Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #206
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest        Tuesday, June 23 1998        Volume 03 : Number 206

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:43:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 624 (FALSE)

else...if has judged this FALSE.

Call for Judgement 624
Subject: Amending Return Dates
Initiator: Alfvaen (sent 20 June 1998, 00:19 Acka)
Judge: else...if (chosen 20 June 1998, 08:53 Acka)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:

Pandora's Expected Date of Return from Vacation is June 30, 1998.

Alfvaen's Reasoning:

On June 5, 1998, Pandora put emself on Vacation, "until the end of June".
On June 19th, Pandora, while still on Vacation, posted "I shall return
by Wednesday 8 July".  Now, I consider this to either be a statement of
general information, or an attempt to change the EDR.  Now, I don't believe
that the current Rules allow this, but who knows?

Judge's Reasoning:

Rule 255 says "A player should specify the expected duration of
their vacation."  It says nothing about when the date must be specified.
Although a default vacation length is given, there is no indication that
the duration cannot be changed.  Rule 255 says that "The only thing a
player on vacation may legally do is take himself off vacation and send
public messages."  Note that it is possible for a vacationing player to go
on vacation, since all that is neccessary is sending a public request, NOT
performing any kind of action.  Specifying the return date also appears to
require only the sending of a public message, so this is in fact a
legitimate change, and Pandora's return date is July 8.

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:45:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 623 (FALSE)

Vynd has judged this one FALSE.

Call For Judgement 623
Subject: Royal Frinking
Initiator: Alfvaen (sent June 19 1998, 22:46 Acka)
1st Judge: Niccolo Flychuck (chosen June 20 1998, 03:11 Acka)
2nd Judge: Joe Java (chosen June 21 1998, 03:43 Acka)
3rd Judge: Vynd (chosen June 22 1998, 03:04 Acka)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement:

Slakko did not receive a Boon of the Ancients on June 19th or 20th because
of Rule 1390.2.

Alfvaen's Reasoning:

Slakko repeated five times the action of creating and frinking Right-Handed
Grapefruit Juice on June 19th.  Then e claimed that this satisfied the
condition of the newly-created Rule 1390.2, of having frunk "5 Frinks
which are defined as Royal".

Now RHGFJ is indeed defined as a Royal Frink by Rule 1390.2.  However,
I do not believe that the condition of Rule 1390.2 can be satisfied by
drinking the same Royal Frink five times; it will have to wait on at
least four other Frinks being defined as Royal.  In other words, one can
drink as many individual instances of RHGFJ as one likes, but they are
all the same Royal Frink, and only count for one Royal Frink towards a
Boon.

Vynd's Reasoning:  

I can find nothing in the Rules or game custom to guide
my judgement on this matter.  That being the case, I will rely on the
common interpretation of the language used in the relevant Rules.  This
doesn't yield a particularly clearcut answer either, but given a choice
between equally plausible inclusive and an exclusive interpretations of a
phrase or word, my feeling is that the inclusive interpretation is the one
that should be used.  Thus each individual Right-handed Grapefruit Juice
counts as a Royal Frink, and by drinking five of them Slakko did indeed
receive a Random Boon of the Ancients.  This CFJ is FALSE.

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:51:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFCJ 168 (Slakko)

Slakko has been selected.

Call for Criminal Judgement 168
Subject: Ignoring the Laws of Nature (else...if)
Initiator: K 2 (sent 22 June 1998, 22:27 Acka)
Judge: Slakko

Statement:
else...if committed the crime of ignoring the laws of nature on 22nd of
June 1998.

Reasoning:
On 22 Jun 1998 20:09:27 else...if posted a message that did not start
with Moo! nor end with Quack Quack as per rule 836. Since e was found to
be concussed at 22 Jun 1998 09:55:09 e was ignoring the laws of nature.

Pseudo Penalty:
A fifteen line apology in the style of the late Hoover 2300.

Suggested Penalty:
A fifteen line apology.

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:52:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: G&C Submission

On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, K2 wrote:

> I hereby officially submit the following (delimited by CHANCE) for the
> Games & Contests Rule Suite, as a game
> called "A Game of Sheer Chance":

Seeing as this looked like a game aimed at getting K 2's score to be
prime, I object to this Games and Contests Submission.
- -- 
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 - Web-Harfer,RuneMaker,ChessUmpire,Map-Harfer - www.ackanomic.org

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:46:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Duncan C. \"Slakko\" Richer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: dcr24 downtime

My machine is down at the moment, because I was supposed to be moving
rooms today.  I can read my mail fine from the Department (all of my Acka
mail goes through the main University mail server), however my website
will be inaccessible.

I'm not actually moving today, because the room I was supposed to start
occupying is currently still occupied by someone else.  I should be moving
in tomorrow morning (BST), so hopefully the webserver will be up and 
running by tomorrow afternoon at the latest. YMMV, of course.

Yours,
Slakko
we apologise for the inconvenience.
- -- 
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
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, RuneMaker, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:44:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: G&C Submission

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, K2 wrote:
> 
> > I hereby officially submit the following (delimited by CHANCE) for the
> > Games & Contests Rule Suite, as a game
> > called "A Game of Sheer Chance":
> 
> Seeing as this looked like a game aimed at getting K 2's score to be
> prime, I object to this Games and Contests Submission.

I'm also objecting to this submission.

                                      - Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: AARON KEESLER <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 625 (Fortunato)

If it is not too late (and I believe it is not), I decline this CFJ.

>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Duncan Richer [SMTP:[email-masked]]
>Sent:	Saturday, June 20, 1998 5:02 PM
>To:	Ackanomic Main Mailing List
>Subject:	Acka: CFJ 625 (Fortunato)
>
>Fortunato has been chosen.
>
>Call for Judgement 625
>Subject: Existence of Sin Rules
>Initiator: saaremaa (sent June 20 1998, 15:06 Acka)
>Judge: Fortunato
>
>Statement:
>
>There exists a rule whose title contains the 
>string "The Deadly Sin of Annoying the Harfers".
>
>saaremaa's reasoning:
>
>[None]
>

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 18:01:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Discovery (Must Describe) (JPBT)

On Sat, 20 Jun 1998, JT wrote:
>In accordance with rule 1211, I am calling a Bogusity Hearing on the
>discovery quoted below.  I am the Principal Authenticator and Hearing
>Harfer for this hearing.
>
>Valid results are:
>"This loophole surfer is totally Bogus"
>"Thats a pretty cool idea"
>

Hearing started at: 12:40 EDT Saturday June 20th
Hearing ends at:    12:40 EDT Tuesday June 23rd

VOTES
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Thats a pretty cool idea"
No Votes

"This loophole surfer is totally Bogus"
JT, JT's EBS, Koxvolio, Koxvolio's EBS, Koxvolio's EBS, /dev/joe
else...if, else...if's EBS, Alfvaen, Vynd, Rex Mundi, Rex Mundi's EBS,
K 2, Fortunato, ThinMan, ThinMan's EBS

So, by an overwhelming majority of 16-0, this Boon was found to be Bogus.

Slakko and his EBS did attempt to vote on his behalf, but that vote wasn't
legal according to the Bogusity Hearing rule.  867-5309 also attempted to
vote, but submitted the vote to me wellpast the end of voting for this
hearing.

- --JT

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
[ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 18:31:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Randy Hall <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 624 (FALSE)

> Call for Judgement 624
> Judgement: FALSE
> 
> Statement:
> 
> Pandora's Expected Date of Return from Vacation is June 30, 1998.

I appeal this verdict and thus decline to hear the appeal.

saaremaa

- -----

Appealer's comments:

> Initiator's Reasoning:
> 
> On June 5, 1998, Pandora put emself on Vacation, "until the end of June".
> On June 19th, Pandora, while still on Vacation, posted "I shall return
> by Wednesday 8 July".  Now, I consider this to either be a statement of
> general information, or an attempt to change the EDR.  Now, I don't believe
> that the current Rules allow this, but who knows?

Key text of rule 255:

> The only thing a player on vacation may legally do is take himself off
> vacation and send public messages.

The only changes to the game state allowed while on vacation by the
vacationing player are public messages and return from vacation.
Changing the "EDR"  would also be a change in the game state; the question
is: which rule allows such a change?  I'm not sure any rule describes a
procedure to change the EDR, but lets assume one does, so that the more
interesting point of this case can be examined.  (If no rule describes a
way, either implicitly or explictly, of manipulating the EDR by a player,
vacationing or otherwise, the CFJ is trivially TRUE).

As an aside, I would also like to point out that previous CFJ(s) have
established that public messages with inane or otherwise immaterial content
are in fact changes to the game state.

Key part of the first Judge's reasoning:

> Specifying the return date also appears to require only the sending of 
> a public message, so this is in fact a legitimate change,

So, changing the EDR is not an allowed game state change by the vacationing
rule, but the public message that carries it is.  The original Judge seemed
to indicate that this sort of "tunneling" was allowed, and perhaps it is.
Given this tunneling logic (and I apologize if I am misconstruing the first
reasoning), it seems to me that any change to the game state that is done
as a public action via a message allowed by the vacationing rule could be
done by a vacationing player via this sort of public message tunneling 
(e.g., creating trinkets).  I don't think so, because it is still the player,
and not the public message, that is changing the game state, but who knows.
If it is the message that is changing the game state, then perhaps this
tunneling is legal after all.  If this tunneling logic is off base (e.g.
it is not legal to create trinkets while on vacation, but it is legal to
change the EDR, I'd like to know how).

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #206
*******************************