Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #234
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest        Tuesday, July 14 1998        Volume 03 : Number 234

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 02:41:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 630 (FALSE)

Alfvaen has judged this false.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 630 - July 13, 1998
Subject: Palindrome Win
Initiator: /dev/joe (Sent 9 Jul 1998 12:46 Acka)
Judge: Alfvaen (Selected 9 Jul 1998 12:52 Acka)
Verdict: False

Statement:
/dev/joe has achieved a Winning Condition during the current cycle.

Reasoning:
Just after proposal 3241, named 'X', was accepted, Rule 605 gave /dev/joe
a winning condition.  The conditions for this are as follows (paraphrased;
see rule 605 for the full text):

1) The rule created by that proposal has a game effect in addition to its
own addition to the rule set and any effect of rule 605.

It does so, it gives lager the 'regal' property, a synonym for 'royal'.

2) Each word in the rule exists in the rule set previously, or in the
official dictionary.

The words 'lager', 'sir', 'is', and 'regal' exist in the official
dictionary.

3) The text of the rule is palindromic.

'lagersirisregal' reads the same forwards and backwards.

Thus, immediately after the score changes for P3241 were applied, I
achieved a winning condition and the title "Sage o' Doe Gas".

Judge's Reasoning:
Let us first dispense with the easy ones.  A quick check of the Official
Dictionary confirms 2), and 3) is patently obvious.

The only troublematic one, IMHO, is 1).  Is "regal" the same as "royal"
for the purposes of Rule 1390.2?  That rule states:

   Any player who successfully frinks 5 Frinks which are defined as Royal
   shall be awarded a random Boon of the Ancients.

   Right Handed Grapefruit juice is a Royal Frink.

Now, does "Lager, sir, is regal" define Lager as a Royal Frink?  Now,
since game custom seems to dictate that anything which, in our normal
world, can be drunk, can be frunk in Ackanomic, I have no trouble with
Lager being a Frink by default.  However, is calling a frink "regal"
the same as "defining it as Royal"?

Let me consult the nearest dictionary to hand, in this case the 1976
World Book Dictionary, which is probably as good as any:

  regal, adj.: 1. belonging to a king; royal.  2. fit for a king;
  kinglike; stately; splendid; magnificent.

  royal, adj.: 1a. of kings and queens.  1b. belonging to the family
  of a king or queen.  2. belonging to a king or queen.  3a. serving a
  king or queen.  3b. founded by, or under the patronage of, a king or
  queen.  4. from or by a king or queen.  5. of a kingdom. 6. appropriate
  for a king or queen; splendid. 7. like a king; noble; majestic. 8. fine,
  excellent. 9. rich and bright. 10. chemically inert; noble.

Also, appended under Synonyms, there are usage notes for royal vs. regal
(and kingly, but I'll omit that):

  Royal is the most general in application, describing people or things
  associated with or belonging to a king.  Regal emphasizes the majesty,
  pomp, and magnificence of the office, and is now used chiefly of people
  or things showing these qualities.

The Random House Dictionary(Second Addition, Unabridged)has further such
notes under kingly:

  Regal is esp. applied to the office of kingship or the outward
  manifestations of grandeur and majesty.  Royal is applied esp. to what
  pertains to or is associated with the person of a monarch.

Another question is: what definition of "Royal" is being used for "Royal
Frinks"?  I'd say that, since Ackanomic has never had a king or queen,
definitions 6("appropriate for a king or queen; splendid") or 8("fine,
excellent")are the most appropriate, and the former is very close to
definition 2 of regal("fit for a king; kinglike; stately; splendid;
magnificent").

But let's face it, if there were a Rule which stated "Mountain Dew is
stately, splendid, magnificent, and fit for a king!", one would be
hard-pressed to argue that it was therefore a Royal Frink.  So let me
now betake myself to see if there are any other questions of synonymy
in the CFJ archive for me take precedent from.

The Judge's comments for CFJ 308 are telling: 

   Some rules assign artificial meanings to certain words, meanings that
   only apply (or, indeed, make sense) within the scope of the game.
   Examples of such words in Ackanomic include "tradeable", "judgement",
   and "newspaper".

   However, in my best judgement, a word in the Ackanomic language is
   only separated from its English meaning to the extent that the Rules
   (or some other source of legal authority) provide a clear definition
   for the word in its new context.

I think that Rule 1390.2, by saying "defined as Royal", is giving its
own meaning to the word "Royal" in the context of Frinks in the game.
It is the ruling of this Judge, then, that defining a Frink as "regal"
is _not_ the same as defining it as "Royal", for the purposes of that
Rule.

The word "regal" appears(or did, before the passage of Proposal 3241)
only in the Champion's Cloak Rule as a harmless adjective.  So I must
conclude that the game effect of the Rule that P3241 creates is not
sufficient to allow /dev/joe a Palindrome Win.  Pity.

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ 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, 14 Jul 1998 02:50:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 631 (JT)

JT has been selected.

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 631 - July 13, 1998
Subject: CEIS win
Initiator: K 2 (Sent 13 Jul 1998, 22:06 Acka)
Judge: JT (Selected 14 Jul 1998, 02:47 Acka)

Statement:
K 2 has achieved a Winning Condition during the current cycle.

Reasoning:
On 06 Jul 1998 09:50:47 the cubical earth implementation society had the
required hardware, both K 2 and Vynd had donated 5 pieces each.
At 06 Jul 1998 21:51:39 the speaker (Alfvaen) determined K 2 would ride
the rocket.
According to Rule 1319.12 after one week in space the selected player
would achieve a winning condition.

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ 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, 14 Jul 1998 02:50:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 632 (Vynd)

Vynd has been selected.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 632 - July 13, 1998
Subject: Museam Win
Initiator: else...if (Sent 13 Jul 1998, 22:18 Acka)
Judge: Vynd (Selected 14 Jul 1998, 02:52 Acka)

Statement:
else...if has achieved a Winning Condition during the current cycle.

Reasoning:
else...if has a benefactor value exceeding A$5000 following his
donation of the Life Size Model of the Ackan Reserve.  Since he has never
before had a benefactor value exceeding A$5000 he receives a winning
condition as per rule 850.

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ 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, 14 Jul 1998 03:08:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 631 (TRUE)

JT has judged this true.

- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 631 - July 13, 1998
Subject: CEIS win
Initiator: K 2 (Sent 13 Jul 1998, 22:06 Acka)
Judge: JT (Selected 14 Jul 1998, 02:47 Acka)
Verdict: True

Statement:
K 2 has achieved a Winning Condition during the current cycle.

Reasoning:
On 06 Jul 1998 09:50:47 the cubical earth implementation society had the
required hardware, both K 2 and Vynd had donated 5 pieces each.
At 06 Jul 1998 21:51:39 the speaker (Alfvaen) determined K 2 would ride
the rocket.
According to Rule 1319.12 after one week in space the selected player
would achieve a winning condition.

Judge's Reasoning:
K 2 did in fact meet all the criteria and was selected to ride the rocket
as stated above.
He was in fact selected by the Alfvaen through use of the dice server at the
time quoted.
At the time of this CFJ, K 2 had in fact been in the space ship for a week
and thus had returned and thus achieves a Winning Condition.
Thus this CFJ is true.

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ 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, 14 Jul 1998 03:14:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Hose Free (fwd)

Like a silly goose I did this on Acka-research instead of Ackanomic.
So.  I donate A$1 to the Twits.
I ask one of the twits to please finally make me a member (since K2 is
back now he can :)

On Sun, 12 Jul 1998, K2 wrote:

>Jenny has a Book.

Since Jenny has the Spellbook of Chorg, I accept his previous offer of the
book and thus I now have it.

I then read the next page of the book.  The page vaporizes in a puff of
smoke filled with yellow and green sparkles.

- --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, 14 Jul 1998 09:01:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Doom

	And as I walked to the museum to deliver my model, I did see in the
stars a most horrific vision.  I saw the stars spinning in circles, and
with each circle more stars vanished until the sky was empty.  I realized
that each full circle represented a cycle win, and if we did not do
something, taxes would suck us all dry.  With so many wins in risk of
happening, we must prevent taxes quickly, or we will all be destroyed.

- --
- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 11:40:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Gavin M. Doig" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Hose Free (fwd)

>Like a silly goose I did this on Acka-research instead of Ackanomic.
>So.  I donate A$1 to the Twits.
>I ask one of the twits to please finally make me a member (since K2 is
>back now he can :)

>
>--JT
>
I grant this request for membership.

Rex Mundi.

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 16:23:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 630 (FALSE)

> Call for Judgement 630 - July 13, 1998
> Subject: Palindrome Win
> Initiator: /dev/joe (Sent 9 Jul 1998 12:46 Acka)
> Judge: Alfvaen (Selected 9 Jul 1998 12:52 Acka)
> Verdict: False

I am appealing this verdict.
I am (as required by the rules) exercising my option to decline judgement
on this CFJ.  [Hmm, I don't see anything which would prevent a justice
from judging a CFJ he himself submitted, if somebody else appealed it.]

My reasoning follows:

The judge's reasoning is based the following:
> The Judge's comments for CFJ 308 are telling: 
> 
>    Some rules assign artificial meanings to certain words, meanings that
>    only apply (or, indeed, make sense) within the scope of the game.
>    Examples of such words in Ackanomic include "tradeable", "judgement",
>    and "newspaper".
> 
>    However, in my best judgement, a word in the Ackanomic language is
>    only separated from its English meaning to the extent that the Rules
>    (or some other source of legal authority) provide a clear definition
>    for the word in its new context.
> 
> I think that Rule 1390.2, by saying "defined as Royal", is giving its
> own meaning to the word "Royal" in the context of Frinks in the game.
> It is the ruling of this Judge, then, that defining a Frink as "regal"
> is _not_ the same as defining it as "Royal", for the purposes of that
> Rule.

However, this is faulty, in that a synonym for *one of the examples given
in CFJ 308's reasoning* is widely used in the rules, without being defined
as equivalent anywhere within the rules, and that is "verdict", which is
used interchangeably with "judgement" throughout rules 213-217.  Certainly
no judge would deny that those words mean the same thing in these rules.
We also once had this sort of problem with "accepted", "approved", and
"passed" proposals, and "YES" vs "for" vs "in favor" votes; some of this
may still be hanging around as well.

> But let's face it, if there were a Rule which stated "Mountain Dew is
> stately, splendid, magnificent, and fit for a king!", one would be
> hard-pressed to argue that it was therefore a Royal Frink.

This argument is a stretch from the actual situation, since it involves
trying to substitute another definition of *regal* in place of royal, a
definition which *royal* does not have.  You might as well try to contrive
"feathers" to mean "sad".  [Word un-association strikes the supreme court!]
In the case at hand, the word substituted is one so close in meaning to the
other as to require a usage note in the dictionary to point out the fine
distinctions between them.

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 18:38:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 630 (Entity Formerly Known as the Supreme Court)

I believe that as the only fully manned cortex, this CFJ goes to the
Entity Formerly Known as the Supreme Court with justices Breadbox and
ThinMan.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 630 - July 13, 1998
Subject: Palindrome Win
Initiator: /dev/joe (Sent 13 Jul 1998 12:46 Acka)
Judge: Alfvaen (Selected 13 Jul 1998 12:52 Acka)
Verdict: False
Appealed: /dev/joe (Appealed 14 Jul 1998, 16:29 Acka)
Cortex: The Entity Formerly Known as the Supreme Court
        (ThinMan and breadbox)

Statement:
/dev/joe has achieved a Winning Condition during the current cycle.

Reasoning:
Just after proposal 3241, named 'X', was accepted, Rule 605 gave /dev/joe
a winning condition.  The conditions for this are as follows (paraphrased;
see rule 605 for the full text):

1) The rule created by that proposal has a game effect in addition to its
own addition to the rule set and any effect of rule 605.

It does so, it gives lager the 'regal' property, a synonym for 'royal'.

2) Each word in the rule exists in the rule set previously, or in the
official dictionary.

The words 'lager', 'sir', 'is', and 'regal' exist in the official
dictionary.

3) The text of the rule is palindromic.

'lagersirisregal' reads the same forwards and backwards.

Thus, immediately after the score changes for P3241 were applied, I
achieved a winning condition and the title "Sage o' Doe Gas".

Judge's Reasoning:
Let us first dispense with the easy ones.  A quick check of the Official
Dictionary confirms 2), and 3) is patently obvious.

The only troublematic one, IMHO, is 1).  Is "regal" the same as "royal"
for the purposes of Rule 1390.2?  That rule states:

   Any player who successfully frinks 5 Frinks which are defined as Royal
   shall be awarded a random Boon of the Ancients.

   Right Handed Grapefruit juice is a Royal Frink.

Now, does "Lager, sir, is regal" define Lager as a Royal Frink?  Now,
since game custom seems to dictate that anything which, in our normal
world, can be drunk, can be frunk in Ackanomic, I have no trouble with
Lager being a Frink by default.  However, is calling a frink "regal"
the same as "defining it as Royal"?

Let me consult the nearest dictionary to hand, in this case the 1976
World Book Dictionary, which is probably as good as any:

  regal, adj.: 1. belonging to a king; royal.  2. fit for a king;
  kinglike; stately; splendid; magnificent.

  royal, adj.: 1a. of kings and queens.  1b. belonging to the family
  of a king or queen.  2. belonging to a king or queen.  3a. serving a
  king or queen.  3b. founded by, or under the patronage of, a king or
  queen.  4. from or by a king or queen.  5. of a kingdom. 6. appropriate
  for a king or queen; splendid. 7. like a king; noble; majestic. 8. fine,
  excellent. 9. rich and bright. 10. chemically inert; noble.

Also, appended under Synonyms, there are usage notes for royal vs. regal
(and kingly, but I'll omit that):

  Royal is the most general in application, describing people or things
  associated with or belonging to a king.  Regal emphasizes the majesty,
  pomp, and magnificence of the office, and is now used chiefly of people
  or things showing these qualities.

The Random House Dictionary(Second Addition, Unabridged)has further such
notes under kingly:

  Regal is esp. applied to the office of kingship or the outward
  manifestations of grandeur and majesty.  Royal is applied esp. to what
  pertains to or is associated with the person of a monarch.

Another question is: what definition of "Royal" is being used for "Royal
Frinks"?  I'd say that, since Ackanomic has never had a king or queen,
definitions 6("appropriate for a king or queen; splendid") or 8("fine,
excellent")are the most appropriate, and the former is very close to
definition 2 of regal("fit for a king; kinglike; stately; splendid;
magnificent").

But let's face it, if there were a Rule which stated "Mountain Dew is
stately, splendid, magnificent, and fit for a king!", one would be
hard-pressed to argue that it was therefore a Royal Frink.  So let me
now betake myself to see if there are any other questions of synonymy
in the CFJ archive for me take precedent from.

The Judge's comments for CFJ 308 are telling: 

   Some rules assign artificial meanings to certain words, meanings that
   only apply (or, indeed, make sense) within the scope of the game.
   Examples of such words in Ackanomic include "tradeable", "judgement",
   and "newspaper".

   However, in my best judgement, a word in the Ackanomic language is
   only separated from its English meaning to the extent that the Rules
   (or some other source of legal authority) provide a clear definition
   for the word in its new context.

I think that Rule 1390.2, by saying "defined as Royal", is giving its
own meaning to the word "Royal" in the context of Frinks in the game.
It is the ruling of this Judge, then, that defining a Frink as "regal"
is _not_ the same as defining it as "Royal", for the purposes of that
Rule.

The word "regal" appears(or did, before the passage of Proposal 3241)
only in the Champion's Cloak Rule as a harmless adjective.  So I must
conclude that the game effect of the Rule that P3241 creates is not
sufficient to allow /dev/joe a Palindrome Win.  Pity.

Appealer's Reasoning:
The judge's reasoning is based the following:
> The Judge's comments for CFJ 308 are telling:
>
>    Some rules assign artificial meanings to certain words, meanings that
>    only apply (or, indeed, make sense) within the scope of the game.
>    Examples of such words in Ackanomic include "tradeable", "judgement",
>    and "newspaper".
>
>    However, in my best judgement, a word in the Ackanomic language is
>    only separated from its English meaning to the extent that the Rules
>    (or some other source of legal authority) provide a clear definition
>    for the word in its new context.
>
> I think that Rule 1390.2, by saying "defined as Royal", is giving its
> own meaning to the word "Royal" in the context of Frinks in the game.
> It is the ruling of this Judge, then, that defining a Frink as "regal"
> is _not_ the same as defining it as "Royal", for the purposes of that
> Rule.

However, this is faulty, in that a synonym for *one of the examples given
in CFJ 308's reasoning* is widely used in the rules, without being defined
as equivalent anywhere within the rules, and that is "verdict", which is
used interchangeably with "judgement" throughout rules 213-217.  Certainly
no judge would deny that those words mean the same thing in these rules.
We also once had this sort of problem with "accepted", "approved", and
"passed" proposals, and "YES" vs "for" vs "in favor" votes; some of this
may still be hanging around as well.

> But let's face it, if there were a Rule which stated "Mountain Dew is
> stately, splendid, magnificent, and fit for a king!", one would be
> hard-pressed to argue that it was therefore a Royal Frink.

This argument is a stretch from the actual situation, since it involves
trying to substitute another definition of *regal* in place of royal, a
definition which *royal* does not have.  You might as well try to contrive
"feathers" to mean "sad".  [Word un-association strikes the supreme court!]
In the case at hand, the word substituted is one so close in meaning to the
other as to require a usage note in the dictionary to point out the fine
distinctions between them.

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ 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, 14 Jul 1998 20:35:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Trade

I offer an Automatic Sculpture to /dev/joe in exchange for an Otzma
Card: Grave Robber.

K 2

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 20:35:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Doom, Robe, Ad

As of this message the Treasury is A$ 3950 below the tax threshold. Only
a miracle can save us ;)

I take possession of the Purple Robe of Justice. This costs A$240. I don
the hired garment in the approved fashion.

A$ 3710.

Which reminds me since it looks like I'll be the winner of the next
cycle (as opposed to /dev/joe or else...if)...

*******ADVERTISEMENT*******
For a Limited Time Only!!!
I would like to offer my services as money holder for the end of cycle
taxes. Giving all your stocks, trinkets and A$ to me will reduce your
taxes by half!!!!! The items will be held in an off shore account, A
service fee of 2% (before tax) is levied and the items will be returned
in the next cycle. (Contracts available on request).
Act now!!!!
Call acka-finance now and reduce your total wealth to 0.
***************************

The True Prophet wrote:
> [Things to Horrific to quote]

I shake in awe at the horrific portents forecast by The True Prophet.

K 2

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 20:41:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Oh all right

I donate all my A$ to the Church of the Spell Book of Chorg

- --
- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 21:05:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Trade

> I offer an Automatic Sculpture to /dev/joe in exchange for an Otzma
> Card: Grave Robber.
> 
> K 2

I accept this trade.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 21:13:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Actions

I convert the following trinkets into A$
Sculpture 17
6
Consolation prize 2
small off-duty Czechoslovakian Traffic Warden 6
The Folly of Fooling with Anyone Whose Name Begins with 'Sla'
Mr. Ferry's Trouser

I bury the 'Big-Nosed Kilroy' with a map known currently only to myself 
and which will have a clue or three forthcoming at some point in the near
future.

I donate A$500 (which I should have) to the Church of the Book of
Chorg.

- --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, 14 Jul 1998 21:29:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CotBoC

As founder and manager of The Church of the Book of Chorg I direct that
it purchase a Secret Lab. Hopefully 1301 Sec 10 Allows me to do this :)

[A$ 2710]

K 2

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 21:44:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Stocks and trinkets

I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. 
I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. 
I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. 
I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. 
I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. I sell 5 stocks. 

I create 29 trinkets named "/dev/joe's bar of gold #N" where N is
replaced by a different integer value from 1 to 29 for each trinket,
each worth A$250, each with the description "It is a small gold ingot
with the number N stamped in it." where N is replaced by the same
number that is in its name.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 21:54:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Museum

I donate all my trinkets to the private collection room of the Museum, so
that all of Acka may come and look at the huge pile of gold I made in the
scam known as the stock market, with a few other trinkets scattered among
the gold for variety.

/dev/joe

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 22:05:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Guilt Trip

	Alright, I feel really bad about this whole thing.  I suggest that
the N-Setting be set to 0.3 (roughly in keeping with the YES/NO ratio).
	I can't afford to file the appropriate CFCJ against myself, but I
will as soon as I have the money (probably after the cycle wins, whoever
wins it.)  If people feel I should step down as AR-C, I will.

- --
- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 22:28:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Museum

I'm not sure I will permit this kind of tax evasion. According to Rule
850 I have the right of refusal.

Hmmm, <loudly> I shall have to think about the relative merits of these
items before either accepting or declining em ;) </loudly>

K 2
Financier
Museum Curator

Joseph W. DeVincentis wrote:
> 
> I donate all my trinkets to the private collection room of the Museum, so
> that all of Acka may come and look at the huge pile of gold I made in the
> scam known as the stock market, with a few other trinkets scattered among
> the gold for variety.
> 
> /dev/joe

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #234
*******************************