone through the FM
> procedure 4 times, and 50% of the time someone has attempted a scam from
> it (once only foiled by Rex Mundi's error over the number of sentences).
> TGW pledged to repeat the scam - why should we stand idly by and let it
> happen?

I must respectfully disagree.  Only one scam out of this was successful,
and that loophole has been patched.  If a player, like TGW, manages to
sneak a sentence through in a Proposal that could garner them a Win, so
much the better for them for getting that past the rest of Acka.
(Personally, I doubt TGW's attempt will work, but it's certainly worth a
try on eir part.)

Frankenstein Monsters are, in my own opinion, one of the harfiest bits of
Acka, not only because of the hilarity involved in the juxtaposition of
phrases from different Rules, but because of the chaos that ensues (like
the bit about the Office!) when one is released.  And I'd just like to go
on record as saying that if K 2 hadn't submitted the part about the owner
of Nyarlathotep not being able to win a Cycle, a random player would be
winning one every two weeks.  Which is, I suppose, the exact sort of
reason you disapprove of this kind of thing.  And that's where we differ.
It's just you and me and we just disagree.

- -Hubert

Christmas has been cancelled--Joseph confessed.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 04:51:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Ian K." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Campaign Promises

> If anyone else who voted for Slakko wants one of eir Campaign Promise
> trinkets, let me know (and say my name publically) and I'll give you one.
> Otherwise I'm going to give them back in a day or two, because I'm sick of
> being eir unwitting pawn.  Well, OK, witting pawn.  All right, willing
> accomplice.  But the point stands: the little joke has somewhat outlived
> its usefulness (although did I remember K 2 mentioning jailing Slakko for
> lexical equivalency?) and humor.  So if you want one, let me know.  Should
> I stay or should I go.

OK, Hubert- I might as well have one...

Although I think I might be about to annoy the Arts community again...

Koxvolio

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 05:36:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Portrait Gallery

The Ackanomic Portrait Gallery has moved again, this time by a single
letter.  The new URL is

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~plumb/acka/gallery/gallery.html

I have updated it to include the recent additions and deletions from the
player list, and I shall be extremely put out if any new players join or
any current players leave, as it is a nice 7x5 fully filled rectangle
right now.  This is, again, a call for Astro, Attila the Pun, Ayla, Calvin
N Hobbes, Crackfoo, else...if, Fortunato, Hoover 2300, H*bert, IdiotBoy,
Illusion, Niccolo Flychuck, Pandora, Rex Mundi, Robert Sevin, Thin Man,
two-star, UglyBigNose, and Vynd to each please send me a picture of
yourself if you would.  (Well, not really of yourself.  I doubt anyone's
picture there is actually of emself, except possibly Malenkai/saaremaa.)

And if anyone can tell me why I appear to have measles in the scaled-down
version of my own portrait, I'd be vastly obliged.

(I've received only three responses to the bio RFC.  Unless I get several
more, I don't think it's really worth doing.  Let me know if you want me
to do it.)

- -Hubert

God is love. Love is blind. Therefore, Ray Charles is God. 

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 05:56:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Portrait Gallery

> (Well, not really of yourself.  I doubt anyone's
> picture there is actually of emself, except possibly Malenkai/saaremaa.)

Mine is a 100% up and up true blue picture of myself. See that spec in the
foreground.....

K 2

>
>
> And if anyone can tell me why I appear to have measles in the scaled-down
> version of my own portrait, I'd be vastly obliged.
>
> (I've received only three responses to the bio RFC.  Unless I get several
> more, I don't think it's really worth doing.  Let me know if you want me
> to do it.)
>
> -Hubert
>
> God is love. Love is blind. Therefore, Ray Charles is God.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 07:12:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

> > If Slakko is correct on this matter, we probably need a way to prevent
> > this from happening again.  (Besides repealing the damn things, Slakko.
>
>   No - two scambait attempted wins is enough.  We have gone through the FM
> procedure 4 times, and 50% of the time someone has attempted a scam from
> it (once only foiled by Rex Mundi's error over the number of sentences).
> TGW pledged to repeat the scam - why should we stand idly by and let it
> happen?

If "two scambait attempted wins is enough" to warrant the repeal of a rule
then why aren't we repealing points and the museum right now? There have been
attempted scams with both of those. Anyhow, how can I possibly "repeat" the
scam? I haven't done it yet. It required quite a bit of work to actually get
that in you know, I'd been trying for ages. I think that perhaps my first one
was the one to allow us to ditch zuriti'ili guidelines. For that I think that
I at least deserve a chance to see if it works. The fact of the matter is
that pretty much all the rules that provided ways to win are scammable.

It seems to me that you are against scams in general. Do recall though that
certain players such as myself and Malenkai (or whatever his name is now) are
against "ordinary" wins. The way we see things (if I'm wrong about your
opinions here Malenkai (or Slakko for that matter) then do feel free to
correct me but I believe I'm justly representing you) you should have to work
for a win. Just piling up the points by anti-voting doesn't seem to me to
deserve a win.

The fact of the matter is (I believe), that the majority of Acka would like
to see both remain. This is something that we are both going to have to
accept (unless we can convince 60% of Acka otherwise).

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 07:55:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> It seems to me that you are against scams in general. Do recall though that
> certain players such as myself and Malenkai (or whatever his name is now) are
> against "ordinary" wins. The way we see things (if I'm wrong about your
> opinions here Malenkai (or Slakko for that matter) then do feel free to
> correct me but I believe I'm justly representing you) you should have to work
> for a win. Just piling up the points by anti-voting doesn't seem to me to
> deserve a win.

I am not against scams per se.  However, as far as I can tell a "scam"
represents a hole in the ruleset which must be plugged in some way.  Yet
it is being suggested that we just leave the Frankenstein Monster rule
alone.  

If you can find a scam, well done.  However, once it has been found, it
should then be closed off.  If there is a way to do this to FM without
strangling the rule in the process, well and good.  I just haven't seen
anyone suggest such a way yet, and therefore my current preference is for
the FM to be repealed.

If you want my opinions on scams, I had an editorial in TIA a couple of
weeks ago IIRC which discussed the issue.  Check it out.

> 
> The fact of the matter is (I believe), that the majority of Acka would like
> to see both remain. This is something that we are both going to have to
> accept (unless we can convince 60% of Acka otherwise).
> 
> 

- -- 
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, Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 08:47:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: AARON KEESLER <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka:  Moral Kiosk

If I am still a member of the Moral Kiosk (which I think I am), I proxy
my support to the organization.  Given the amount of time I can devote
to Acka at the moment (almost enough time to make an Eleusis move every
two weeks :)), I think it's better this way.

- ------------------
Aaron Keesler
Lotus Notes Administrator
Intranet Administrator
Adtran, Inc.
- ------------------

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 09:35:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: Wizard

I commence construction of an Evil Ballot Stuffer.  It will be complete in
three days.

ThinMan
Wizard

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 09:45:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

> I am not against scams per se.  However, as far as I can tell a "scam"
> represents a hole in the ruleset which must be plugged in some way.  Yet
> it is being suggested that we just leave the Frankenstein Monster rule
> alone.  

In that case I would say that this is not a scam. There is no "hole in the
ruleset". The FM rule provides a legitimate way of winning. All I will be
trying to do will be gain a win using the method outlined in this rule. I
don't see how that is any different from trying to gain a win by points,
agenda museum or whatever.

> If you can find a scam, well done.  However, once it has been found, it
> should then be closed off.  

In that case might I ask why you were so eager to try to jump on the
band-wagon with both the recent Beldin's pants thing (may it rest in peace)
and the negatively valued trinket thing? Perhaps you should be practicing
what you preach.

> If there is a way to do this to FM without
> strangling the rule in the process, well and good.  I just haven't seen
> anyone suggest such a way yet, and therefore my current preference is for
> the FM to be repealed.

How about just changing it so that the FM can't give a winning condition? I
will add that I wouldn't support that either but I find it a lot less
objectionable than repealing the whole rule. 

> If you want my opinions on scams, I had an editorial in TIA a couple of
> weeks ago IIRC which discussed the issue.  Check it out.

Okay then....

[fx: TGW goes off to try to find this article]

Ah yes, issue 19. I'm starting to feel moved to write a letter to the editor
actually. Just wait 'till next Saturday everyone. :-)

TGW.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 11:26:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joel Ricker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Portrait Gallery

> (I've received only three responses to the bio RFC.  Unless I get several
> more, I don't think it's really worth doing.  Let me know if you want me
> to do it.)
> 
> -Hubert

Why not this ~~ allow people to submit URLs to be linked with eir 
pictures.  Most people, like myself, already have something up for a 
bio and it will also save trouble of redesigning the page to put up 
player bios.  

Of course most people will take this as serious probably as they did 
the pictures but who cares, its all Harfy :-)

- -- Joe Java 

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

     Joel Ricker [] [email-masked] [] ICQ# 6244364
       Check out the link below for the conclusion of ImpNom28
         http://www.Geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/1047/

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 11:29:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

Slakko wrote:
[TGW(?) wrote:]
>> It seems to me that you are against scams in general. Do recall though that
>> certain players such as myself and Malenkai (or whatever his name is now) are
>> against "ordinary" wins. The way we see things (if I'm wrong about your
>> opinions here Malenkai (or Slakko for that matter) then do feel free to
>> correct me but I believe I'm justly representing you) you should have to work
>> for a win. Just piling up the points by anti-voting doesn't seem to me to
>> deserve a win.
>
>I am not against scams per se.  However, as far as I can tell a "scam"
>represents a hole in the ruleset which must be plugged in some way.  Yet
>it is being suggested that we just leave the Frankenstein Monster rule
>alone.  
>
>If you can find a scam, well done.  However, once it has been found, it
>should then be closed off.  If there is a way to do this to FM without
>strangling the rule in the process, well and good.  I just haven't seen
>anyone suggest such a way yet, and therefore my current preference is for
>the FM to be repealed.

I agree with Slakko 100% about scams in general and about the FM in
particular.  The FM has always been scambait.  Ackanomic has repeatedly
had to learn that allowing individual players or small groups to make
changes to the rules invariably leads to scamming.  Look at the Vulcan
coup.  The attempted counteraction via Zuriti'ili.  The Beldin's Pants
situation.  With the current rules for blueprints, the FM is a perpetual
scam waiting to happen.  We have been looking for rules to eliminate;
these have outlived any usefulness and harf they may ever have had.

ThinMan

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 11:37:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Nyarlathotep

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> > I am not against scams per se.  However, as far as I can tell a "scam"
> > represents a hole in the ruleset which must be plugged in some way.  Yet
> > it is being suggested that we just leave the Frankenstein Monster rule
> > alone.  
> 
> In that case I would say that this is not a scam. There is no "hole in the
> ruleset". The FM rule provides a legitimate way of winning. All I will be
> trying to do will be gain a win using the method outlined in this rule. I
> don't see how that is any different from trying to gain a win by points,
> agenda museum or whatever.

I guess that comes down to what people define a scam to be - and there's
no point arguing any further once that comes down to personal
interpretation. :-)

> 
> > If you can find a scam, well done.  However, once it has been found, it
> > should then be closed off.  
> 
> In that case might I ask why you were so eager to try to jump on the
> band-wagon with both the recent Beldin's pants thing (may it rest in peace)
> and the negatively valued trinket thing? Perhaps you should be practicing
> what you preach.

I should be.  I'm sorry for that - the -vely valued trinket thing was
before I really saw what was going on in Acka, and the nature of Ackan
scam ethics.  I only bothered to think through exactly what was going on
after that point, which was when I came to my conclusions.  I was eager to
exploit Beldin's Pants because there was a scam on, which I noticed was
failing due to some shortcomings in Alfvaen's attempts.  I was happy for
people to close the scam down - but I thought Alfvaen had failed to
exploit it, so I was still going to sneak one win out of it.  I probably
shouldn't have done that - but, unlike some scams, this scam was not open
to all players at once, and I got very, very lucky to end up in a position
where I thought I could manage it.

> > If there is a way to do this to FM without
> > strangling the rule in the process, well and good.  I just haven't seen
> > anyone suggest such a way yet, and therefore my current preference is for
> > the FM to be repealed.
> 
> How about just changing it so that the FM can't give a winning condition? I
> will add that I wouldn't support that either but I find it a lot less
> objectionable than repealing the whole rule. 

I don't think that kind of methodology could work - what if the FM granted
a player points - then it is the points producing the winning condition,
and not the Frankenstein Monster.

> Ah yes, issue 19. I'm starting to feel moved to write a letter to the editor
> actually. Just wait 'till next Saturday everyone. :-)

Always happy to publish - even if it is inflammatory :-)
- -- 
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, Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 12:26:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT Traub <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: retraction

I retract proposal 2990

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 12:53:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan David Amery <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: That Room.

 I am going to *that room* and reading the book.

 H*bert.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:19:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Following.

I wanna follow Hubert into that there room.

IB

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:36:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 583 (IdiotBoy)

IdiotBoy has been selected. And I remind people that they really ought to
unambiguously label their statement and their reasoning. I might be tempted
to misinterpret things otherwise :-).

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 583- May 03, 1998
Subject: Nyarlathotep
Initiator: H*bert (sent May 03, 1998, 17:25)
Judge: IdiotBoy (selected May 04, 1998, 11:07)
Judgement: 

Statement:
 At least one instance of the word "Nyarlathotep" in Rule 594.23/0
(Blueprint: Nyarlathotep) other than the one in the scentence "There
exists an optional Functional Office of Nyarlathotep." refers to either
the functional office or the holder of it.

Initiator's  Reasoning:
 The blueprint states that: "Nyarlathotep is called granting Sanctuary of
Salvation."  This must either apply to the Monster or the Office.  However
if the office is known as Nyarlathotep then there may not _be_ a monster. 
In which case the scentence "If ever a player owns Nyarlathotep then e
will achieve a winning condition. " must refer to the Office.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:36:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 584 (TGW)

I have been selected again. This purple robe appears to be working. I'll try
not to go deadbeat on these. :-)

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 584- May 04, 1998
Subject: Malenkai
Initiator: Alfvaen (sent May 03, 1998, 22:37)
Judge: The Gingham Wearer (selected May 04, 1998, 11:10)
Judgement: 

Statement:
There is currently a player with the Ackanomic name "Malenkai".

Alfvaen's Reasoning:
The Gingham Wearer and Slakko seem to be persuaded of this, so let me
see if I can support their conclusion.

Malenkai posted the following message:

"I exist as described in Rule 252.

The following strings exist in this message as described by Rule 252:
saaremaa
Randy Hall
[email-masked]

saaremaa
Speaker Emeritus
and little else :-)
who is oh so glad e used a treasure"

Rule 252, "Joining the Game", states, on the subject of Returning players:

   I. For the purposes of this rule, a player whose most recent departure
   from Ackanomic caused him or her to become an Undead that still exists
   is considered a Returning player. All other players are considered
   New.

Rule 250, "Registered Players", states:
   No matter how many times a person legally registers as a player in
   Ackanomic, that person is always considered the same player. [That is,
   if a player quits and later rejoins, he is considered the same
   player.]

  Therefore it is indisputable, barring questions of email-address
  identity, that Randy Hall is the same player known as Malenkai.
  And thus e is eligible to become a Returning player.  (Though e is
  not a Returning player until e is once again a player.)

Back to Rule 252:
   IV. A person able to join the game as a Returning player may do so by
   posting a public message to that effect. This message must include
   their Ackanomic and real life names, as well as a valid email address.
   The Registrar shall then record their return to the players list.

The ambiguity here is in the meaning of what "their" Ackanomic name is.
So let's look at Rule 251, "Player Names":

   Every player has exactly one Ackanomic name. This name must be a
   string of name characters from two to twenty characters in length.
   Neither the first nor the last character in this string may be the
   space character. All official nomic business shall use this name to
   refer to that player.

   A player may change his Ackanomic name, so long as the new name
   complies with all applicable rules. The Registrar shall record and
   acknowledge each legal name change; a legal name change takes effect
   at the time of the Registrar's acknowledgement, at which time the
   player in question shall pay the standard Harfer Fee. When a player
   changes their Ackanomic name, all Ackanomic business will be changed
   to follow their new name.

Now, is Randy Hall a player?  To return to Rule 250:
   A player is any person who is registered as a player. Players are
   named, unownable entities. No person may register as a player more
   than once concurrently. Anyone is allowed to observe the game and
   participate in discussion of any issue, but no person who is not a
   player may make a proposal, or vote on any proposal, or call for
   judgement, or judge, or score points, or win a cycle. No person who is
   not a player may hold office or have any tasks, duties or
   responsibilities within the game.

After Randy Hall left the game, e was not a player, but an Undead.  This
state of affairs holds until Randy Hall is once again a registered player.
The Rules are silent on the issue of Ackanomic names of non-player
entities, except that by Rule 348, " ":

   No named entity may have a name that matches a former name of any
   current or former player, except that a player may change his name to
   match one that he previously held.

   This Rule defers to other Rules on the matter of whether it is
   permissible for a returning Player to choose, as eir Ackanomic name,
   the same name as an Undead.

I note that it does not seem to be possible for an Undead to possess an
Ackanomic name which matches that of a former player, since Rule 258,
"Undead", is silent on the subject, and Rule 348 makes no special
provisions.  So it appears that in the following section of Rule 252:

   V. Upon the registration of a Returning player, the following
   procedure takes place:

   1) The Undead with that player's Ackanomic name changes from an Undead
   to a player.

This does not work, since it is patently illegal for an Undead with any
player's Ackanomic name to exist.

My conclusion, then, is that it may or may not have been possible for Randy
Hall to have joined under the Ackanomic name "saaremaa" as opposed to eir
former Ackanomic name of "Malenkai".  I find it also highly likely that
despite eir own assertion, saaremaa(or Malenkai) is not Speaker Emeritus,
this being a title bestowed upon a Undead named "Nameless Thing #N" for
some integer N that, as Undead-Harfer, I really don't feel like working
out right now.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:36:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 585 (Joe Java)

Joe Java has been selected. Malenkai (if that is his name) has only been back
a few days and already he's causing trouble. Is this an omen for the future?

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 585- May 04, 1998
Subject: Malenkai part 2
Initiator: Slakko (sent May 04, 1998, 07:32)
Judge: Joe Java (selected May 04, 1998, 11:12)
Judgement: 

Statement:
The player whose Real Name is Randy Hall has an Ackanomic Name of
Malenkai.

Slakko's Reasoning:
As Rule 252 requires a player returning who is an undead to register with
that name (otherwise they do not become a player), Randy Hall could not
have become a player known as saaremaa without paying the Standard Harfer
Fee to change eir name.  Therefore, eir name is Malenkai.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:36:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 582 (TGW)

I have been selected.

Clerk of the Courts
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 582- May 04, 1998
Subject: Weasels
Initiator: Slakko (sent May 03, 1998, 18:52)
Judge: The Gingham Wearer (selected May 04, 1998, 11:00)
Judgement: 

Statement:
"as soon as humanly possible" in Rule 1240.12 are Weasel Words.

Initiator's Reasoning:
This is a Weasel Words CFJ.
What does it mean for something to happen "as soon as humanly possible"?
Does it require public knowledge?  If I am working, not reading my mail,
but with the capacity to bring up my newsreader and post a message within
5 minutes, does this mean I must do it within 5 minutes without knowing
about it?  The rules do not say.  The rules give no indication as to the
interpretation of this particular phrase, which is open to widely varying
interpretation as to the exact timeframe it specifies.  

Some interpretational questions: Does it refer to one particular
human (one who is in a position to need to post the message) or to any
human?  Does it refer to each player having to post as soon as either is
capable of doing so, or only when they themselves are capable?  Does it
allow for people to find out the need to post a message (it does not state
that the player asked to post must know they have been asked)?

I therefore submit that the phrase quoted in the statement consists of
Weasel Words.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:55:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan David Amery <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 583 (IdiotBoy)

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> IdiotBoy has been selected. And I remind people that they really ought to
> unambiguously label their statement and their reasoning. I might be tempted
> to misinterpret things otherwise :-).
> 
 I did.  I carefully put the word "Reasoning:" between the two...

 H*bert.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:57:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan David Amery <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Following.

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Matt Miller wrote:

> I wanna follow Hubert into that there room.
> 
 a) You can't.  There is now a 24hour limitation.
 b) It was me who went in there.

 H*bert.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 14:05:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan David Amery <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: Flora Amanita

The London Flora Marathon.

H*bert.

(Well, it's worth a try...)

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 14:18:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 583 (IdiotBoy)

H*bert wrote:

> On Mon, 4 May 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:
> 
> > IdiotBoy has been selected. And I remind people that they really ought to
> > unambiguously label their statement and their reasoning. I might be
tempted
> > to misinterpret things otherwise :-).
> > 
>  I did.  I carefully put the word "Reasoning:" between the two...

True, but allow me to quote rule 211:

"A CFJ should include a single, clear, and clearly labeled statement that can
be answered TRUE or FALSE."

Your statement was sure as hell not clearly labeled. You just had CFJ in the
subject line and then launched into a message, putting "Reasoning:" in the
middle. Looking at the rules I probably shouldn't have distributed it, but
being the kind-hearted sort of chap that I am I did anyway. So stop
complaining.

TGW, CotC.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 15:56:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 582 (TGW)

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> I have been selected.
> 
> Clerk of the Courts
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Call For Judgement 582- May 04, 1998
> Subject: Weasels
> Initiator: Slakko (sent May 03, 1998, 18:52)
> Judge: The Gingham Wearer (selected May 04, 1998, 11:00)
> Judgement: 
> 
> Statement:
> "as soon as humanly possible" in Rule 1240.12 are Weasel Words.
> 

I assume that this appears in the rules somewhere... ?

                             - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 16:07:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Silver Moon Nominees

Three of the four senators (Vynd, JT, and myself) approved the following
list of Silver Moon nominees in the Commission d'Arts which ended today,
and no senators voted against it:

K 2's P2790 "No Cigar" (The palindrome proposal)
  http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/acka/props/prop2800.html#P2790

The Gingham Wearer's YORL poem (play of "irrigate")
  http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/subgames/yorl2.html

Alfvaen's Parade Description for P2776 (the alphabetical one).
  http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/entity/parade.html

saaremaa's Parade Description for P1376 (the Treasure 106 one).
  http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/entity/parade.html

/dev/joe
Senator

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 16:21:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Raquel Peres da Silva" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Campaign Promises

> > Oi, Hubert gimmie a trinket :)
> > 
> > erm....
> > 
> > Please Hubert may I have a trinket...
> 
> Very well.  Since you asked nicely.  I gift to K 2 the trinket known as
"A
> Hundred Dollars."  All the rest of you naughty boys and girls could take
a
> lesson in politeness from this mountain of virtue.
> 
> Especially since I know you're all just waiting for me to slip up and
type
> one of these without the "trinket known as" clause and accidentally end
up
> giving away all my hard-earned money.

I did ask you nicely, too, and I did it before K2. Why is everybody trying
to keep me Trinket-less? First, Alfvaen, and now Hubert... :-(((

OK, then...

<deep breath>

*Mr. Hubert*, would you please be kind enough to give me a Trinket?

<candid smile>

Yours,

Ayla (who has had to work hard in order to receive eir Trinkets)
Priestess of the Order of the Razor Boomerangs
Priestess of the Church of the Evil Ballot Stuffer

Law of Cat Motion:  A cat will move in a straight line, unless there is a
*really* good reason to change direction.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 17:03:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Tom Walmsley" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Silver Moon Nominees

> Three of the four senators (Vynd, JT, and myself) approved the following
> list of Silver Moon nominees in the Commission d'Arts which ended today,
> and no senators voted against it:
> 
> K 2's P2790 "No Cigar" (The palindrome proposal)
>   http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/acka/props/prop2800.html#P2790
> 
> The Gingham Wearer's YORL poem (play of "irrigate")
>   http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/subgames/yorl2.html
> 
> Alfvaen's Parade Description for P2776 (the alphabetical one).
>   http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/entity/parade.html
> 
> saaremaa's Parade Description for P1376 (the Treasure 106 one).
>   http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/Nomic/Acka/entity/parade.html

In an unusual and uncharacteristic display of promptness I am calling a
hearing to decide which nominee wins. The valid responses are:

The Gingham Wearer
K 2
Alfvaen
and either Malenkai or saaremaa.

Since the last one is currently under consideration by CFJ (two of them no
less) I believe it fair to accept either one as a mis-spelling of the other.
You may reply to vote.

TGW, Count Tabula.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 17:44:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Campaign Promises

>Especially since I know you're all just waiting for me to slip up and type
>one of these without the "trinket known as" clause and accidentally end up
>giving away all my hard-earned money.
	Oh yeah, me too.  You can give me the one for my EBS too.  I'll
take good care of it.

- --
- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 18:08:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Campaign Promises

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Raquel Peres da Silva wrote:

> I did ask you nicely, too, and I did it before K2. Why is everybody trying
> to keep me Trinket-less? First, Alfvaen, and now Hubert... :-(((
> 
> OK, then...
> 
> <deep breath>
> 
> *Mr. Hubert*, would you please be kind enough to give me a Trinket?
> 
> <candid smile>

I already did.  If you're not subscribed to acka-finance, you might have
missed it.  :-(

But since you took the time to ask so nicely again (and since I love your
smile) (I'm not going to lit-cite that last because I hate that song):

I hereby create a Trinket called "The Politeness Moon" with a value of
A$23, with a description of "It is a shiny hadrathium medallion about
one-seventeenth of a standard cat-height in diameter, with Ayla's portrait
on the obverse and a lengthy commendation of eir outstanding record of
stellar Acka etiquette on the reverse, written in really tiny letters so
it all fits."  I gift this trinket to Ayla.

Apologies for not putting this on acka-finance; I just wanted to make sure
Ayla caught it this time. :-)

- -Hubert

Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies. 

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 18:41:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Gavin M. Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acka: Flora Amanita

>The London Flora Marathon.
>

No.

Rex Mundi.

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

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 18:58:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Portrait Gallery

On Mon, 4 May 1998, Joel Ricker wrote:

> Why not this ~~ allow people to submit URLs to be linked with eir 
> pictures.  Most people, like myself, already have something up for a 
> bio and it will also save trouble of redesigning the page to put up 
> player bios.  

This is an incredibly good idea.  OK, rehash: if you want the Portrait
Gallery to link to your home page or an online bio of you somewhere, let
me know (and please send me the URL) and I'll do so.  Even though I know
where several of you live (i.e., have seen your home pages) I won't link
unless you explicitly ask me to.  If you don't have a home page but still
want a bio up there, send it to me and I'll HTMLize it and link to it.
(Several players have already done so.)  I give Joe Java a pat on the back
for a blindingly brilliant idea that should have been obvious to me from
the start.

> Of course most people will take this as serious probably as they did 
> the pictures but who cares, its all Harfy :-)

Unless they try to kill the Harf.  (stares suspiciously at Astro, Slakko,
and ThinMan.)

- -Hubert

Charlie was a Chemist, but Charlie is no more. 
What Charlie thought was H20 was H2SO4. 

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #136
*******************************