Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #263
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest       Thursday, August 6 1998       Volume 03 : Number 263

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:05:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brandon Ray <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Real-life antivoting

In RL, a person in a legislative body may also vote contrary to his beliefs, in
order to preserve the right to move to reconsider.  Roberts Rules (which govern
many but not all parliamentary bodies) allow a vote to be reconsidered, but
only if a member who voted for the winning side requests it.  Thus, if there is
a motion which proposes that pi be made equal to exactly 3, I an oppose this
but believe it may pass, I might vote in favor of it, because I can then move
to reconsider the vote if circumstances change later on.

Hmm.  Ackanomic doesn't seem to have a reconsider provision.  Maybe I'll
propose one...

Michael Pizolato wrote:

> I realize it's moot (for the time being, at least) in Ackanomic, but thought
> you'd enjoy hearing about an example of real-life antivoting that I often
> encounter. Our local school board does it quite often. Board members vote
> against a proposal that they know will pass and that they are actually in
> favor of, because they know the majority of their constituents are against
> the proposal. By voting against it, they can claim to their constituents
> that they had "opposed" the measure.
>
> Only one of the members ever called the others on it, trying to get them to
> explain their "opposition" when their words and actions prior to the vote
> had been entirely in favor of the proposal. The response was always stony
> silence.
>
> Thanks,
> Piz

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:09:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: The Tater. 

From the desk of IdiotBoy...
To: JT
From: IB

Attached please find the cofirmation you requested.

IB

1 enc.

(I confirm this)

On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, JT wrote:

> On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, Matt Miller wrote:
> 
> >I bake the Magic Potato, cut it wide open ad stuff it with butter, sour
> >cream, and green onions.  Then I go to The Library, wandering by The Room,
> >and drop the potato there.
> 
> If that was in fact a request to go to *that* room, please confirm :)
> 
> --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: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:14:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Dice server)
Subject: Acka: Ackanomicon Determination

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

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

# Player: <name>
# 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 - 40 Long Lost Treasure
# 41 - 41 Forbidden Fruit
# 42 - 42 Catastrophe
# 43 - 46 Not so Forbidden Fruit
# 47 - 47 Ancient One
# 48 - 48 Stock Market Crash
# 49 - 50 Judgement Day

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

     19

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]  Thu Aug  6 15:18:15 1998
> Received: (from smtp@localhost) by xkey.com
>       id PAA12273 for <[email-masked]>; Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:18:15 -0700
> Received: from herne.dragoncat.net(207.54.31.1) by xkey.com via smtp (V1.3)
>       id sma012239; Thu Aug  6 15:18:03 1998
> Received: from localhost (jtraub@localhost)
>       by dragoncat.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02904
>       for <[email-masked]>; Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:18:05 -0700
> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:18:05 -0700 (PDT)
> From: JT <[email-masked]>
> To: Dice Server <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Acka: Ackanomicon
> Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> 
> #P [email-masked]
> #S 50
> #D 1
> #R 1
> #L 1
> #T Acka: Ackanomicon Determination
> 
> #C Player: <name>
> #C Ackanomicon Determination
> #C based on the following (using a 50 sided die)
> #C
> #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 - 40 Long Lost Treasure
> #C 41 - 41 Forbidden Fruit
> #C 42 - 42 Catastrophe
> #C 43 - 46 Not so Forbidden Fruit
> #C 47 - 47 Ancient One
> #C 48 - 48 Stock Market Crash
> #C 49 - 50 Judgement Day
> 
> 
> [-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
> [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
> [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
> [-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
> 

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

iQCVAwUBNcorrj8NitsTFjcVAQH2bwQAhV7BxhXTGcZG4ASyd691wxvqVOkB26Un
DK0pZDHiQY2QNE075eQu5p9bxukzfixwZ92/TQiOUo/LQOpSBjWtakM/sowF0Aly
xzUwHuqbiH1Is9FSHyjhZPGM3IOWjOk4CnDmFfZIySQTz/A6D6F1IA3C4fC9Qaii
7ofj0ionBVY=
=7dDI
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:17:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Test

As all but three of you will currently be aware I've been having problems
emailingto any muppetlabs.com addresses (well, ackanomic@ aand breadbox@).
I'm sure my ISP must be having a bad day or something, I can't get through
to my mentee or the main list for Acka. Oh well. Anyway, IdiotBoy suggested
that I try the alias (I can now be reached at mt,@ackanomic.org by the way)
so I am doing. If this test message gets through then I'm ging to burden
you all with 10K of CFJs again. Sorry.

MTM.

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:17:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Ackanomicon Determination

I forgot to specify that this was the determination for IdiotBoy.
It was.

- --JT

On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, Dice server wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>
>Dice rolls requested by: JT <[email-masked]>
>Rolls also sent to:
>    [email-masked]
>
># Player: <name>
># 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 - 40 Long Lost Treasure
># 41 - 41 Forbidden Fruit
># 42 - 42 Catastrophe
># 43 - 46 Not so Forbidden Fruit
># 47 - 47 Ancient One
># 48 - 48 Stock Market Crash
># 49 - 50 Judgement Day
>
>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
>
>     19
>
>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]  Thu Aug  6 15:18:15 1998
>> Received: (from smtp@localhost) by xkey.com
>>       id PAA12273 for <[email-masked]>; Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:18:15 -0700
>> Received: from herne.dragoncat.net(207.54.31.1) by xkey.com via smtp (V1.3)
>>       id sma012239; Thu Aug  6 15:18:03 1998
>> Received: from localhost (jtraub@localhost)
>>       by dragoncat.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02904
>>       for <[email-masked]>; Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:18:05 -0700
>> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 15:18:05 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: JT <[email-masked]>
>> To: Dice Server <[email-masked]>
>> Subject: Acka: Ackanomicon
>> Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>> 
>> #P [email-masked]
>> #S 50
>> #D 1
>> #R 1
>> #L 1
>> #T Acka: Ackanomicon Determination
>> 
>> #C Player: <name>
>> #C Ackanomicon Determination
>> #C based on the following (using a 50 sided die)
>> #C
>> #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 - 40 Long Lost Treasure
>> #C 41 - 41 Forbidden Fruit
>> #C 42 - 42 Catastrophe
>> #C 43 - 46 Not so Forbidden Fruit
>> #C 47 - 47 Ancient One
>> #C 48 - 48 Stock Market Crash
>> #C 49 - 50 Judgement Day
>> 
>> 
>> [-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
>> [ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
>> [ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
>> [-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
>> 
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: 2.7
>
>iQCVAwUBNcorrj8NitsTFjcVAQH2bwQAhV7BxhXTGcZG4ASyd691wxvqVOkB26Un
>DK0pZDHiQY2QNE075eQu5p9bxukzfixwZ92/TQiOUo/LQOpSBjWtakM/sowF0Aly
>xzUwHuqbiH1Is9FSHyjhZPGM3IOWjOk4CnDmFfZIySQTz/A6D6F1IA3C4fC9Qaii
>7ofj0ionBVY=
>=7dDI
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

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

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:30:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJs (4th try!)

This is similar to the last one most of you got but it has some more stuff
on the end. CFJ 598 is now finished since I've learned how to use cut and
paste, and an exra CFJ is added at the bottom which I missed last time.

MTM, CotC.

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

K 2 has judged FALSE.

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: FALSE

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.

Judge's Reasoning:

Rule 593 places ..."the single voting player who had the highest score
when the cycle ended, which was both a prime number and not greater than
or equal to the Magic Number at that time, and who is not already a
Scientist other than the Archaeologist." in the office of Archaeologist
at the end of a cycle. Since prime numbers aren't mathematically defined
in the rules, game custom holds that a common english definition be
found to define them. According to the prime research page maintained at
The University of Tennessee
(http://www.utm.edu/research/primes/glossary/Prime.html) a prime number
is defined in the following manner:

"An integer greater than one is called a prime number if its only
positive divisors (factors) are one and itself."

Greater than one clearly excludes negative numbers. Game custom supports
this definition since the sentence fragment (in Rule 252) ..."and x is
the smallest prime number"... has always been interpreted as a finite
positive integral number - not an infinitely negative one. Similarly the
sentence fragment ..."the least prime number that would result in a
unique name"... (from rule Rule 594.5) has also been interpreted in the
past as including only positive numbers.

As a result -2, being negative, is not prime, thus Rule 593's "highest
prime" requirement was not met by any player at the end of cycle 22.

This CFJ is ruled FALSE.

- ---------

rufus has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 638 - August 2, 1998
Subject: Eleusis
Initiator: Alfvaen (Sent 2 Aug 1998, 21:54 Acka time)
Judge: rufus (Selected 06 Aug 1998, 17:21 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement:

There is no game of Eleusis with /dev/joe as a player.

Initiator's Reasoning:

I was just looking over the Eleusis rule, and noticed that it said "The
game is played with 5-8 players and one optional Referee."

Now, the game commonly referred to "Eleusis Game 1" has JT as a referee,
and four players--/dev/joe, else...if, and two others(who have, at some
time, been known as The Gingham Wearer and Slagothor respectively).
This is obviously not a real game of Eleusis.  "Eleusis Game 2", in which
I am currently Deus, does not contain /dev/joe as a player.

I'm not sure how this happened--was the lower limit overlooked, or
changed at some point?--but Rules is Rules.

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

K 2 has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 639 - August 3, 1998
Subject: More Eleusis
Initiator: Alfvaen (Sent 3 Aug 1998, 18:14 Acka time)
Judge: K 2 (Selected 06 Aug 1998, 17:23 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement:

The current game of Eleusis in which Alfvaen is Deus will enter 'sudden death'
after the next card played.

Initiator's Reasoning:

This rests on the interpretations of two sections in the Eleusis rule:

   k) If there is no prophet, mark every 10th card played with a '*'.
   After forty cards, the round enters 'sudden death'.
   
   l) If there is a prophet, mark every 10th card since they became the
   prophet with a '!'. After 30 cards (3 '!') the round enters sudden
   death.

I believe that a reasonable interpretation of these would not make them
mutually exclusive.

In the game mentioned above, Ayla became Prophet with the 23rd card played,
and remained so until the 36th card was played.  So there was a "!" on
the 23rd card, and one on the 33rd.  Perhaps the 30th card should not
have been marked with a "*", since there was a Prophet at that time, but
it still seems reasonable to me that _after_ Ayla lost eir status as
Prophet the first count(toward forty)would still include the 13(14?)cards
that were played while there was a prophet.  The "forty cards" in that
clause is ambiguous, and nowhere does "cards played" mean "cards played
when there is no prophet".

I should also note that 39 cards total have been played so far in the
game, with or without a Prophet.  So if those under the Prophet count
towards the forty, then the next will be the fortieth.

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

Vynd has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 640 - August 5, 1998
Subject: Potato
Initiator: Alfvaen (Sent 5 Aug 1998, 06:46 Acka time)
Judge: Vynd (Selected 06 Aug 1998, 17:25 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement:

K 2 has the Magic Potato.

Initiator's Reasoning:

Although according to the Rules the Magic Potato is given out every Monday,
at noon, it is also the result of a random determination the posting of
whose results should be the time at which it occurs.  Due to the Speaker
interregnum it still hasn't been posted yet, and I've been wondering about
this one for a while.  And, frankly, it will affect scoring quite a bit
since K 2 has a lot of Proposals in the last batch.

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

Fortunato has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Criminal Judgement 172* - August 5, 1998
Subject: Spam
Initiator: Slakko (Sent 5 Aug 1998, 12:27 Acka time)
Judge: Fortunato (Selected 06 Aug 1998, 17:29 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement:
Brie Clump committed the Crime of Being Annoying on August 5th, 1998.

Initiator's Reasoning:
Rule 721 defines the only ways to be Annoying, and hence commit the crime
of Being Annoying.  One of these is Spam, defined to be "Pursuing a game
strategy which entails, as one of its effects, causing excessive amounts
of messages to be sent to the public fora [in the judgement of a judge]".

The only question here is whether Brie Clump's game strategy causes
excessive amounts of messages to be sent to the public fora.
Twelve proposals from the one player in a single day appears to me to be
excessive, and it is clearly part of Brie Clump's strategy.  So if the
judge of this CFCJ agrees with me, then Brie Clump has committed the Crime
of Being Annoying.

[I just thought I'd run this up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes.]

[* CotC's note: I think this is the correctt number, if not then it's
numbered one higher than the last one :-)]

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

Publius has judged this TRUE.

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:  TRUE

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.

Judge's reasoning:

At the time the user Malenkai left the game for the first time, Rule 254
stated that as part of the process of leaving the game:

"5) The player is removed from all Offices."

Since the Godfather was an office (when it existed), Malenkai must have
been removed from that office when he left the game.  Therefore, it
could not later have been transferred to another player under any
circumstances.

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

Niccolo has been selected.

CotC.
- ---------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 641 - August 4, 1998
Subject: True Names
Initiator: K 2 (Sent 4 Aug 1998, 14:32 Acka time)
Judge: Niccolo Flychuck (Selected 06 Aug 1998, 18:25 Acka time)
Judgement: 

Statement:
No player of Ackanomic has ever had an Ackanomic name (as distinct from
a real name) of Tom Walmsley.

Reasoning:
When the entity then known as
a-collection-of-numbers-that-I-can-never-remember-which-relate-in-some-manne
r-to-the-string-"Jenny"
attempted to change eir name the registrar (JT - an altogether easier
name to remember) objected on the grounds of "Malenkai's Loophole". As a
result the change did not occur.

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:37:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Acka: CFJ637]

On Thu, 6 Aug 1998 [email-masked] wrote:

> The definition quoted  says nothing about negative numbers, and as it
> happens negative numbers are generally defined as prime if and only
> if their absolute value is zero.

Let me get this straight. Negative numbers are prime if they aren't
negative?

- -- 
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: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 18:57:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC  Reconsideration

[Sorry for sending this to the main list but I wasn't sure if there was an
acka-research alias @ackanomic.org. IB?]

>Create a new rule with the number 106.5 and the title “Reconsideration
>of Proposals”, with the following RECONSIDER-delimited text:

You're using the fancy quotation marks again.

>RECONSIDER
>Any proposal which is accepted or rejected may be reconsidered.
>Proposals may only be reconsidered as described in this Rule.
>
>A proposal is reconsidered if any player who voted on the winning side
>notifies the Promoter within 24 hours of the announcement of the outcome
>of the vote that e wishes for the proposal to be reconsidered.  

Winning side is not defined. You should probably define that. Also, there
is an Acka tradition that the game can be played by someone who only checks
there mail every three days so you might want to change that.

>The
>Promoter shall then place the proposal on the proposal queue in the
>normal manner, and post as a Public Action that the proposal is being
>reconsidered, and name the player who has requested reconsideration.

I'm not sure but I'd guess this would make things fairly awkward for the
promoter.

>The voting deadline for a proposal which is being reconsidered shall be
>three days.  This paragraph takes precedence over Rule 106, if they are
>found to be in conflict.  All other Rules governing voting on,
>acceptance and rejection of proposals remain in force.
>
>A particular proposal may be reconsidered only once.
>
>Enforcement of any Rule created by the proposal being reconsidered shall
>be suspended while the proposal is being reconsidered.  However, if the
>original outcome is upheld, any Rule created by the proposal which was
>reconsidered shall be enforced as if it had never been suspended.  This
>paragraph takes precedence over Rule 103, if they are found to be in
>conflict.

This sounds dodgy to me. Take the great debunk proposal for example. I
could request that that was reconsidered at which point the rule would not
have any effect but by the time the reconsideration was over the hearing
would have finished. I'm presuming R103 isretroactive effects (I'm too
tired to go and look) but if not then this wouldn't work at all.

>If the outcome of the reconsideration is the same as the original
>ballot, the player requesting reconsideration shall be penalized 10
>points.  If the original outcome is overturned, the player requesting
>reconsideration shall receive 5 points.  Other players shall be rewarded
>and/or penalized as voting rules may prescribe.  This paragraph shall
>take precedence over all other Rules governing points and scoring.
>RECONSIDER

Essentially, I don't like the entire idea; it seems unnecessary. I think it
owuld probably just make a lot of work for the promoter and tabulator.

MTM.

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 19:01:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: RFC  Reconsideration

>The concept is interesting.  The main problem I see with it is the
>likelihood of a reconsideration failing quorum.  Given that I am
>reasonably confident people don't necessarily send in votes every three
>days, I suspect that when this starts we could see perfectly well accepted
>proposals being overturned because quorum is not reached on the
>reconsideration.

I've just had anothe thought actually. What would happen to bonus votes and
tammany bribes? It would probably be best just to have them countagain at
no extra cost but this needs to be specified.

MTM.

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 19:15:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Real-life antivoting

On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, Michael Pizolato wrote:

> I realize it's moot (for the time being, at least) in Ackanomic, but thought
> you'd enjoy hearing about an example of real-life antivoting that I often
> encounter. Our local school board does it quite often. Board members vote
> against a proposal that they know will pass and that they are actually in
> favor of, because they know the majority of their constituents are against
> the proposal. By voting against it, they can claim to their constituents
> that they had "opposed" the measure.

Very, very commonly done in the US congress.  The whips let members whose
constituents are opposed to the party line vote against the party line if
they know they have enough votes.  Can get really complicated, as voting
is done publiclly, and votes can be changed.  The US Senate also provides
one of my favorite anti-voting to get what you really want senerios.  I am
a bit fuzzy, and my notes are elsewhere, but what happened was therer were
two versions of an education bill, one quite liberal, the other more
moderate.  A conserivative in the committe marking the bill up, who was
opposed to both bills, supported the liberal bill, so that it got out of
committe, and the moderate bill didn't.  The moderate bill would have
likely passed the floor vote, but the liberal one hadn't a chance.  The
result was the troll^H^H^H^H^H conseratives got what they wanted - nothing
- - by supporting big change.  

rufus

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 20:49:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma cards of type Go Fish (fwd)

I am forwarding on the following message from K 2.

According to em, there really should be a limit of 14 OC Go Fish instead
of the 13 listed in the rule.  In this case, the rule is incorrect and
should be corrected by Breadbox and the OC Go Fish destruction I mentioned
earlier does not in fact occur.

I see no reason to believe that K 2 was wrong. Therefore this is merely an
error in the rules easily fixed by a CSR since the number should have been
14 and not the 13 that is reported in the rule.

- --JT

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

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1998 10:52:50 +1000
From: K2 <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
To: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Otzma cards of type Go Fish

The number of go-fish now in existance _IS_ the limit.

I have the following go-fish transaction logged since I became financier.
11/05/98 14:17 OGF Wild D 1

none before and none since.

>Subject:  Acka: Go fish
>Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 04:09:52 -0400 (EDT)
>From:  K2 <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To:  [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>
>Just a note, since 23rd May 1998 has come and gome rule 1239 should be
>applied. I beleive that there are currently 13 go fish in existance, but
>the Runemaker should confirm this.
>
>
>K 2

I now beleive I mis-informed breadbox with the preceeding message. I was wrong
there were infact 14 go fish in existance on the 23rd of May (I never did get
confirmation from Slakko).

There were 15 when I took over as finacier distributed as follows [ignore the
dates]:
23/06/02 0:00 OGF C Chaos 1
24/06/02 0:00 OGF C devjoe 1
25/06/02 0:00 OGF C else 1
26/06/02 0:00 OGF C Guy 1
27/06/02 0:00 OGF C Wild 1
28/06/02 0:00 OGF C Hubert 1
29/06/02 0:00 OGF C Koxvolio 1
30/06/02 0:00 OGF C NF 1
1/07/02 0:00 OGF C Rex 2
2/07/02 0:00 OGF C T194 2
3/07/02 0:00 OGF C TGW 1
4/07/02 0:00 OGF C ThinMan 1
5/07/02 0:00 OGF C Vynd 1

JT wrote:

> the rule is just wrong.

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 22:32:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Plumb <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: AVPP

On Thu, 6 Aug 1998, K2 wrote:

> I denounce this suggestion.
> I suggest the following be apppended to the party manifesto (or whatever):(---
> delimited)
> ---
> Moreover, should the concept of anti-voting ever be removed from this fair game
> of Ackanomic, the members of AVPP shall be constrained to vote on each and every
> proposal, especially those submitted by opponents of anti-voting, as if they (the
> members of AVPP) (well, the opponents can too, I suppose) were able to gain
> points for anti-voting.
> ---

I approve this suggestion.

That WAS what I meant. :-)

Oh, while I'm here, I offer MTM A$7 for an Otzma Card Lay Off! since our
draconian Financier nullified my previous one.  For the same reason, I
sent this to ackanomic instead of acka-finance.

- - 867-5309

I have not yet BEGUN to procrastinate! 

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

Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1998 22:41:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Aaron V. Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ?

>>From the judgement on CFJ 637 came the following definition:

>"An integer greater than one is called a prime number if its only
>positive divisors (factors) are one and itself."

>Fine.  That does not say, however, that negative numbers cannot be primes.
>It merely defines what positive numbers are primes, leaving negatives as a
>separate case undefined.

>Interestingly, Webster's definition technically admits no primes exist:

>having no factor except itself and one

>as it conveniently forgets to specify positive factors.

>Dammit I'm a mathematician.
>-2 is prime.
>So is 1+i.

If you begin to admit negative divisors, then no number is prime; 2 has
- -2 and -1 as divisors, neither of which is itself or one.

If "primeness" is defined for positive numbers only, though, I would tend
to think that there are no negative prime numbers.  Let's look again at
that definition:

"An integer greater than one is called a prime number if its only
positive divisors (factors) are one and itself."

To reduce it a little bit

"A member of set A has the property B if it satisfied the condition C."

I can see this being read as that property B is a property _only_ of
members of set A.  It may not, but in this case I think it can.  Whatever
prime may mean in complex number theory, I don't think you can get away
with that in Ackanomic.  (Besides, we can divide by zero here, so don't
think that all of number theory carries over.  :-)

- --
- --Alfvaen(Web page:http://www.telusplanet.net/public/alfvaen/)
Current Album--None of The Above:No Smurfing Zone
Current Book--Sheri S. Tepper:Shadow's End
A miser is hard to live with, but makes a fine ancestor.

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #263
*******************************