Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #288
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest        Friday, August 28 1998        Volume 03 : Number 288

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:36:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> >> Since rule 709 provides a condition by which I am released, I may now in
> >> fact leave the gaol.
> > 
> > Why - you are at the Gaol.  To leave requires you use another rule, as
> > Rule 709 does not enable a player to change their Location.
> 
> Hang on. What Rule 709 actually SAYS is: "A player may not leave the
> Gaol except by the application of a Rule which explicitly defines a
> procedure or condition for the player to be released or removed from
> the Gaol." [emphasis mine] There is in fact a rule which defines a
> condition for players to be released from the Gaol. Rule 709 also
> says: "A player is released from the Gaol if and when their sentence
> expires." Since this condition has in fact been met, JT (et al) may
> leave the Gaol.

It says "A player may not leave the Gaol except _by the application_ of a
Rule which explicitly ... "

How can JT apply Rule 709 to change locations?

- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, CotC, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Senator

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:40:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 649 (Robin Hood / Piz)

In a message dated 27/08/98  22:39:39, you write:

> 
>  Robin Hood has been selected.
>  However, if this CFJ is TRUE, then by the same logic Robin Hood is
>  ineligible to judge CFJ 649.
>  Therefore, if the statement is TRUE, I have selected Piz to judge it.
>  
>  This bifurcation is getting _really_ fun.
>  

I decline to accept this appointment since I can not give an impartial
decision. I'd also suggest we amend the CFJ rules either people whose
eligibility for a particular CFJ would otherwise depend on that same CFJ
are ineligible, or that no-one can be ruled ineligible for some CFJ by any
reasoning based on that assumption.

Robin Hood

>  Call for Judgement 649 - August 27, 1998
>  Subject: Presence of K 2 in Gaol
>  Initiator: rufus (sent 27 Aug, 1998 16:34 Acka)
>  Judge (Thread F): Robin Hood 
>  Judge (Thread T): Piz
>  Judgement:
>  
>  Statement: 
>  k 2 is ineligble to judge CFJ 648.
>  

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:40:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 649 (Robin Hood / Piz)

In a message dated 27/08/98  22:39:39, you write:

> 
>  Robin Hood has been selected.
>  However, if this CFJ is TRUE, then by the same logic Robin Hood is
>  ineligible to judge CFJ 649.
>  Therefore, if the statement is TRUE, I have selected Piz to judge it.
>  
>  This bifurcation is getting _really_ fun.
>  

I decline to accept this appointment since I can not give an impartial
decision. I'd also suggest we amend the CFJ rules either people whose
eligibility for a particular CFJ would otherwise depend on that same CFJ
are ineligible, or that no-one can be ruled ineligible for some CFJ by any
reasoning based on that assumption.

Robin Hood

>  Call for Judgement 649 - August 27, 1998
>  Subject: Presence of K 2 in Gaol
>  Initiator: rufus (sent 27 Aug, 1998 16:34 Acka)
>  Judge (Thread F): Robin Hood 
>  Judge (Thread T): Piz
>  Judgement:
>  
>  Statement: 
>  k 2 is ineligble to judge CFJ 648.
>  

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:43:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
>> Hang on. What Rule 709 actually SAYS is: "A player may not leave the
>> Gaol except by the application of a Rule which explicitly defines a
>> procedure or condition for the player to be released or removed from
>> the Gaol." [emphasis mine] There is in fact a rule which defines a
>> condition for players to be released from the Gaol. Rule 709 also
>> says: "A player is released from the Gaol if and when their sentence
>> expires." Since this condition has in fact been met, JT (et al) may
>> leave the Gaol.
>
>It says "A player may not leave the Gaol except _by the application_ of a
>Rule which explicitly ... "
>
>How can JT apply Rule 709 to change locations?

I don't have to 'apply' rule 709, nor does the rule actually have to move
me.  Rule 709 applied itself and released me from Gaol, thus allowing me
to move since a rule 'explicitly defined a proceedure or condition for the
player to be released'.  That enabled me to move/leave.  This is also the
game custom as has been accrued over the lifetime of the game.

We have had cases in the past where game custom and interpretaton have in
fact overwhelmed the rules (in fact, I recall a relatively recent
proposal by Saaremaa which replaced the text of a rule with itself JUST to
reset game custom on the interpretation of that 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 ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:45:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 649 (Joe Java / Piz)

Robin Hood has declined in Thread F.  Joe Java has been chosen in Thread
F.

Nothing has changed in thread T.

Call for Judgement 649 - August 27, 1998
Subject: Presence of K 2 in Gaol
Initiator: rufus (sent 27 Aug, 1998 16:34 Acka)
1st Judge (Thread F): Robin Hood (chosen 27 Aug, 1998 18:36 Acka)
2nd Judge (Thread F): Joe Java
Judge (Thread T): Piz (chosen 27 Aug, 1998 18:36 Acka)
Judgement:

Statement: 
k 2 is ineligble to judge CFJ 648.

Reasoning:  
He is in jail, regardless of CFJ 648.  

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 02:53:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, JT wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
> >> Hang on. What Rule 709 actually SAYS is: "A player may not leave the
> >> Gaol except by the application of a Rule which explicitly defines a
> >> procedure or condition for the player to be released or removed from
> >> the Gaol." [emphasis mine] There is in fact a rule which defines a
> >> condition for players to be released from the Gaol. Rule 709 also
> >> says: "A player is released from the Gaol if and when their sentence
> >> expires." Since this condition has in fact been met, JT (et al) may
> >> leave the Gaol.
> >
> >It says "A player may not leave the Gaol except _by the application_ of a
> >Rule which explicitly ... "
> >
> >How can JT apply Rule 709 to change locations?
> 
> I don't have to 'apply' rule 709, nor does the rule actually have to move
> me.  Rule 709 applied itself and released me from Gaol, thus allowing me
> to move since a rule 'explicitly defined a proceedure or condition for the
> player to be released'.  That enabled me to move/leave.  This is also the
> game custom as has been accrued over the lifetime of the game.

Rule 709 releases the player, fine.  However, you have argued that player
is still at the Gaol (you have claimed K 2 is still there, despite eir
sentence having expired).  Hence the application of another rule which
allows for removal or release from Gaol (or the application of 709 again)
is necessary to _leave_ the Gaol.

> 
> We have had cases in the past where game custom and interpretaton have in
> fact overwhelmed the rules (in fact, I recall a relatively recent
> proposal by Saaremaa which replaced the text of a rule with itself JUST to
> reset game custom on the interpretation of that rule).

Just because we have been playing a particular way does not automatically
make it correct, nor does it mean that the rules must be interpreted to
keep it correct.  Game custom does have strong force, but if the rules can
more reasonably be interpreted otherwise, then the existing game custom
should be overturned.

Besides, I don't think this game custom has ever been codified in a CFJ
before.
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, CotC, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Senator

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:21:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

> We have had cases in the past where game custom and interpretaton
> have in fact overwhelmed the rules (in fact, I recall a relatively
> recent proposal by Saaremaa which replaced the text of a rule with
> itself JUST to reset game custom on the interpretation of that
> rule).

Well, game custom can't outright override what the rules say. However,
it can override one interpretation over another, even when the latter
interpretation seems more natural when taken out of context. Of
course, the more "perverse" a given interpretation, the more game
custom needs to be marshalled in order for it to hold sway.

In this case, of course, the game custom is absolutely overwhelmingly
in favor of one interpretation. To deny that interpretation, one would
nearly have to show that the rules as written simply can not be
interpreted this way. I don't think that this is the case here.

Slakko's interpretation is that it is not enough to be "released" from
Gaol, but that as long as the Goal is your location, you can't leave
it. I think this is a bit excessive, given the existing game custom.
Rather, if Slakko wishes to press the point, I would invoke Rule 810,
which says:

  If a player leaves or is removed from, any Location, and it is
  unspecified to which Location that they go, they go to their Home,
  if it exists.

and in fact this may be the way that being released from the Gaol has
been harfed in the past.

breadbox

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:22:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
>> I don't have to 'apply' rule 709, nor does the rule actually have to move
>> me.  Rule 709 applied itself and released me from Gaol, thus allowing me
>> to move since a rule 'explicitly defined a proceedure or condition for the
>> player to be released'.  That enabled me to move/leave.  This is also the
>> game custom as has been accrued over the lifetime of the game.
>
>Rule 709 releases the player, fine.  However, you have argued that player
>is still at the Gaol (you have claimed K 2 is still there, despite eir
>sentence having expired).  Hence the application of another rule which
>allows for removal or release from Gaol (or the application of 709 again)
>is necessary to _leave_ the Gaol.

Actually, I believe K 2 is free to leave the Gaol since the condition in
the exception has been met.  However, he has not yet left it.
Until he removes himself from the Gaol (through the exact application of
rule 709 that I used), he may not be selected for a CFJ by the statement
of rule 709 itself.

>> We have had cases in the past where game custom and interpretaton have in
>> fact overwhelmed the rules (in fact, I recall a relatively recent
>> proposal by Saaremaa which replaced the text of a rule with itself JUST to
>> reset game custom on the interpretation of that rule).
>
>Just because we have been playing a particular way does not automatically
>make it correct, nor does it mean that the rules must be interpreted to
>keep it correct.  Game custom does have strong force, but if the rules can
>more reasonably be interpreted otherwise, then the existing game custom
>should be overturned.

The thing is, I think the interpretation you are choosing is the more
forced one.   I do not claim either of the above (that play makes
correctness or that rules must be interpreted to keep it correct).  I
merely am describing an alternate interpretation to the rules under which
the previous game custom already conforms to the rules.

>Besides, I don't think this game custom has ever been codified in a CFJ
>before.

I suspect you are right, but I will check (just in case).

- ----accesssing.....-----

I couldn't find any game custom codified within the CFJ archives, so it is
worthwhile for the judge to provide the game custom in this case
regardless of the outcome.

You provide one interpretation.  I provide another, which is equally valid
and which conforms to previous implicit game custom.

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:37:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:
>Well, game custom can't outright override what the rules say. However,
>it can override one interpretation over another, even when the latter
>interpretation seems more natural when taken out of context. Of
>course, the more "perverse" a given interpretation, the more game
>custom needs to be marshalled in order for it to hold sway.

Oh, no doubt.  Again, I wasn't trying to imply that game custom could in
fact over-rule the rules, but could in fact prevail in one interpretation
of the rules over another.

>In this case, of course, the game custom is absolutely overwhelmingly
>in favor of one interpretation. To deny that interpretation, one would
>nearly have to show that the rules as written simply can not be
>interpreted this way. I don't think that this is the case here.
>
>Slakko's interpretation is that it is not enough to be "released" from
>Gaol, but that as long as the Goal is your location, you can't leave
>it. I think this is a bit excessive, given the existing game custom.
>Rather, if Slakko wishes to press the point, I would invoke Rule 810,
>which says:
>
>  If a player leaves or is removed from, any Location, and it is
>  unspecified to which Location that they go, they go to their Home,
>  if it exists.

I had not even noticed this.  Given this specific context, I would in fact
retract my earlier statement that I believed K 2 (and Studge and Robin
Hood) to be still located at the Gaol pending exercise of their right to
move.  I would given this believe them to be in their homes.

>and in fact this may be the way that being released from the Gaol has
>been harfed in the past.

I do not know how it's been harfed in the past, but this is how I will
treat it pending the results of the appropriate CFJ(s).

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:38:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Acking a name change

I ack Joe Java's name change to '404 Not Found'.  I'd done it mentally,
but had forgotten to post the message to the list doing so.

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:42:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Brian Raiter wrote:

> In this case, of course, the game custom is absolutely overwhelmingly
> in favor of one interpretation. To deny that interpretation, one would
> nearly have to show that the rules as written simply can not be
> interpreted this way. I don't think that this is the case here.
> 
> Slakko's interpretation is that it is not enough to be "released" from
> Gaol, but that as long as the Goal is your location, you can't leave
> it. I think this is a bit excessive, given the existing game custom.
> Rather, if Slakko wishes to press the point, I would invoke Rule 810,
> which says:
> 
>   If a player leaves or is removed from, any Location, and it is
>   unspecified to which Location that they go, they go to their Home,
>   if it exists.
> 
> and in fact this may be the way that being released from the Gaol has
> been harfed in the past.

Fine.  I missed that.  That means that it is Rule 709 which is doing both
the releasing and the change of location, in which case there is no issue
at all.
- -- 
Duncan C. "" Richer aka
Slakko (Lost) Warner - http://dcr24.quns.cam.ac.uk/ - Queens' College
Cambridge, 1st Year PhD(Pure Maths), CUDipSoc, CUSFS, CUSTS, CURS etc
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, CotC, ChessUmpire, Map-Harfer, Senator

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:52:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Another new player - Weishaupt (Mentor: Studge)

I would like to take this moment to welcome Wieshaupt to the game.
He joins us at the urging of Studge (from whom he also heard about the
game) (and thus Studge (and Weishaupt) each recieve special trinkets)  In
addition, Studge will become Weishaupt's mentor pending his public
acknowledgement of this fact.

Weishaupt's real name is Gabriel Drummond-Cole, and he can be reached via
the email address of [email-masked].

He is joining us as a voting player, and I hope you will all join me in
welcoming him to the game.

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 03:59:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
>>   If a player leaves or is removed from, any Location, and it is
>>   unspecified to which Location that they go, they go to their Home,
>>   if it exists.
>> 
>> and in fact this may be the way that being released from the Gaol has
>> been harfed in the past.
>
>Fine.  I missed that.  That means that it is Rule 709 which is doing both
>the releasing and the change of location, in which case there is no issue
>at all.

Three cheers for breadbox! :)

I retract the CFJ which I submitted on 8/27/1998 (I do not recall the
number off hand)  Since I only submitted one CFJ today, I believe this
would be unambiguous.

If else...if would like his OC Skeleton Key back, I offer it to him for
A$50 in return, the price I paid him for it.

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 04:08:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Eleusis Game 1

>Correct Plays          | Incorrect plays
>-----------------------+------------------------------------------------------
> 5 H (starter)         |
> 8 H (MTM [#])         | 9 H (else...if)
>10 D (867-5309)        | K D (MTM (JT))
> 4 S (else...if)       |
> 3 D (867-5309 [#])    | 4 S (MTM (JT))
> 5 D (else...if)       | 9 S (867-5309) 3 C (MTM [*])
> 8 D (else...if)       |
> 2 S (867-5309)        |
> 2 D (MTM)             | A S (else...if(JT))
> 7 D (867-5309[!])     |
> 7 D (MTM [-])         |
> J D (else...if)       | 2 C/3 H/5 D/7 H (867-5309)  9 C (MTM [*])
>                       | 3 S (else...if) 2 S (867-5309)
> J H (MTM)             | A C (else...if) Q D (867-5309) 8 D (MTM [~])
>                       | 6 D (else...if [~]) K D (867-5309 [~])

Mr. Tambourine Man failed to submit a play within 3 days.
Therefore he plays the '3 C' at random.

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 04:58:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mueller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Another new player - Weishaupt (Mentor: Studge)

JT wrote:
>In addition, Studge will become Weishaupt's mentor pending
>his public acknowledgement of this fact.

I do so.

Studge

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 05:03:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bernard El-Hagin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, JT wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
> >>   If a player leaves or is removed from, any Location, and it is
> >>   unspecified to which Location that they go, they go to their Home,
> >>   if it exists.
> >> 
> >> and in fact this may be the way that being released from the Gaol has
> >> been harfed in the past.
> >
> >Fine.  I missed that.  That means that it is Rule 709 which is doing both
> >the releasing and the change of location, in which case there is no issue
> >at all.
> 
> Three cheers for breadbox! :)
> 
> I retract the CFJ which I submitted on 8/27/1998

OK, like, this is *such* a relief. <unbelievable sigh>

Just a thought, though:

release - to let free; to let loose again; to set free from
          restraint, confinement or servitude.

Isn't that enough to shed any doubt about whether or not JT was free
to leave the Gaol? Aren't there rules that allow players to move
around as long as they're "free from restraint, confinement or
servitude"? Just checking.

Cheers,
Rig R. Mortis

"Santa Claus doesn't believe in you, either."

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 07:01:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Grey Council

The following nominated themselves for the Grey Council:

Worker Caste:

Studge
rufus
ThinMan

Warriors:

K 2
Calvin N Hobbes
JT
Rex Mundi
Mr. Tambourine Man

Religious:

else...if
Niccolo Flychuck
Slakko
Wild Card

If I remember and interpret the rules correctly this means rufus, Studge
and ThinMan get their seats automatically but their needs to be a vote
on the others. If you are of the warrior or religious Caste then you may
reply to vote for one of the above nominees. I think.

MTM, Count Tabula.

- --
Tom Walmsley [email-masked]
http://website.lineone.net/~t.walmsley/index.html
AIM: TGW666 ICQ 2925739
Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston, lausajne estas rano en mia bideo.

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 07:01:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Dice server)
Subject: Acka: Characteristics

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

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

# Player: ThinMan
# The rolls will be the values for the characteristics in this order
# Strength
# Intelligence
# Wisdom
# Dexterity
# Constitution
# Charisma

No. of sides on every die:      6
No. of dice for every roll:     3
No. of dice rolls requested:    6
No. of rolls per line:          6

     11     12      9     15     15      8

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]  Fri Aug 28 04:01:37 1998
> Received: (from smtp@localhost) by xkey.com
>       id EAA24094 for <[email-masked]>; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 04:01:37 -0700
> Received: from boober-be.lineone.net(194.75.152.84) by xkey.com via smtp (V1.3)
>       id sma024089; Fri Aug 28 04:01:28 1998
> Received: from lineone.net (host5-99-49-221.btinternet.com [195.99.49.221]) by boober.lineone.net (8.8.5/8.8.0) with ESMTP id MAA14367 for <[email-masked]>; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 12:01:25 +0100 (BST)
> Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 11:53:44 +0100
> From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: (no subject)
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> #P [email-masked]
> #S 6
> #D 3
> #R 6
> #L 6
> #T Acka: Characteristics
> 
> #C Player: ThinMan
> #C The rolls will be the values for the characteristics in this order
> #C Strength
> #C Intelligence
> #C Wisdom
> #C Dexterity
> #C Constitution
> #C Charisma
> 
> --
> Tom Walmsley [email-masked]
> http://website.lineone.net/~t.walmsley/index.html
> AIM: TGW666 ICQ 2925739
> Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston, lausajne estas rano en mia bideo.
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

iQCVAwUBNeaOGD8NitsTFjcVAQFoHgP+NisxeZxc56z/RJtPQO2/uBVKtdMwWH0D
xQm0gIgfUg6ZpEy8Qt7anv12HFkY0ajpPykmeIZXzrg8yxTjfy3NOvMOYBmaPChF
i2gUHh5d0M7+TUQEgrJj00w7dDGNomYtoR8N3Q8mwKRjC3CqHq+tokwvyiIIg9Tx
HBRzryszR+g=
=VhKz
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 07:02:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (Dice server)
Subject: Acka: Characteristics

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

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

# Player: Mr. Tambourine Man
# The rolls will be the values for the characteristics in this order
# Strength
# Intelligence
# Wisdom
# Dexterity
# Constitution
# Charisma

No. of sides on every die:      6
No. of dice for every roll:     3
No. of dice rolls requested:    6
No. of rolls per line:          6

     10      8      8      6     14      8

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]  Fri Aug 28 04:01:37 1998
> Received: (from smtp@localhost) by xkey.com
>       id EAA24098 for <[email-masked]>; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 04:01:37 -0700
> Received: from boober-be.lineone.net(194.75.152.84) by xkey.com via smtp (V1.3)
>       id sma024090; Fri Aug 28 04:01:30 1998
> Received: from lineone.net (host5-99-49-221.btinternet.com [195.99.49.221]) by boober.lineone.net (8.8.5/8.8.0) with ESMTP id MAA13677 for <[email-masked]>; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 12:01:28 +0100 (BST)
> Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 11:54:26 +0100
> From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: (no subject)
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> #P [email-masked]
> #S 6
> #D 3
> #R 6
> #L 6
> #T Acka: Characteristics
> 
> #C Player: Mr. Tambourine Man
> #C The rolls will be the values for the characteristics in this order
> #C Strength
> #C Intelligence
> #C Wisdom
> #C Dexterity
> #C Constitution
> #C Charisma
> 
> --
> Tom Walmsley [email-masked]
> http://website.lineone.net/~t.walmsley/index.html
> AIM: TGW666 ICQ 2925739
> Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston, lausajne estas rano en mia bideo.
> 
> 
> 

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

iQCVAwUBNeaONT8NitsTFjcVAQFsqAP/W/lQfgk4nAlpsJH1bERmMTG0ifMQQtq4
OE49oqURzOCE8OLCi8vXNdUiINtWbxjMrmtQmDI//mUOD4IhBdDzEdaz5Fsqtnhh
PEpdXqtR4/g/+CB+ukMnkMKouk4sUniwK2M4IeIKRscaprfxe9UXwQaCqkmCiK4l
FtBdmLwVgoM=
=ntKu
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 09:40:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, JT wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
> > >> Hang on. What Rule 709 actually SAYS is: "A player may not leave the
> > >> Gaol except by the application of a Rule which explicitly defines a
> > >> procedure or condition for the player to be released or removed from
> > >> the Gaol." [emphasis mine] There is in fact a rule which defines a
> > >> condition for players to be released from the Gaol. Rule 709 also
> > >> says: "A player is released from the Gaol if and when their sentence
> > >> expires." Since this condition has in fact been met, JT (et al) may
> > >> leave the Gaol.
> > >
> > >It says "A player may not leave the Gaol except _by the application_ of a
> > >Rule which explicitly ... "
> > >
> > >How can JT apply Rule 709 to change locations?
> > 
> > I don't have to 'apply' rule 709, nor does the rule actually have to move
> > me.  Rule 709 applied itself and released me from Gaol, thus allowing me
> > to move since a rule 'explicitly defined a proceedure or condition for the
> > player to be released'.  That enabled me to move/leave.  This is also the
> > game custom as has been accrued over the lifetime of the game.
> 
> Rule 709 releases the player, fine.  However, you have argued that player
> is still at the Gaol (you have claimed K 2 is still there, despite eir
> sentence having expired).  Hence the application of another rule which
> allows for removal or release from Gaol (or the application of 709 again)
> is necessary to _leave_ the Gaol.
> 

It seems to me that Slakko's interpretation hinges on their being some
sort of vast difference between being released from Gaol and being able to
leave the Gaol.  Without taking sides or in any other way getting involved
in this argument :) I would like to pose the question:

Do the rules clearly distinguish what "leaving" something is, and do they
do so in such a manner that it being "released" from something is not the
same thing?

Let me reemphasize that I'm *not* saying such a distinction between
leaving and released doesn't exist, I honestly don't know.  And unless I
get assigned one of these CFJs, I'm not going to try and figure it out.
But for those among us who have a vested interest in this matter, it might
be worth investigating.

Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 09:44:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 649 (Robin Hood / Piz)

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998 [email-masked] wrote:

> In a message dated 27/08/98  22:39:39, you write:
> 
> > 
> >  Robin Hood has been selected.
> >  However, if this CFJ is TRUE, then by the same logic Robin Hood is
> >  ineligible to judge CFJ 649.
> >  Therefore, if the statement is TRUE, I have selected Piz to judge it.
> >  
> >  This bifurcation is getting _really_ fun.
> >  
> 
> I decline to accept this appointment since I can not give an impartial
> decision. I'd also suggest we amend the CFJ rules either people whose
> eligibility for a particular CFJ would otherwise depend on that same CFJ
> are ineligible, or that no-one can be ruled ineligible for some CFJ by any
> reasoning based on that assumption.
> 
> Robin Hood
> 

Its a nice idea, and this is by no means the first time I've wished that
such a thing were possible.  But how could we codify it in a way that
wouldn't end up requiring the judgement of the CotC, or similar rubish.
WE'd end up confusing the issue even more, because someone would be
excluded from judging a CFJ, except that he issues a CFJ asking if he
should have been excluded, which means that we would have three (or more)
thread splits, instead of just two.  The idea of making people eligible
for any CFJ that they, for lack of a better phrase, might be eligible for,
would probably work better.  It would still be a real bear to incorporate
into the rules though.

Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:45:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph W. DeVincentis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Eleusis Game 1

> >Correct Plays          | Incorrect plays
> >-----------------------+------------------------------------------------------
> > 5 H (starter)         |
> > 8 H (MTM [#])         | 9 H (else...if)
> >10 D (867-5309)        | K D (MTM (JT))
> > 4 S (else...if)       |
> > 3 D (867-5309 [#])    | 4 S (MTM (JT))
> > 5 D (else...if)       | 9 S (867-5309) 3 C (MTM [*])
> > 8 D (else...if)       |
> > 2 S (867-5309)        |
> > 2 D (MTM)             | A S (else...if(JT))
> > 7 D (867-5309[!])     |
> > 7 D (MTM [-])         |
> > J D (else...if)       | 2 C/3 H/5 D/7 H (867-5309)  9 C (MTM [*])
> >                       | 3 S (else...if) 2 S (867-5309)
> > J H (MTM)             | A C (else...if) Q D (867-5309) 8 D (MTM [~])
> >                       | 6 D (else...if [~]) K D (867-5309 [~])
> 
> Mr. Tambourine Man failed to submit a play within 3 days.
> Therefore he plays the '3 C' at random.

Which is also wrong.

/dev/joe
Deus

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:54:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Raiter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 649 (Robin Hood / Piz)

>> I decline to accept this appointment since I can not give an
>> impartial decision. I'd also suggest we amend the CFJ rules either
>> people whose eligibility for a particular CFJ would otherwise
>> depend on that same CFJ are ineligible, or that no-one can be ruled
>> ineligible for some CFJ by any reasoning based on that assumption.
> 
> Its a nice idea, and this is by no means the first time I've wished
> that such a thing were possible.  But how could we codify it in a
> way that wouldn't end up requiring the judgement of the CotC, or
> similar rubish.

The idea was bantered around a fair bit in the old days, but in the
end no one came up with a system that was really workable (or wasn't
open to abuse). Trusting people to decline judgement if they feel
there is a conflict of interest is really the best method.

breadbox

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 12:10:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Get out of Jail

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, John Frederic Mc Coy wrote:
>Do the rules clearly distinguish what "leaving" something is, and do they
>do so in such a manner that it being "released" from something is not the
>same thing?
>
>Let me reemphasize that I'm *not* saying such a distinction between
>leaving and released doesn't exist, I honestly don't know.  And unless I
>get assigned one of these CFJs, I'm not going to try and figure it out.
>But for those among us who have a vested interest in this matter, it might
>be worth investigating.

Even though this has been resolved, I figured I'd take a peek through the
rules.  (Caveat: I did not do an exhaustive search, just a quick scan for
'leav' (in order to catch leaving, leaves, etc) and 'release'.   As far as
I can tell, there is no specific definition for either of those two words
set out in the rules.

- --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: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 13:04:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: IRC

	IRC anyone?

- --
- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Thank heavens, the sun has gone in, and I don't have to go out and
enjoy it.
		-Logan Pearsall Smith

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 13:28:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: IRC

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Towsner wrote:

Give me the address, if you would sir.

rufus

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 13:31:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: IRC

>Give me the address, if you would sir.

	wilma.che.utexas.edu port 9942, on channel #ackanomic

- --
- -Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Thank heavens, the sun has gone in, and I don't have to go out and
enjoy it.
		-Logan Pearsall Smith

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 14:22:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: Acka:

I chance my status to Voting

The rules also state about changing ones name, that the Standard Harfers Fee 
must be paid but I don't see corresponding rules for it but I pay it anyways :)

Joe Java
Imperial Emporer and Moderator of the Fantasy Wargame Design Project
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/1047/fw_new_player.html

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 14:27:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 649 (Joe Java / Piz)

> Robin Hood has declined in Thread F.  Joe Java has been chosen in Thread
> F.

I can't decide on this because as of the time of this message I am non-voting.

Joe Java
Imperial Emporer and Moderator of the Fantasy Wargame Design Project
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/1047/fw_new_player.html

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 14:32:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Gnomesday

At 12:00 noon today, the Voting Gnome came to town bearing harf and gifts.
The following gifts are distributed according to rule 975.

404 Not Found - pair of dress pants
867-5309 - Silly Vacation Hat
Alfvaen - pair of dress pants
Astro - santa's beard
Attila the Pun - santa's beard
Ayla - santa's beard
Balsamic Dragon - bonus vote
Bascule - santa's beard
breadbox - pair of dress pants
Brinjal - santa's beard
Calvin N Hobbes - Rock to wind a string around
Chaos - Santa's beard
Crackfoo - Santa's beard
/dev/joe - boon of the ancients
else...if - pair of dress pants
Enigma - santa's beard
Ethelred - silly vacation hat
fnord - santa's beard
Fortunato - pair of dress pants
Goldenmean - santa's beard
Guy Fawkes - santa's beard
IdiotBoy - pair of dress pants
Illusion - santa's beard
J. M. Bear - Silly Vacation Hat
JT - santa's beard
K 2 - bonus vote
Karma - pair of dress pants
Koxvolio - pair of dress pants
Memo - Santa's beard
mr cwm - santa's beard
Mr. Lunatic Fringe - Santa's beard
Mr. Tambourine Man - boon of the ancients
Mu-Cow Hunter - santa's beard
Niccolo Flychuck - pair of dress pants
Piz - santa's beard
Publius - santa's beard
Red Barn - santa's beard
Rex Mundi - boon of the ancients
Rig R. Mortis  - santa's beard
Robin Hood - santa's beard
rufus - pair of dress pants
saaremaa - pair of dress pants
Slakko - bonus vote
Studge - santa's beard
ThinMan - pair of dress pants
this is not a name - santa's beard
Tin Observer - santa's beard
Tom Kitten - santa's beard
two-star - pair of dress pants
UglyBigNose - santa's beard
Voting Gnome - santa's beard
Vynd - pair of dress pants
Wayne - santa's beard
Weishaupt - santa's beard
Wild Card - pair of dress pants

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

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #288
*******************************