Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #253
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest        Sunday, August 2 1998        Volume 03 : Number 253

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 08:37:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Randomness

First off the great oars or raft have been found this week by Goldenmean.

I was also going to determine the winner of this month's museum door prize, but it appears that that is 
the duty of the financier and not my business.

I also recently discovered that Phoebe has returned from vacation and has been found by Vynd.

JT's Ackanomicon determination will come shortly (I'll get you for this Traub :-)).

Brie Clump, acting Speaker.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 08:38:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Randomness

From: "Aaron V. Humphrey" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
CC: 
Subject: Acka: For Your Convenience, Random Dice Server Scripts
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 19:51:07 -0600 (MDT)
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Content-Type; text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

______________________________________________

#P [email-masked]
#S 100
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: B-Ack Random Determination

#C Player: 
#C Date:
#C
#C The abovementioned player is in the Wilds and posted a public message.
#C
#C There is a 40% chance at the B-Ack is on the trail of whoever it
#C is, i.e. a value of 1 through 40.
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 50
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Ackanomicon Determination

#C Player: 
#C Ackanomicon determination
#C based on the following (using a 50 sided die):
#C 1 -15: arcane trivia
#C 16-20: vile prophecies
#C 21-25: inner workings
#C 26-30: arcane lore
#C 31-33: terrorizing pages
#C 34-34: ancient artifact
#C 35-36: mutation
#C 37-38: dark domain
#C 39-39: stock market crash
#C 40-41: long lost treasure
#C 42-43: doomsday
#C 44-44: forbidden fruit
#C 45-45: catastrophe
#C 46-49: not so forbidden fruit
#C 50-50: ancient one
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 100
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Boon determination

#C player: /dev/joe
#C I am using the dice server to determine the boon from the
#C machine based on the following (using a 100 sided die):
#C 1 -45: ancient artifact (random gadget)
#C 46-70: ancient scroll (random otzma card)
#C 71-80: gods are smiling (bonus vote)
#C 81-87: ancient relic (trinket worth A$75)
#C 88-92: ancient knowledge (new blueprint)
#C 93-97: ancient wisdom (new otzma card)
#C 98-99: gods are bored (pointy ears)
#C  100 : gods are grouchy (chartreuse goose)
#C Malenkai

#P [email-masked]
#S 18
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: SBoC Random OC determination

#C Player: 
#C I am using the dice server to determine the random otzma card
#C delivered from the spell book of chorg based on the following
#C schedule:
#C 1 - go fish
#C 2 - map shard
#C 3 - summon tornado
#C 4 - share my expenses
#C 5 - share your income
#C 6 - tactical retreat
#C 7 - paratroop
#C 8 - truthseeker
#C 9 - scientist for a day
#C 10 - art thief
#C 11 - grave robber
#C 12 - lay off!
#C 13 - rod & staff
#C 14 - shield
#C 15 - founder's boon
#C 16 - felicitous populi
#C 17 - acme instagadget
#C 18 - skeleton key
#C No fix my gadget(max in play)
#C No swinging sale(max in play)
#C No foul fowl(max in play)

#P [email-masked]
#S 42
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Colour

#C This is a random colour determination.
#C In this case, for the colour of a Wizard.
#C
#C 1: alabaster; 2: amber; 3: aquamarine; 4: azure; 5: black
#C 6: blue; 7: brown; 8: burgundy; 9: carnelian; 10: cerulean
#C 11: chartreuse; 12: crimson; 13: cyan; 14: emerald; 15: fuchsia
#C 16: gold; 17: green; 18: grey; 19: indigo; 20: lavender
#C 21: magenta; 22: maroon; 23: mauve; 24: murrey; 25: ochre
#C 26: orange; 27: peach; 28: pink; 29: puce; 30: purple
#C 31: red; 32: scarlet; 33: sienna; 34: silver; 35: teal
#C 36: turquoise; 37: ultramarine; 38: umber; 39: vermilion; 40: viridian
#C 41: white; 42: yellow
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 12
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Robbing Mr. Lunatic Fringe's Grave

#C What does Rex Mundi find?
#C
#C 1-2    Bonus Vote
#C 3      Right-Handed Grapefruit Juice
#C 4      Whamiol
#C 5      Gravitational Monopole
#C 6      Oscar
#C 7      Otzma Card Untouch Me
#C 8      Otzma Card Tactical Retreat
#C 9      Otzma Card Foul Fowl
#C 10     Otzma Card Truthseeker
#C 11-12  Prosthetic Foreheads
#C
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 19
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Acting Archaeologist?

#C Since I have absolutely no preference as to who becomes Archaeologist,
#C and have decided not to hog it for myself, I will attempt to determine
#C it randomly.  Whatever active player is selected hereby has three days
#C to accept or refuse; I'll choose someone else unless e accepts.  (I
#C can't remember who is Wizard, and am too lazy to look it up, so e's
#C probably on the list.)
#C    Alfvaen, Expert Emeritus in Bandwidth-Wasting Gizz
#C 1: 867-5309
#C 2: Alfvaen
#C 3: Attila the Pun
#C 4: breadbox
#C 5: Calvin N Hobbes
#C 6: /dev/joe
#C 7: else...if
#C 8: Fortunato
#C 9: IdiotBoy
#C 10: J. M. Bear
#C 11: JT
#C 12: K 2
#C 13: Koxvolio
#C 14: Niccolo Flychuck
#C 15: Rex Mundi
#C 16: ThinMan
#C 17: two-star
#C 18: Vynd
#C 19: Zaknafein Dourden

#P [email-masked]
#S 23
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Gadget determination

#C Player:
#C I am using the dice server to determine a Gadget
#C based on the following:
#C 1) Scroll of Crumble
#C 2) Really Big Blue Thing That Doesn't Do Too Much, Really
#C 3) Whamiol
#C 4) Vending Machine
#C 5) Automatic Scuplture
#C 6) Gravitational Monopole
#C 7) Evil Ballot Stuffer
#C 8) Jukkasjarvi Mind Control Laser
#C 9) Plunky Monkey Wrench
#C 10) Bonus Vote Add-On
#C 11) Gimme Shelter
#C 12) Cheez-Whiz
#C 13) Pulse Laser
#C 14) Silver Spaceship
#C 15) BWG Laser
#C 16) Butler
#C 17) Pyraic Frobnotzer
#C 18) BWG Laser Shotgun attachment
#C 19) Good Ballot Stuffer
#C 20) Electrolux
#C 21) Finger of Justice
#C 22) Transtemporal Holographic Image Recording Device
#C 23) Book of Chorg (Boon only)
#C
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 12
#D 1
#R 2
#L 1
#T Acka: GBS Harfy Lever

#C Player: Joe Java
#C
#C Sorry, just got around to reading the Blueprint or I would've done
#C this earlier.
#C
#C For the first roll:
#C   1-3: GBS votes for all Harfy Proposals in queue
#C   4-6: One Bonus Vote awarded to all players
#C   7-9: GBS owner receives random Boon
#C 10-12: Game state non-harf penalty
#C
#C For the second roll:
#C   1-4: GBS breaks
#C   5-8: GBS explodes
#C  9-12: GBS teleports
#C
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 40
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: GM random determination

#C player: breadbox
#C I am using the dice server to determine the latest attempt
#C at using the GM.  Failure is on a 1 (or 1 & 2 if e doesn't
#C have the Ackaphysicist skill
#C Malenkai

#P [email-masked]
#S 56
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Otzma Card Probabilistic Determination

#C Results of Probabilistic Otzma Card Creation
#C
#C 1-3 - Go Fish
#C 4-6 - Map Shard
#C 7 - Summon Tornado
#C 8-10 - Rod & Staff
#C 11-13 - Share My Expenses
#C 14-16 - Share Your Income
#C 17-19 - Swinging Sale
#C 20-22 - Tactical Retreat
#C 23-25 - Paratroop
#C 26-28 - Foul Fowl
#C 29-31 - TruthSeeker
#C 32-34 - Fix My Gadget
#C 35-37 - Scientist for a Day
#C 38-40 - Art Thief
#C 41-43 - Skeleton Key
#C 44-46 - Grave Robber
#C 47-49 - Lay Off!
#C 50 - Founder's Boon
#C 51-53 - Shield
#C 54-56 - Felicitous Populi
#C 57 - ACME InstaGadget

#P [email-masked]
#S 5
#D 1
#R 1
#L 1
#T Acka: Rafting Results

#C Players: IdiotBoy, Mr. Tambourine Man, rufus, K 2
#C 1) Water Pollution
#C 2) Lost In The Wilds
#C 3) Capsized (Gadget Loss)
#C 4) Capsized (Concussion)
#C 5) Success!
#C
#C Alfvaen

#P [email-masked]
#S 6
#D 1
#R 5
#L 1
#T Acka: Lost In The River

#C As the members of the rafting team make their way to the shore,
#C here's what they lose:
#C
#C Alfvaen loses eir only gadget, the Gravitational Monopole.
#C
#C Hubert may lose either a Scroll of Crumble(1-3) or a Really Big Blue
#C Thing That Doesn't Do Too Much, Really(4-6).
#C
#C else...if may lose a Scroll of Crumble(1-3) or an Evil Ballot Stuffer(4-6).
#C (I don't think Valaraukar counts as a Gadget since its Blueprint was
#C destroyed...)
#C
#C The Gingham Wearer, not having any Gadgets, loses two of eir six trinkets:
#C  1. The Sceptre of banna #2
#C  2. Fleas Shaking Hands #1
#C  3. off-chartreuse mask
#C  4. Gingham Shovel
#C  5. Omega medal II
#C  6. Pool
#C (There's an extra roll in case the first two are the same; otherwise
#C ignore it)
#C
#C Alfvaen

.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 08:40:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Dice server)
Subject: Acka: Ackanomicon Determination

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Dice rolls requested by: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Rolls also sent to:
    [email-masked]

# Player: JT
# Ackanomicon determination
# based on the following (using a 50 sided die):
# 1 -15: arcane trivia
# 16-20: vile prophecies
# 21-25: inner workings
# 26-30: arcane lore
# 31-33: terrorizing pages
# 34-34: ancient artifact
# 35-36: mutation
# 37-38: dark domain
# 39-39: stock market crash
# 40-41: long lost treasure
# 42-43: doomsday
# 44-44: forbidden fruit
# 45-45: catastrophe
# 46-49: not so forbidden fruit
# 50-50: ancient one

No. of sides on every die:     50
No. of dice for every roll:     1
No. of dice rolls requested:    1
No. of rolls per line:          1

     10

Information on the dice server:
   DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE!
   Replies to [email-masked] vanish into a seldom-read mailbox.

   For instructions on using the dice server, send a message with
   subject "help" to [email-masked], or see http://www.pbm.com/dice/

   The dice server is provided by:

      Shadow Island Games
      http://www.pbm.com/

=================================================
             ** NewHoo Web Directory **
    An army of editors surfing the web for you!
               http://www.NewHoo.com/
=================================================

Original message follows:
> From [email-masked]  Sun Aug  2 05:44:05 1998
> Received: (from smtp@localhost) by xkey.com
>       id FAA29217 for <[email-masked]>; Sun, 2 Aug 1998 05:44:05 -0700
> Received: from boober-be.lineone.net(194.75.152.84) by xkey.com via smtp (V1.3)
>       id sma029201; Sun Aug  2 05:43:56 1998
> Received: from default (host5-99-50-10.btinternet.com [195.99.50.10]) by boober.lineone.net (8.8.5/8.8.0) with SMTP id NAA05524 for <[email-masked]>; Sun, 2 Aug 1998 13:43:53 +0100 (BST)
> Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 13:43:53 +0100 (BST)
> Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
> From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> ADate: 02/08/98 13:41:46
> X-Mailer: Acorn Email v1b2
> Subject:  Acka: Ackanomicon Determination
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> #P [email-masked]
> #S 50
> #D 1
> #R 1
> #L 1
> #T Acka: Ackanomicon Determination
> 
> #C Player: JT
> #C Ackanomicon determination
> #C based on the following (using a 50 sided die):
> #C 1 -15: arcane trivia
> #C 16-20: vile prophecies
> #C 21-25: inner workings
> #C 26-30: arcane lore
> #C 31-33: terrorizing pages
> #C 34-34: ancient artifact
> #C 35-36: mutation
> #C 37-38: dark domain
> #C 39-39: stock market crash
> #C 40-41: long lost treasure
> #C 42-43: doomsday
> #C 44-44: forbidden fruit
> #C 45-45: catastrophe
> #C 46-49: not so forbidden fruit
> #C 50-50: ancient one
> 

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.7

iQCVAwUBNcRfIz8NitsTFjcVAQHpMgP/df0hp736cjOVqHylA7If4H2ogdZqn+1u
ggviSunhjrPQmNF+EWXv9UaYpzvG4PeYEeg+bXwYrTS3S8DumOehT9eReTbEg9ZY
CnJbDPsijcLTRDDZWjm3HMwCFhcYYxD/+ildXuVxj8v5Oj83MxHU4x/y917kcf7A
zpIxLL6d2mo=
=GFd6
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 08:44:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: oops

>#P [email-masked]
>#S 100
>#D 1
>#R 1
>#L 1
>#T Acka: B-Ack Random Determination

[...]

Oops. I don't know how this ended up here, sorry.

Memo to myself, do the dumb things I gotta do, download a decent mail prog that works.

Brie Clump.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 08:47:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Question about #3349

>What d'y'all think?  (I am really learning what I assume is the desired
>lesson -- that one must pay very close attention to the apparently petty
>little details -- as they say, "the devil is in the details"....)

I would say wait until it is distriibuted and then retract and resubmit again. I remember one time where 
Slakko must have submitted essentially the same proposal about ten times due to little bugs. The real 
lesson to learn here is probably to wait a bit before resubmitting after you retract, since it stops things 
like this happening. We all make little errors that we don't spot, so don't worry about that.

Brie Clump.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 09:19:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CotC stuff

I create a pair of trinkets called "Spasibo khorosho 1" and "Spasibo khorosho 2" both with a value of 
A$30 and the following description:

"A chartreuse plaque with the legend:

'Thank you for doing my dirty work for my CotCing when I was too lazy to do so.

er, Tom.'

emblazoned upon it in gold letters."

I give the first of these to JT and the second to /dev/joe.

I can now also announce that the CotC web pages are back up to date. As you may have guessed 
from the above this was largely thanks to JT with help from /dev/joe. Thank you.

It also gives me great pleasure to present Alfvaen with a bronze torch for having judged 15 CFJs. 
Congratulations Alfvaen.

And now to go and (re)assign some CFJs.

Brie Clump.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:33:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: That Reminds Me

Some salary substitution is in order.

As a reward for those who did my work in my absence:

I give A$30 to K 2 for eir work as ChessUmpire, and eir attempts at being
substitute Web-Harfer.
I give A$15 to JT even though e didn't do anything as Acting Map-Harfer
:-)

Yours,
Slakko

- -- 
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: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:50:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka:  Question about #3349

On Sun, 2 Aug 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> >What d'y'all think?  (I am really learning what I assume is the desired
> >lesson -- that one must pay very close attention to the apparently petty
> >little details -- as they say, "the devil is in the details"....)
> 
> I would say wait until it is distriibuted and then retract and resubmit again. I remember one time where 
> Slakko must have submitted essentially the same proposal about ten times due to little bugs. 

And still had it rejected.
:-)

Yours,
Slakko
- -- 
Duncan C. "still want to see the word 'Suber' in the rules" 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: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 603 (two-star)

This has been reassigned to two-star.

CotC.
- ----------------------------------
Call For Judgement 603 - May 30, 1998
Subject: Playing With Fire
Initiator: Hubert (sent May 29, 1998, 17:20)
Judge: Atilla the Pun (selected May 30, 1998, 08:59) (deadbeat)
Second Judge: two-star
Judgement:

Statement: 

Neither Slakko nor Wild Card is Enlightened. 

Initiator's Reasoning: 

Well, in Slakko's case this is true by a CFJ submitted by emself, which
established that Witchhunts cannot be called unless the offending text was
stated explicitly. E called the Blackhunt against emself for stating 

, which certainly does not explicitly contradict that black is a color. In
other words, by eir own reasoning, interpretation is not a valid cause for
a Witchhunt. 

More generally, though, Slakko and Wild Card both attempted to get around
the new Middle Ages restriction on Churches' use of Secret Labs by calling
Black Witchhunts on themselves. I would argue that Rule 1307.1 does not
allow this to happen. True, it states "Witchhunts may be called against
.... using the same methods and results as described in Rule 1307..." which
would seem to imply that Slakko and WC's actions were valid. 

But R1307.1 also says that the "same methods and results" of R1307 must be
used. R1307 does not allow a player to call a Witchhunt against emself; it
states explicitly that "any other player" may start the Witchhunt. Ergo,
Slakko and Wild Card called invalid Witchhunts, and never got burned.
That's what they get for playing with fire. 

Oh, and any judge who attempts to take advantage of my never having paid
attention during grammar class and use the possibly incorrect substitution
of "is" for "are" in the Statement of this CFJ as grounds for its dismissal
will be met with the full force of my wrath. 

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 609 (Vynd)

This has been reassigned to Vynd.

CotC.
- ----------------------------------
Call For Judgement 609 - Jun 02, 1998
Subject: Paradox?
Initiator: Mr. Tambourine Man (sent Jun 02, 1998, 12:29)
Judge: Koxvolio (selected Jun 01, 1998, 12:30) (deadbeat:
Second Judge: Vynd
Judgement:

Statement: 

The action of breadbox maintaining a copy of the rules in which rule 419.1
does not contain the text "currently [email-masked]" and no
other copies appears equally legal and illegal. 

Initiator's Reasoning: 

This is a paradox win CFJ. 

First I will note that this is an action that effects the game state and so
can be a paradox win, because of rule 701. 

The text quoted above was in proposal 3129, which was recently accepted.
There are two ways it could be interpreted: either the text in notes
brackets should be added to the rule; or the text in notes brackets is
merely a note in the middle of a block of text. There is plenty of game
custom that seems to indicate that either is possible. Therefore it is
impossible to determine how the rule actually reads. 

Rule 407.1 lists one of the duties of the rule-harfer (currently breadbox)
as: 

"a) To keep an accurate copy of the Rules of Ackanomic (known as the
Official Rules Document), and to make the text of the Official Rules
Document available to any player upon request." 

Since it is not possible to know what the rules actually are, it is
impossible for breadbox to definitely do this by maintaining only one copy
of the rules. 

Rule 701 states: 

"Failure of an Officer to perform a Duty of an Office e holds is the Crime
of Non-Performance. The act of performing a Duty incorrectly is the Crime
of Malpractice." 

Maintaining an incorrect copy of the rules would therefore be malpractice.
Therefore if breadbox maintains just one copy, since there is a fifty
percent chance of his copy being the right one there is also a fifty
percent chance of him committing malpractice. Therefore the action in the
statement appears equally legal and illegal. 

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 598 (Publius)

Slightly late, but this has been reassigned to Publius. I will add that it
is unfortunate that this was long before Publius joined the game and the
situation in whichit arose is no longer relevant. I would therefore
recomend to you Publius that you either ask your mentor or myself about
this so we can give you the background before you judge it (of course, if
you want to read through all the email logs then you are welcome to but...
:-)).

CotC.
- --------------------------------------
Call For Judgement 598 - May 23, 1998
Subject: Godfather
Initiator: Slakko (sent May 21, 1998, 15:06)
Judge: Wild Card (selected May 23, 1998, 17:04) (deadbeat)
Second Judge: Publius
Judgement: 

Statement: 

saaremaa is not the Godfather. 

Initiator's Comments: 

The player known as saaremaa was created at a time when there was no
definition of Godfather in the rules. The only possible way saaremaa could
have acquired the title is by transfer from the undead Malenkai. Yet the
rule which enabled this transfer had the following text: 

> {{
> This rule has precedence over all rules. If an Undead named Malenkai
> exists, that undead transfers all of its possessions to the author of the
> proposal that added this text to this rule, then that Undead is destroyed.
> }}

The Godfather, when it was defined by the rules, was an Office, and hence
unowned regardless of who "held" it. As it was not owned, it could not be
possessed, and could therefore not have been a possession of the undead
Malenkai. Hence saaremaa could not have acquired it from the undead
Malenkai, hence there is no way that saaremaa could have acquired it. So
saaremaa is not the Godfather. 

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 636 (Slakko)

Slakko has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 636 - July 31, 1998
Subject: Weasels
Initiator: Publius (Sent 31 July 1998, 00:41 Acka time)
Judge: Slakko (Selected 02 Aug 1998, 10:48 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement:  

In Rule 309, the phrase "substantially similar"
constitutes weasel words, as specified in the rules.

Initiator's Reasoning:  

"Substantially similar" is a subjective standard.  In the
context of Rule 309, it is used to allow a judge to invalidate a
proposal, on the grounds that the game effect of a proposal would be
"substantially similar" to another proposal already in the queue.
However, Rule 309 gives no guidance on how to interpret the phrase
"substantially similar", leaving the judge free to make an ad hoc
decision, possibly guided only by is own self-interest (for example, by
preventing a superior proposal from being accepted by the players rather
than one of is own authorship).

The standard "substantially similar" in this context also ignores the
possibility that apparently minor differences in game effect may still
be quite important to the outcome, and may have been very deliberately
introduced by the author of the proposal being judged.

I have submitted a proposal to delete the phrase "substantially similar"
wherever it appears in Rule 309, and replace it with the word
"identical".  I feel that this will recognize the true interest of the
players in preventing duplicate proposals from cluttering the queue,
while allowing alternative proposals with fine differences in nuance to
be considered.  I ask that that this valiant act of weasel slaying be
recognized.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 637 (K 2)

K 2 has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 637 - August 1, 1998
Subject: Archaeology
Initiator: Slakko (Sent 1 Aug 1998, 09:39 Acka time)
Judge: K 2 (Selected 02 Aug 1998, 10:43 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement: 

Vynd is the Archaeologist.

Initiator's Reasoning:

2 is prime.  Therefore -2 is prime.
0 is not prime.  Therefore at the end of Cycle 22 The Wages of Sin (who is
now Vynd) was the only player with a prime score.  E had not won the
cycle, therefore e became Archaeologist.  E has not since resigned from
or been impeached from this office, and hence e remains Archaeologist.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJs 633 and 635 confirmation

My able assistant JT informs me that I need to rebroadcast these to make
them official, so here are the verdicts for CFJs 633 and 635.

CotC.
- ------------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 633 - July 20, 1998
Subject: Lycanthropy
Initiator: Mr. Tambourine Man (Sent 20 Jul 1998, 08:19 Acka time)
Judge: K 2 (Selected 20 Jul 1998, 08:21 Acka time)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement: 

JT has chosen which animal he wishes to be lycanthropic in. 

Initiator's Reasoning: 

Rule 950.3 states: 

"The Werewolf of London is a unique, unownable entity. If the Werewolf
should bite a player, that player becomes Lycanthropic in the animal of eir
choice if e is not Lycanthropic already. If e has not chosen an animal
within three days, an animal shall be assigned to em by the Mad Scientist." 

JT selected the "animal" he wished to be lycanthropic in as a dragon. I'm
not sure however that a dragon counts as an animal or not though and would
like to be certain. 

Judge's Reasoning: 

> Statement:
> JT has chosen which animal he wishes to be lycanthropic in.

At the time this CFJ had been distributed JT had made the following
announcements regarding eir chosen lycanthropic form: 

> I claim that my Were-form is a were-dragon.

Since "were-forms" are not defined in the rules, recourse to The New
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993) is necessary. The following
definition is listed under the suffix "were-": Used. w. names of animals to
denote a human being imagined to be able to change at times into a
specified animal, as were-bear, were-leopard, etc. 

It would therefore appear that JT has chosen, as eir Lycanthropic form, a
human able to change into a dragon. 

Was this a valid choice? The only place in which the rules use the term
"animal" is in rule 950.3 itself thus, as is customarily the case, standard
English meaning is applied. Under animal the following definition is listed:
A living organism having sensation and voluntary motion, without rigid cell
walls, and dependent on organic substances for food. 

It would appear then, that a were-dragon, being defined as a human, is an
animal and a valid choice wrt rule 950.3 . 

As an aside a dragon would also meet the animal criteria, both as "a
mythical monster like a ..." and as the diminutive of "_Dracunculus
vulgaris_". 

- -----

Call for Judgement 635 - July 30, 1998
Subject: Modest proposals
Initiator: breadbox (Sent 30 Jul 1998, 12:17 Acka time)
Judge: Small Mew Toy (Selected 30 Jul 1998, 12:17 Acka time)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement: 

Proposal 3321 is modest. 

Initiator's reasoning: 

Once again, we are forced to ask ourselves what constitutes a preface. CFJ
414 determined that punctuation before proposal "furniture" was permitted.
CFJ 560 ruled that notes [bracketed text] also could precede "furniture".
So how about sentence fragments? 

The obvious argument for a judgement of True would be that a sentence
fragment, while not completely devoid of meaning, is still pretty empty in
the semantic department, and thus analagous to the case of CFJ 560. But I'm
wondering, then, how far this can go. How much digging through a proposal's
text could be required of the Scorekeeper (or anyone else) in order to
determine its point values? When does a bunch of text stop being preferatory? 

If memory serves, game custom would argue for a False verdict - except that
this custom was established under slightly different wording of the rules,
so I believe there is no real applicable game custom. So, I offer the
previous paragraph as a spirit-of-the-game argument for a False verdict. 

Judge's Reasoning: 

I agree with the submitter's reasoning. 

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 625 (TEFKATSC)

I seem to recall Alfvaen judging UNDECIDED on this one at some point but
I'mnot sure, so could you please verify this to me. If e did then TEFKATSC
gets it.

CotC.
- --------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 625 - June 20, 1998
Subject: Existence of Sin Rules
Initiator: saaremaa (sent June 20 1998, 15:06 Acka)
Judge: Fortunato (chosen June 20 1998, 18:02 Acka)
2nd Judge: IdiotBoy (deadbeat)
3rd Judge: Alfvaen
Judgement:UNDECIDED
Cortex: TEFKATSC (breadbox and ThinMan)

Statement:  There exists a rule whose title contains the string "The Deadly
Sin of Annoying the Harfers".  

Initiator's Reasoning:  
[None] 

Judge's Reasoning:
[None]

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 13:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 636 (TRUE)

Slakko has judged this TRUE.

CotC.
- --------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 636 - July 31, 1998
Subject: Weasels
Initiator: Publius (Sent 31 July 1998, 00:41 Acka time)
Judge: Slakko (Selected 02 Aug 1998, 10:48 Acka time)
Judgement: TRUE

Statement:  

In Rule 309, the phrase "substantially similar"
constitutes weasel words, as specified in the rules.

Initiator's Reasoning:  

"Substantially similar" is a subjective standard.  In the
context of Rule 309, it is used to allow a judge to invalidate a
proposal, on the grounds that the game effect of a proposal would be
"substantially similar" to another proposal already in the queue.
However, Rule 309 gives no guidance on how to interpret the phrase
"substantially similar", leaving the judge free to make an ad hoc
decision, possibly guided only by is own self-interest (for example, by
preventing a superior proposal from being accepted by the players rather
than one of is own authorship).

The standard "substantially similar" in this context also ignores the
possibility that apparently minor differences in game effect may still
be quite important to the outcome, and may have been very deliberately
introduced by the author of the proposal being judged.

I have submitted a proposal to delete the phrase "substantially similar"
wherever it appears in Rule 309, and replace it with the word
"identical".  I feel that this will recognize the true interest of the
players in preventing duplicate proposals from cluttering the queue,
while allowing alternative proposals with fine differences in nuance to
be considered.  I ask that that this valiant act of weasel slaying be
recognized.

Judge's Reasoning:

>From Rule 344, "Weasel Words", we have the following:
There exist certain words whose meaning is indeterminate in some contexts.
Such words are known as "weasel words". Any words which are
vague, overly broad or obfuscate the intended meaning of a rule qualify as
weasel words. 

The context in which Rule 309 contains the alleged Weasel Words is as
follows:

If two Proposals, A and B, have identical text, or if (in the judgement of
a judge) the game effect that would occur if Proposal A was adopted is
substantially similar to that of Proposal B.

Now regardless of the other definitions, relying on the judgement of a
judge to interpret what is "substantially similar" indicates that the
phrase "substantially similar" is vague.  Hence the phrase is an instance
of "weasel words".  I therefore judge TRUE.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 13:29:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 609 (FALSE)

Vynd has judged this FALSE. I'm very tempted to appeal this though, but it
can wait. For now. :-).

CotC.
- ----------------------------------
Call For Judgement 609 - Jun 02, 1998
Subject: Paradox?
Initiator: Mr. Tambourine Man (sent Jun 02, 1998, 12:29)
Judge: Koxvolio (selected Jun 01, 1998, 12:30) (deadbeat:
Second Judge: Vynd
Judgement: FALSE

Statement: 

The action of breadbox maintaining a copy of the rules in which rule 419.1
does not contain the text "currently [email-masked]" and no
other copies appears equally legal and illegal. 

Initiator's Reasoning: 

This is a paradox win CFJ. 

First I will note that this is an action that effects the game state and so
can be a paradox win, because of rule 701. 

The text quoted above was in proposal 3129, which was recently accepted.
There are two ways it could be interpreted: either the text in notes
brackets should be added to the rule; or the text in notes brackets is
merely a note in the middle of a block of text. There is plenty of game
custom that seems to indicate that either is possible. Therefore it is
impossible to determine how the rule actually reads. 

Rule 407.1 lists one of the duties of the rule-harfer (currently breadbox)
as: 

"a) To keep an accurate copy of the Rules of Ackanomic (known as the
Official Rules Document), and to make the text of the Official Rules
Document available to any player upon request." 

Since it is not possible to know what the rules actually are, it is
impossible for breadbox to definitely do this by maintaining only one copy
of the rules. 

Rule 701 states: 

"Failure of an Officer to perform a Duty of an Office e holds is the Crime
of Non-Performance. The act of performing a Duty incorrectly is the Crime
of Malpractice." 

Maintaining an incorrect copy of the rules would therefore be malpractice.
Therefore if breadbox maintains just one copy, since there is a fifty
percent chance of his copy being the right one there is also a fifty
percent chance of him committing malpractice. Therefore the action in the
statement appears equally legal and illegal. 

Judge's Reasoning:

I have to disagree with the initiator's reasoning, where he claims that
there is extensive support in game custom for not including notes in
proposals in the rules that said proposals create. It does seem that note
which were included at the begining or end of a proposal were, on
occasion, not included as part of the text of any subsequent rule.  I find
no support, however, for the idea that a note contained within the middle
of a section of text which is clearly defined to be a new rule, would
mysteriously disappear.  If I could find such custom, it would be wrong.
For while the rules state that information contained within note brackets
[] has no semantic meaning, thats a far cry from saying that it shoudl be
treated as non-existant.

I also have to disagree that, even if everything I have said above is
wrong, it would be equally legal and illegal for only the one copy of the
rules to be maintained.  It would either be legal, or it would be illegal.
The fact that we cannot determine which of the two possibilities it would
be does not mean it is both.  Nor am I convinced that we couldn't
determine with finality whether or not was legal or illegal, but as I am
pressed for time, and such a determination is outside the scope of what
this CFJ requires, I shall merely conclude by juding this FALSE.

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 14:01:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 625 (TEFKATSC)

>I seem to recall Alfvaen judging UNDECIDED on this one at some point but
>I'mnot sure, so could you please verify this to me. If e did then TEFKATSC
>gets it.

This might be grounds for a CFJ itself--see, what happened is that I sent
my verdict to JT, thinking e was still Acting COTC, when I knew perfectly
well that you had returned from Inactivity.  And then e forwarded it on to
you(and cc:ed it to me).  But I think that game custom will consider this
to have been a proper distribution.  I hope.

- --
- --Alfvaen (Web page:http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/)
Song In My Head--Moist:Believe Me
Current Book--Jo Clayton:Shadow of The Warmaster
Hara kiri, hara kiri, kiri kiri, hara hara

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 14:12:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Acka: New email

As promised, I have a new email address, [email-masked].  My web
pages will be moving over the next week or so, I hope, and while I will
be keeping the telusplanet.net address for mail-forwarding purposes for a
few months(and both are subscribed to the mailing lists right now), please
update any appropriate web pages, mailto links, etc.

- --
- --Alfvaen (Web page:http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/)
Song In My Head--Moist:Believe Me
Current Book--Jo Clayton:Shadow of The Warmaster
We never bothered to scream when your mask came off

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 15:55:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 625 (TEFKATSC)

On Sun, 2 Aug 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:
>I seem to recall Alfvaen judging UNDECIDED on this one at some point but
>I'mnot sure, so could you please verify this to me. If e did then TEFKATSC
>gets it.

I could find no record of such a judement in the logs that I searched
through last night.   However, that's not necessarily final as it could
have been sent privately.

- --JT

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

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 15:59:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 625 (TEFKATSC)

On Sun, 2 Aug 1998, JT wrote:
>On Sun, 2 Aug 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:
>>I seem to recall Alfvaen judging UNDECIDED on this one at some point but
>>I'mnot sure, so could you please verify this to me. If e did then TEFKATSC
>>gets it.
>
>I could find no record of such a judement in the logs that I searched
>through last night.   However, that's not necessarily final as it could
>have been sent privately.

And as Alfvaen pointed out, and I have now reconfirmed in my email logs,
he did in fact send it privately, and I forwarded it on to the entity now
known as Brie Clump.

- --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: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 16:08:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CotC stuff

On Sun, 2 Aug 1998, Tom Walmsley wrote:
>I give the first of these to JT and the second to /dev/joe.

I accept the 'Spasibo khorosho 1' with thanks.  It was my pleasure to help
out.

- --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: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 16:21:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 625 (TEFKATSC)

>This might be grounds for a CFJ itself--see, what happened is that I sent
>my verdict to JT, thinking e was still Acting COTC, when I knew perfectly
>well that you had returned from Inactivity.  And then e forwarded it on to
>you(and cc:ed it to me).  But I think that game custom will consider this
>to have been a proper distribution.  I hope.

Aah, yes, I remember now. This is probably a similar sort of situation to
when I had problems with my computer and went on vacation by (double)
proxy. The way I look at it, you sent a message which was to go to CotC and
CotC got it so it should probably count.

Brie Clump.

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #253
*******************************