Subject: ackanomic digest V3 #321
From: [email-masked] (ackanomic digest)
To: [email-masked]

ackanomic digest      Tuesday, September 15 1998      Volume 03 : Number 321

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 12:56:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 660 (TRUE)

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:
>Wild Card has judged this TRUE without reasoning.
>
>Call for Judgement 660 - September 11, 1998
>Subject: Burying Potato
>Initiator: Piz (sent Sep 11 1998, 09:15 Acka)
>Judge: Wild Card (chosen Sep 11 1998, 11:33 Acka)
>Judgement: TRUE
>
>Statement: 
>It is legal for the Magic Potato to constitute part of a Treasure.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>The Magic Potato is a non-tradable entity, because its tradability status is
>not explicitly defined in the Rules (Rule 901), and in such a case an entity
>is non-tradable by default (Rule 500.2).
>
>Rule 1217 states:
>
>"...the player attempting [to bury a Treasure] must state which one or more
>of his tradeable entities collectively constitute the Treasure..."
>
>Other than this phrase, there is nothing in the Rules that regulates the
>contents of a Treasure. This does not expressly *limit* the contents of a
>Treasure to tradable entities, although it requires that at least one
>tradable entity be part of a Treasure.
>
>Vynd's Bronze Torch Reasoning:
>
>I disagree with the initiator's reasoning on two points.
>
>1) I do think that Rule 1217 prohibits the burying of non-tradeable
>entities. It specifically says that the tradeable entities specified by
>the burier "collectively constitute the treasure." So Rule 1217 requires
>the buried to specify what "collectively constitutes" the treasure, and
>the only items it allows to be specified are tradeable entities.
>
>Even if Rule 1217 does not explicitly forbid burying non-tradeable
>entities, I believe that Rule 101 would still prevent such an action. Rule
>101 tells us that actions described in the rules can only be made in
>accordance with the rules. Burying non-tradeable entities is not in
>accordance with the method described in Rule 1217, the only method
>described in the rules, and thus by Rule 101 burying non-tradeable
>entities is impossible.
>
>Judge's Reasoning: 
>
>[none]

I wish to appeal this CFJ.

Reasoning:
See Vynd's Bronze Torch reasoning, which I feel eloquently states the
case.

- --JT

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

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 12:56:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Pizolato" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 660 (TRUE)

Fo wrote:
:Wild Card has judged [CFJ 660] TRUE without reasoning.

Oo. Didn't think it would fly. Hm.

That means I no longer have the Magic Potato - 867-5309 does. Buy by Rule
901 I *do* have the Great Tuba of Ackanomic.

I bury a Treasure consisting of A$3 and the Great Tuba of Ackanomic. I
disclose no part of the map at this time.

Piz

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:02:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CSR 161

Gabe Drummond-Cole wrote:

> At 10:41 AM 9/15/98 -0400, you wrote:
> > If there is an entry in the literature list reading (WW-delimited)
> >WW
> >Work: The Bible, Old and New Testaments
> >WW
> > remove it.
> >
> > Add to the literature list:
> >
> >Work: The King James Version of the Bible, any books therin that exist.
> >Work: The Revised English Version of the Bible, any books therin that exist.
> >
> >{{[KJV is the "traditional" ye olde version of the Book, REB is a pretty
> >good modern translation.]}}
>
> I object, sorry.  I think that it's a terrible idea to limit us to those

I object to this too but for a totally different reason. And yes it's incredibly
picky. My reason for objecting is that the syntax is not that required by the
literature list. Try a semicolon instead of a comma.

MTM.

- --
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:05:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 660 (TRUE)

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> Wild Card has judged this TRUE without reasoning.
> 
> Call for Judgement 660 - September 11, 1998
> Subject: Burying Potato
> Initiator: Piz (sent Sep 11 1998, 09:15 Acka)
> Judge: Wild Card (chosen Sep 11 1998, 11:33 Acka)
> Judgement: TRUE
> 
> Statement: 
> It is legal for the Magic Potato to constitute part of a Treasure.
> 
> Reasoning:
> 
> The Magic Potato is a non-tradable entity, because its tradability status is
> not explicitly defined in the Rules (Rule 901), and in such a case an entity
> is non-tradable by default (Rule 500.2).
> 
> Rule 1217 states:
> 
> "...the player attempting [to bury a Treasure] must state which one or more
> of his tradeable entities collectively constitute the Treasure..."
> 
> Other than this phrase, there is nothing in the Rules that regulates the
> contents of a Treasure. This does not expressly *limit* the contents of a
> Treasure to tradable entities, although it requires that at least one
> tradable entity be part of a Treasure.
> 
> Vynd's Bronze Torch Reasoning:
> 
> I disagree with the initiator's reasoning on two points.
> 
> 1) I do think that Rule 1217 prohibits the burying of non-tradeable
> entities. It specifically says that the tradeable entities specified by
> the burier "collectively constitute the treasure." So Rule 1217 requires
> the buried to specify what "collectively constitutes" the treasure, and
> the only items it allows to be specified are tradeable entities.
> 
> Even if Rule 1217 does not explicitly forbid burying non-tradeable
> entities, I believe that Rule 101 would still prevent such an action. Rule
> 101 tells us that actions described in the rules can only be made in
> accordance with the rules. Burying non-tradeable entities is not in
> accordance with the method described in Rule 1217, the only method
> described in the rules, and thus by Rule 101 burying non-tradeable
> entities is impossible.
> 
> Judge's Reasoning: 
> 
> [none]
> 

I am appealing this verdict.

My reasoning:

Well, I already covered things pretty well in my bronze Torch reasoning, I
think.  But I seem to have been in a particularly convoluted frame of
mind, so let me try to start my thoughts a little clearer.

Rule 1217 says that when you bury a treasure, you must specify one or more
tradeable entities which "collectively constitute the Treasure." I think
that this means that the only things a player can specify to be buried as
a Treasure are tradeable entities.  It might (although I doubt it) be
possible that this language doesn't in and of itself forbid the inclusion
of non-tradeable entities in Treasure.  If this is the case, however, Rule
101 would still prevent such a burial, because Rule 101 declares that
actions described in the rules can only be performed in accordance with
the rules, and the only burial method described in the rules is the one
for tradeable entities.

Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:07:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 665 (Robert Sevin)

In a message dated 15/09/98  03:02:53, you write:

> 
>  I can't tell etiquette from shinola, personally (*spit*).  But I'd say
>  there's a fair amount of game custom that supports arbitrary judgements. I
>  can't really recall any recently, but surely a Slumbering Giant such as
>  yourself can remember the days when CFJs would come back with reasoning
>  like: I'm judging this TRUE because I'm pretty sure that it is, but I have
>  a saxophone recital this weekend so I couldn't really check.  So anyway,
>  enjoy.

In one of the early ones which was appealed I said CFJs could be made
on whim. The appeal overruled me and its reasoning shoouls still be
part of game custom.

Robin Hood

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:07:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Oh, not much

In a message dated 14/09/98  21:20:20, you write:

> 
>  Well, unless you can prove that, if division by zero gives zero, e^(90i)
>  equals 1, then it shouldn't be degrees either.
>  
>  e^(ix) = sin x.  That's the _number_ x.
>  Either prove that this works differently when division by zero results in
>  zero, or accept it as the actual result, in which case the sine of a
>  googolplex is equal to the sine of a googolplex radians.
>  
First e^(ix)=cos x +i sin x

If 1/0=0 then 1=0*0=0 
If 1=0 then either the only number is zero, which mkes a mess of the scores
or we have a contradiction with 1 both equal to and not equal to 0. If
even one contradictary statement is true then every statement is true
and sin(googelplex)='a pound a pink custard'.

The dictionary definition of a sine is in terms of the ratios of sides of
right
angled triangles and valid whatever the angle is measured in, as long as
its acute. While I would prefer radians, there is at the least some ambiguity
about the interpretation.

As for division, my preferred option would to be define Ackadivision
and say that when a is Ackadivided by b the answer is a/b except
when b=0 and a Ackadivided by 0 is 0. And if any rule exists or is created
referring to normal division it is automatically amended to refer to
Ackadivision with suitable priorities.

Robin Hood

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:07:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: Oh, not much

In a message dated 14/09/98  21:20:20, you write:

> 
>  Well, unless you can prove that, if division by zero gives zero, e^(90i)
>  equals 1, then it shouldn't be degrees either.
>  
>  e^(ix) = sin x.  That's the _number_ x.
>  Either prove that this works differently when division by zero results in
>  zero, or accept it as the actual result, in which case the sine of a
>  googolplex is equal to the sine of a googolplex radians.
>  
First e^(ix)=cos x +i sin x

If 1/0=0 then 1=0*0=0 
If 1=0 then either the only number is zero, which mkes a mess of the scores
or we have a contradiction with 1 both equal to and not equal to 0. If
even one contradictary statement is true then every statement is true
and sin(googelplex)='a pound a pink custard'.

The dictionary definition of a sine is in terms of the ratios of sides of
right
angled triangles and valid whatever the angle is measured in, as long as
its acute. While I would prefer radians, there is at the least some ambiguity
about the interpretation.

As for division, my preferred option would to be define Ackadivision
and say that when a is Ackadivided by b the answer is a/b except
when b=0 and a Ackadivided by 0 is 0. And if any rule exists or is created
referring to normal division it is automatically amended to refer to
Ackadivision with suitable priorities.

Robin Hood

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:08:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Magic Potato (IdiotBoy)

IdiotBoy has found the Magic potato.
Either Piz or 867-5309 (depending on the final outcome of CFJ 660)
has found the Tuba.

- --JT, OiCoRT

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

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:10:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Acka: CFJ 660 (TRUE)

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Michael Pizolato wrote:
>Fo wrote:
>:Wild Card has judged [CFJ 660] TRUE without reasoning.
>
>Oo. Didn't think it would fly. Hm.

It hasn't yet, since I just appealed it.

>That means I no longer have the Magic Potato - 867-5309 does. Buy by Rule
>901 I *do* have the Great Tuba of Ackanomic.

Or 867-5309 does in the thread where CFJ660 is true after appeal.

>I bury a Treasure consisting of A$3 and the Great Tuba of Ackanomic. I
>disclose no part of the map at this time.

In the thread where CFJ660 is false after appeal, this treasure consists
only of A$3.

- --JT

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

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:10:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Frederic Mc Coy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Treasure!

Wild Card has found the Treasure consisting of all of the Players of
Ackanomic, other than myself.  Assuming it was legal for me to bury them,
of course.  And that it was legal for a buried player to find it, of
course.

I immediately bury all of these Players again.  Thats right, all of the
Players of Ackanomic, other than Vynd.  I also include in this treasure
Rule 1217.

I am revealing part of the map, which reads:

This treasure will be found by the first player to rule UNDECIDED on CFJ
660.

Vynd

[email-masked]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:14:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Oh, not much

[email-masked] wrote:

> If 1/0=0 then 1=0*0=0
> If 1=0 then either the only number is zero, which mkes a mess of the scores
> or we have a contradiction with 1 both equal to and not equal to 0. If
> even one contradictary statement is true then every statement is true
> and sin(googelplex)='a pound a pink custard'.

As an aside from this argument I will note that this is not quite right. I
noticed this ages ago and submitted a paradox win CFJ on it. This failed and I
was going to appeal it but noticed that some of the basic maths that I used to
reach the paradox simply doesn't hold when x/0=0.

MTM.

- --
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:15:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Oh, not much

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 [email-masked] wrote:

> If 1=0 then either the only number is zero, which mkes a mess of the scores
> or we have a contradiction with 1 both equal to and not equal to 0. If
> even one contradictary statement is true then every statement is true
> and sin(googelplex)='a pound a pink custard'.
> 

Suffusion of yellow!  Suffusion of yellow!

IB

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 13:16:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Treasure!

John Frederic Mc Coy wrote:

> Wild Card has found the Treasure consisting of all of the Players of
> Ackanomic, other than myself.  Assuming it was legal for me to bury them,
> of course.  And that it was legal for a buried player to find it, of
> course.
>
> I immediately bury all of these Players again.  Thats right, all of the
> Players of Ackanomic, other than Vynd.  I also include in this treasure
> Rule 1217.
>
> I am revealing part of the map, which reads:
>
> This treasure will be found by the first player to rule UNDECIDED on CFJ
> 660.

How curious. I bury a treasure consiting of Vynd and CFJ 660. It will be
found by the first player to bury a non-tradeable entity as a reasure.

MTM.

- --
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:06:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Oh, not much

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 [email-masked] wrote:

> >  e^(ix) = sin x.  That's the _number_ x.
> >  
> First e^(ix)=cos x +i sin x

Shoot me.  Shoot me now.

I give A$10 to the Twits.
I give A$10 to Robin Hood.

- -- 
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:09:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 660 (1-TRUE) (/dev/cortex)

JT has appealed.  The appeal will be heard by /dev/cortex.

Call for Judgement 660 - September 11, 1998
Subject: Burying Potato
Initiator: Piz (sent Sep 11 1998, 09:15 Acka)
Judge: Wild Card (chosen Sep 11 1998, 11:33 Acka)
Judgement: TRUE (promulgated Sep 15 1998, 12:19 Acka)
Appealed by JT
Cortex: /dev/cortex (/dev/joe and Mr. Tambourine Man)
Judgement:

Statement: 
It is legal for the Magic Potato to constitute part of a Treasure.

Reasoning:

The Magic Potato is a non-tradable entity, because its tradability status is
not explicitly defined in the Rules (Rule 901), and in such a case an entity
is non-tradable by default (Rule 500.2).

Rule 1217 states:

"...the player attempting [to bury a Treasure] must state which one or more
of his tradeable entities collectively constitute the Treasure..."

Other than this phrase, there is nothing in the Rules that regulates the
contents of a Treasure. This does not expressly *limit* the contents of a
Treasure to tradable entities, although it requires that at least one
tradable entity be part of a Treasure.

Vynd's Bronze Torch Reasoning:

I disagree with the initiator's reasoning on two points.

1) I do think that Rule 1217 prohibits the burying of non-tradeable
entities. It specifically says that the tradeable entities specified by
the burier "collectively constitute the treasure." So Rule 1217 requires
the buried to specify what "collectively constitutes" the treasure, and
the only items it allows to be specified are tradeable entities.

Even if Rule 1217 does not explicitly forbid burying non-tradeable
entities, I believe that Rule 101 would still prevent such an action. Rule
101 tells us that actions described in the rules can only be made in
accordance with the rules. Burying non-tradeable entities is not in
accordance with the method described in Rule 1217, the only method
described in the rules, and thus by Rule 101 burying non-tradeable
entities is impossible.

Judge's Reasoning: 

[none]

Appellant's (JT's) Reasoning:

See Vynd's Bronze Torch reasoning, which I feel eloquently states the
case.

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:12:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Oh, not much

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998 [email-masked] wrote:

> The dictionary definition of a sine is in terms of the ratios of sides of
> right
> angled triangles and valid whatever the angle is measured in, as long as
> its acute. While I would prefer radians, there is at the least some ambiguity
> about the interpretation.

So the dictionary definition does not yield any value for the sine of a
googolplex?  Nice if we should choose to go by the dictionary.

- -- 
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:27:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 665 (Ethelred)

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Gabe Drummond-Cole wrote:

:This is a mathematician's idea of sine.  Maybe for someone who works
:exclusively with math, that's all that matters.  But most if not all
:practical applications of the trig functions will involve angles.  In
:almost any other field, you'll find that a trig function involves an angle.
: Physics, Chemistry... Now that i stop and think about it (and this may

Think a little harder.  all of the rotational physics I know is in
radians.  My father, a chemist doing x-ray defraction stuff, tells me that
that all the numbers they use are radians.  Electrical engineers use
radians to describe all sorts of AC waveforms.  

:this implies no units.  Radians I would disagree with, but i'd live with;
:no units would be just about unbearable.

Radians are no units!  If you do the derivation, which i will post, if
forced, but not now becaue I don't have time, they are meters/meters.
Which canncels out leaving this unitless thing.  Very handy if you want
to do physics, or engineering, because your units units aren't some
disgusting mash.

And to a point you made in another point:  There is no such thing as a
hatthe condtiions of which cannot be met.  This is a nomic, the rules can
be changed in any manner you like.  This includs defining a hat t obe true
by fiat.  

rufus

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:33:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mitchell Harding <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email addresses.

At 09:49 AM 9/15/98 -0400, you wrote:
>How does the group feel about having an ambassador address of
>"[email-masked]"?  Tht way when the office is passed around,
>it's not necessary to inform all the other nomics of the change.  
>
>Maybe this makes sense for other offices as well?  CotC springs to mind.

I think this would be a big help for a lot of offices. In addition to the
ones you mentioned, I'd at least add Registrar to the list.  It would make
it easier for slumbering giants like me. 

>Oh yeah, another call for you to submit your desired ackanomic.org
>address.  (THe machine which hosts this domain has bitten the big one a
>couple times in the past couple days, so don't be in a hurry.)

I don't recall hearing about this before, most likely because I am a
slumbering giant.
I'd like my address to be [email-masked].

Harf,
Robert Sevin
"When someone says `Society has a desperate need for bug-free software', my
first thought is `Well, the residents of Hell need icewater.  That doesn't
mean they're gonna get it'.  Maybe that's why I'm not in marketing."
<http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~mitcharf/index.html>
Support the Harf Project: <http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~mitcharf/harfproj.html>
All your questions answered, all your problems solved:
<http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mitch/ask820/ask820.html> 

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:37:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Acka: sin(googleplex)

 The sine of a googleplex radians may not be so difficult to find after.
Certain recently developed algorithms allow the octal digits of pi
to be calculated without calculating the entire number to that point.
It is possible to find the 1000th octal digit without knowing the others.
There is good reason to believe similar algorithms exist for the decimal 
digits of pi. With such an algorithm answering the question in radians
would be theoretically feasible. 
 Judging whether an algorithm has the desired properties is probably
not within the capacities of Ackanomia, but there are capable people
looking for them, and their opinion would be sufficient proof.
 Details of the type of algorithm involved can be found at
http://www.mathsoft.com/asolve/constant/constant.html
There is also there an ititerative algorithm which after n terms
has an error of 10^(-2^n+1) which would give sufficent accuracy for n=300
if you have enough memory and other interesting information. That 2nd
algorithm
while fast converging won't be useful enough though

Robin Hood

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:37:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Acka: CSR 161

In a message dated 15/09/98  14:52:51, you write:

> 
>  I object, sorry.  I think that it's a terrible idea to limit us to those
>  translations as literature.  Further, it's discriminatory; those Bibles
>  will generally be the Bibles of Protestant denominations; Catholics and
>  Jews (nd maybe Orthodox, i'm not sure) use their own translations which
>  should be considered as valid.  Further, these two translations aren't even
>  definitive Protestant Bibles.  What about all the other modern
>  translations? 
 
True. The King James, however is recognised as a influential classic in its
own right, comparable in its significance with shakespeare for its impact on
the english language, and like shakespeare the source of hundreds of
quotations.

We can choose to recognise all translations, but some of them are bad and 
not widely available.  I'd suggest we restrict allowable literature to 
items which are either available online, or owned by at least 5 of us.

This should leave only a few bibles to choose from which is enough.

Robin Hood

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:40:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Spelling Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis

The Spelling Bee is flying!

CFJ 654: (stung word -> new word)

Breadnbox -> breadbox
elegible -> eligible
CFj -> CFJ (not sure if this one is a legitimate sting)
ackanomic -> Ackanomic

- -- 
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Spelling Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis

The Spelling Bee is flying!

CFJ 655: (stung word -> new word)

Breadnbox -> breadbox
elegible -> eligible
CFj -> CFJ (not sure if this one is a legitimate sting)
ackanomic -> Ackanomic

I give A$5 to the Twits.
- -- 
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:44:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email addresses.

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Mitchell Harding wrote:

> At 09:49 AM 9/15/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >How does the group feel about having an ambassador address of
> >"[email-masked]"?  Tht way when the office is passed around,
> >it's not necessary to inform all the other nomics of the change.  
> >
> >Maybe this makes sense for other offices as well?  CotC springs to mind.
> 
> I think this would be a big help for a lot of offices. In addition to the
> ones you mentioned, I'd at least add Registrar to the list.  It would make
> it easier for slumbering giants like me. 
> 
> >Oh yeah, another call for you to submit your desired ackanomic.org
> >address.  (THe machine which hosts this domain has bitten the big one a
> >couple times in the past couple days, so don't be in a hurry.)
> 
> I don't recall hearing about this before, most likely because I am a
> slumbering giant.
> I'd like my address to be [email-masked].

OK: I suggest the following addresses be set up:

[email-masked] : goes to the Clerk of the Court (currently me)
[email-masked] : goes to the Web-Harfer (currently me)
[email-masked] : goes to me (yes, I know I'm Fo, but people still
know me as slakko)

Could you please do these IB?
- -- 
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: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 15:49:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 665 (Ethelred)

>>It's not about which units to use.
>>The hat said "sine of a googolplex".
>>You can take the sine of a googolplex, being the sine of that number.
>>By definition, that gives the same result as the sine of a googolplex
>>radians.
>>
>>Radians, grads and degrees as a unit to choose are all equally valid.  But
>>we are not talking about that - we don't _need_ a unit, as you _can_ take
>>the sine of a number.  In absence of any specified unit, the number should
>>be sined, and hence the answer will match that where radians are used.
>>
>This is a mathematician's idea of sine.  Maybe for someone who works
>exclusively with math, that's all that matters.  But most if not all
>practical applications of the trig functions will involve angles.  In
>almost any other field, you'll find that a trig function involves an angle.
> Physics, Chemistry... Now that i stop and think about it (and this may
>just be getting me into trouble) I can't think of any field other than
>mathematics where you would *ever* take the sine of a number.  The trig
>functions intuitively apply to an angle, and unless you want to judge that
>acka is bound exclusively to higher-level math, I would *not* rule that
>this implies no units.  Radians I would disagree with, but i'd live with;
>no units would be just about unbearable.

I see two potential positions here.

1.  (permissive)  Because the hat did not specify units, any units are
    permissable for the purpose of fulfilling the condition.

2.  (strict)  Because no units were specified, the condition refers to
    the unitless case [which is equivalent to radians].

I tend to favor the latter, principally because, in my opinion, game custom
and the spirit of the game favor winning being more difficult over winning
being less difficult.  I don't at the moment see any other basis than
custom and spirit on which to judge between those alternatives, but I grant
that others may find current custom and spirit to be different than I assert.

I don't see any basis to believe that the condition can be interpreted to
mean degrees or grads _specifically_, but that becomes rather academic in
the light of position 1.

I invoke my privilege as a Bronze Torch holder to have my comments (but not
the quoted text) above added to the official record for CFJ 665.

ThinMan

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:04:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email addresses.

>> I think this would be a big help for a lot of offices. In addition to the
>> ones you mentioned, I'd at least add Registrar to the list.  It would make
>> it easier for slumbering giants like me. 

Please, [email-masked] and [email-masked] to point to me
please :)

I don't think the trinket harfer needs one necessarily :)

- --JT

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:08:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email addresses.

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, JT wrote:

> Please, [email-masked] and [email-masked] to point to me
> please :)
> 

Done.

> I don't think the trinket harfer needs one necessarily :)
> 

Heh. Prolly not.

> --JT
> 
> 
> 

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:11:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email addresses.

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Duncan Richer wrote:

> OK: I suggest the following addresses be set up:
> 
> [email-masked] : goes to the Clerk of the Court (currently me)

Done.

> [email-masked] : goes to the Web-Harfer (currently me)

Done (also, webmaster -> web -> slakko)

> [email-masked] : goes to me (yes, I know I'm Fo, but people still
> know me as slakko)

This was already done.

IB

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:26:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Magic Potato (IdiotBoy)

Bet when you saw that subject line you thought I was gonna bury it as
treasure, huh?

Wrong!

I put my recently purchased pair of dress pants on the Magic Potato.

IB
Mr. ChuckleHead.

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:56:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Uri Bruck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 665 (Ethelred)

On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Duncan C. "Slakko" Richer wrote:

> > The gist of the argument (i'm sure you can read for yourself, why am i
> > telling you this?) is about units.  It is pretty much undeniable that if
> > the angle is measured in either degrees or grads, my answer is completely
> > right.  However, if in fact you decide that radians are the unit of
> > measurement, I would be wrong and you would want to vote false.  
> 
> It's not about which units to use.
> The hat said "sine of a googolplex".
> You can take the sine of a googolplex, being the sine of that number.
> By definition, that gives the same result as the sine of a googolplex
> radians.
> 
> Radians, grads and degrees as a unit to choose are all equally valid.  But
> we are not talking about that - we don't _need_ a unit, as you _can_ take
> the sine of a number.  In absence of any specified unit, the number should
> be sined, and hence the answer will match that where radians are used.

I agree with Fo here. 
There is either a single answer, where we don't need units, or grads and
degreesare acceptable, in which case there is no reason not to acce[t any
other unit, any number of which I can come up with right now, which
follows that there are infinitely many answers. Since it is absurd to have
an agenda hat satisfy a condition which infinitely numbers can satisfy,
then Fo's answer is the least paradoxical one, and also follows the acka
Game Custom that terms which are not defined in the rules are assumed to
have their standard English interpretation. Since in matters of math
standard English defers to formal math, then we too should defer to those
same formal definitions.

Niccolo Flychuck

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 17:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Head Apollo" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: just to make my entry in the pe page look "busier"

I create a trinket named "Diplomatic Immunity" worth A$5 with the following
double quote delimited description:

"
A nifty leather wallet containing a laminated card bearing the legend
'Diplomatic Immunity' crudely inscribed with red crayon. Often produced by
Ambassadors who wish to avoid criminal prosecution.
"

I create a trinket named "Newbie Wand of Awesome Power" worth A$1 with the
following double quote delimited description:

"
At first it appears to be a stick with a gold star stuck to the end with
glue. If put to any use however, it instantly becomes the wrong size, shape
and consistency for the job. Sometimes it causes Windows to crash.
"

Eris

Newbie, Ambassador, general waster of the Trinket Harfer's time.

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:04:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Gabe Drummond-Cole <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 665 (Ethelred)

At 04:56 PM 9/15/98 -0400, you wrote:
>There is either a single answer, where we don't need units, or grads and
>degreesare acceptable, in which case there is no reason not to acce[t any
>other unit, any number of which I can come up with right now, which
>follows that there are infinitely many answers. 

>Fo's answer is the least paradoxical one, and also follows the acka
>Game Custom that terms which are not defined in the rules are assumed to
>have their standard English interpretation. 

This is ridiculous.  Degrees and grads are accepted units of measurement
for an angle.  If I make up an angle unit "Slakkoid" which has a value such
that 37.356728934 Slakkoids = a right angle, it does not fit any standard
English interpretation of angle.  Yes, i'm sure that i could change all my
trig functions so that they *could* apply to Slakkoids, but they wouldn't
be comparable to the accepted custom of degrees, taught and used in every
walk of life, as well as at all levels of school until college.

You can't have it both ways.  Either admit that degrees and grads are, as
accepted English, as valid as radians, 
OR
say that the standard English interpretation doesn't hold, invalidating
degrees, gradians, radians, the definition of the sine function, and the
definition of a googolplex.  

- --Weishaupt
  Feelin' pretty hungry right about now

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 18:14:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 660 (FALSE)

/dev/cortex have overturned Wild Card's judgement of TRUE.
A penalty of 10 points is assessed against Wild Card for the incorrect
first verdict.

Call for Judgement 660 - September 11, 1998
Subject: Burying Potato
Initiator: Piz (sent Sep 11 1998, 09:15 Acka)
Judge: Wild Card (chosen Sep 11 1998, 11:33 Acka)
Judgement: TRUE (promulgated Sep 15 1998, 12:19 Acka)
Appealed by JT
Cortex: /dev/cortex (/dev/joe and Mr. Tambourine Man) (15 Sep 1998 15:09
Acka)
Judgement: FALSE

Statement: 
It is legal for the Magic Potato to constitute part of a Treasure.

Reasoning:

The Magic Potato is a non-tradable entity, because its tradability status is
not explicitly defined in the Rules (Rule 901), and in such a case an entity
is non-tradable by default (Rule 500.2).

Rule 1217 states:

"...the player attempting [to bury a Treasure] must state which one or more
of his tradeable entities collectively constitute the Treasure..."

Other than this phrase, there is nothing in the Rules that regulates the
contents of a Treasure. This does not expressly *limit* the contents of a
Treasure to tradable entities, although it requires that at least one
tradable entity be part of a Treasure.

Vynd's Bronze Torch Reasoning:

I disagree with the initiator's reasoning on two points.

1) I do think that Rule 1217 prohibits the burying of non-tradeable
entities. It specifically says that the tradeable entities specified by
the burier "collectively constitute the treasure." So Rule 1217 requires
the buried to specify what "collectively constitutes" the treasure, and
the only items it allows to be specified are tradeable entities.

Even if Rule 1217 does not explicitly forbid burying non-tradeable
entities, I believe that Rule 101 would still prevent such an action. Rule
101 tells us that actions described in the rules can only be made in
accordance with the rules. Burying non-tradeable entities is not in
accordance with the method described in Rule 1217, the only method
described in the rules, and thus by Rule 101 burying non-tradeable
entities is impossible.

Judge's Reasoning: 

[none]

Appellant's (JT's) Reasoning:

See Vynd's Bronze Torch reasoning, which I feel eloquently states the
case.

Cortex's Reasoning:

We agree with the comments made by Vynd.

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 20:25:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Head Apollo" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Email addresses.

>How does the group feel about having an ambassador address of
>"[email-masked]"?  Tht way when the office is passed around,
>it's not necessary to inform all the other nomics of the change.

Sounds ok to me.

Eris (Ambassador)

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

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 23:08:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Gabe Drummond-Cole <[email-masked]>
Subject: acka: my belated house description

My house, from the outside, has a googolplex small windows about as big as
loopholes (each has area equal to sine of a googolplex in square
cat-heights, to be exact).  Each window has the (primitive name form)
palindrome "googol's log? oog!" inscribed around it in handsome, sans-serif
letters.  The house itself is made of hooves and cucumber (inedible, of
course), although the walk up to the house is ominously made up of the
bones of brass monkeys and fat ladies (as well as the dead bodies of
obviously boneless steel fleas) that make a peculiar crunching sound as one
walks on them.  Above the door is a pentacle in which are inscribed the
words: "Fo meum potest non nocere" and there is no doorknob, only a big
heavy knocker on the outside.  Inside, my house is always pitch black
(despite the windows) and so no one, not even me, knows what it looks like.

- --Weishaupt
  hoping that Fo meum non nocet

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

End of ackanomic digest V3 #321
*******************************