Subject: ackanomic Digest V4 #172
From: [email-masked]
To: ackanomic digest users <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 00:00:02 -400 (EDT)

ackanomic Digest	Monday, June 28 1999	Volume: 04  Issue: 172

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

From: Duncan Richer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 722 (FALSE)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 03:35:59 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 26 Jun 1999, Tom Walmsley wrote:

> Call for Judgement 722 - June 22, 1999
> Subject: Looks Vaguely Familiar
> Initiator: else...if
> Judge: Studge
> Judgement: FALSE

I am appealing this CFJ, and at the same time exercising the requirement
of being a Justice that I decline to hear said appeal. I give the
following YUHUH delimited appeal reasoning:

YUHUH
One factor that the First Round Judge has not considered is whether or not
the song on the ASS, "Ode to Joy", was played.  If the song was not in
fact played, then at no stage did any player gain any benefit from having
the Sad Number as their score, and hence JT's attempt to gain huge amounts
of A$ would have failed.

Playing songs on the ASS is regulated by Rule 7-16, "Ackanomic Sound
System".  Section II of Rule 7-16 contains the following quoted paragraph:

--startquote

Any entity which is in the Library may play any Esoteric Song as a public
action. To do so, that entity must state the name of the Song it
wishes to play and place either an amount of A$ equal to the Song's Cost
or a single Token into the banna-shaped slot on the ASS's control
panel. This action fails if the entity does not own sufficient A$, or has
no Tokens. If the action was successful, the Esoteric Song requested
immediately begins playing as described below, with full effects, unless
there is already an Esoteric Song playing on the ASS. When this
happens, any A$ placed into the slot is transferred to the Treasury, and
any Tokens placed into the slot are destroyed. 

--endquote

This would appear to indicate that the placing of a token into the slot
resulted in the playing of "Ode to Joy".  However, it says also that the
song begins playing "as described below".  Nowhere later in Rule 7-16 does
it describe how a song begins playing, except in the following part of
Section IV:

--startquote

An Esoteric Song will begin playing immediately upon its Trigger becoming
true as long as the Office of DeeJay is filled by an active player. In
this case, the Esoteric Song will begin playing regardless of any other
Song that may be playing on the ASS. The Song will continue playing
until one or more of the following become true: 

- its Duration is expired and its Trigger is not true, or
- another Esoteric Song's Trigger becomes true, 

upon any of which it will stop playing. All game Effects described in the
Song's definition will begin instantaneously when the Song starts to
play, and cease immediately when the Song stops playing, unless specified
otherwise in the Rule creating the Song. 

--endquote

So, if a song begins playing "as described below", this part of the rule
would appear to indicate that the Trigger must have become true, and the
Office of DeeJay was filled by an active player.  Ai! Pedrito! was DeeJay
and Active, but no player without an accepted proposal had had one
accepted.

Secondly, consider the following quoted section of Section IV:

--startquote

The definition is encouraged, but not required, to include these three
attributes also: 

e) Cost: The amount of A$ which must be placed in the banna-shaped slot in
the ASS' control panel to play this Song. If the Cost is not
specified, it defaults to Infinite; i.e., the Song cannot be purchased
with A$ as described above. 

--endquote

The first sentence in Section IV subsection e) indicates that to play
Esoteric Songs, an amount of A$ _must_ (my emphasis) be placed in the
banna-shaped slot.  This conflicts with the part of Section II which
allows either A$ or ASS Tokens to be used.  Being later in the rule, it
will win in the event of a conflict by Rule 1-1.

The second sentence, however, indicates that if no Cost is specified the
Song cannot be purchased with A$ as described above.  Indeed, the rule 
describing the song "Ode to Joy" has no specified cost, and hence it
cannot be purchased with A$ as described above.

What "above" is being referenced here?  Section II, or the preceding
sentence?  The preceding sentence indicates a way to purchase songs, by
putting A$ in the banna-shaped slot.  It is the closer reference to make,
and hence I would argue that it should be taken as the more reasonable
one.

Do the two sentences of Section IV subsection e) conflict?  There is a
very reasonable reading of the rules in which they do not.  The second
sentence says that such songs cannot be purchased with A$.  The first
sentence says that the only way to purchase the song is with A$.  So
clearly the song cannot be purchased in any manner (including payment of
an ASS Token).

So Section IV subsection e) overrules Section II (by Rule 1-1), and the
attempt to pay for the playing of "Ode to Joy" with an ASS Token failed.
Hence JT's attempts to change his Voting Characteristic were unsuccessful,
and hence Proposal 4207 failed.

YUHUH

-- 
Duncan C. Richer aka Slakko the Lost Warner Brother | Queens' College
http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~dcr24/    Ackanomic     | U. of Cambridge
                    Web-Harfer, Map-Harfer, Justice | 2nd Year PhD(PMa)

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

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 722 (FALSE)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 04:40:28 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Duncan Richer wrote:
> I am appealing this CFJ, and at the same time exercising the requirement
> of being a Justice that I decline to hear said appeal. I give the
> following YUHUH delimited appeal reasoning:

I am adding the following BT reasoning to this CFJ as delimited by BT_CFJ
without including any of the quoted text.

BT_CFJ

I agree that the first round judge did not sufficiently consider the
issue, so this appeal is worthwhile regardless of the outcome.

I read the first quote brought up by Slakko as the rule describing
two ways of the song beginning playing. One, when the ASS token or A$ is
inserted, the other when the trigger is fulfilled.   The 'as below' here
refers to "All game Effects described in the Song's definition will begin
instantaneously when the Song starts to play, and cease immediately when
the Song stops playing, unless specified otherwise in the Rule creating
the Song.".  However, it has further limitations in that it cannot be
bought while another esoteric song is playing, which is why it needs to
make that reference.

I believe the second quote brought up by Slakko definately points out a
contradiction in the rules.   We have here 5 possible cases.
a) the song begins playing via the trigger.  (not the case)
b) the song is purchased via A$ and has a cost defined.
c) the song is purchased via ASS token and has a cost defined.
d) the song is purchased via A$ and has no cost defined.
e) the song is purchased via ASS token and has no cost defined.

Reading the sentance with the referent where Slakko has placed it (which
does not define a way to purchase, but defines what cost means, which are
two subtly different things), one could not purchase a song in either case
c or e correctly.

Reading the sentance with the referent to Section II, and the only case
which is faulty is case c.

I think logic dictates to take the least conflicting interpretation, and
certainly game custom dictates that when choosing among equally logical
readings of the rules (and I do not dispute that his reading is one
possible one, nor do I think he disputes that mine is a possible one)
then one should and in fact must choose the reading which is most
consistant with the way the game has been played.

In this case (since we have had a song played via ASS token in the past,
and there is a reading which allows such) we should take that reading of
the rules.

BT_CFJ

--Dragon Mage

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

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

From: Tom Walmsley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: CFJ 722 appealed (K 2 and Laa Laa)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 06:40:54 -0400 (EDT)

Slakko has appealed. This CFJ will now be judged by the supreme cortex
of K 2 and Laa Laa.

Laa Laa, acting CotC.
--------------------------------------
Call for Judgement 722 - June 22, 1999

Subject: Looks Vaguely Familiar

Initiator: else...if

Judge: Studge

Judgement: FALSE

Appealed by: Slakko

Supreme Cortex: K 2 and Laa Laa

Judgement:

Statement:

        Proposal 4207 was rejected.

Initiator's Reasoning:

        I presume (as /dev/joe will doubtless confirm or disprove later)
that the last minute voting by Dragon Mage and AiPedrito! would have
been sufficient to pass Proposal 2407.  Regardless, I deny that Dragon
Mage, AiPedrito!, and Studge were able to raise their characteristics as
they attempted.

        Their claim rests the permissibility of the unrestricted.  The
relevant excerpt:

        Whatever is not explicitly prohibited or regulated by the rules,
however, is permitted and unregulated.  [Rule 1]

        This comes down to the classic question of interpreting rule 1,
a problem which was resolved by CFJ 113 when Ackanomic was only a few
weeks old.  To quote the initiators reasoning, to which the judge agreed
in full;

"This essentially comes down to an interpretation of Rule 115. I claim
that the correct interpretation, the one that we all share, is the
following: You can do anything you want if the rules have nothing to say
on the issue. For example, I could say that I am officially the Big
Herring, because the rules are completely silent on this issue. However,
I could not declare that instead of using ordinal numbers in base 10, we
would be using ordinal numbers in base 3. This is illegal
because while the rules do not expressly forbid this specific action,
there is a rule concerning the numbering of proposals (Rule 642) and
thus I cannot arbitrarily adjust this, even though the said rule does
not discuss this issue specifically."

        The text of Rule 115 survives, unchanged in rule 1 today.  Rule
1 permits not the unprohibited, but the un*regulated*.  The sad and
happy numbers are regulated by the rules, and therefore can not be
arbitrarily altered by the scamsters.

        This has continued to be the Ackan standard in the almost three
and a half years since CFJ 113.  Let me also note Malenkai's Supreme
Court reasoning on CFJ 178, the initiator's and judge's reasoning on CFJ
92.9+2.718i, the judge's reasoning on CFJ 595, judge's reasoning on CFJ
719 and probably countless others.

Judge's Reasoning:

There are three splitting routes, but all lead to the same results.

Either the scam worked like it was supposed to (Case I), or not
(CaseII).

In Case I, everything went to plan, and the scam worked clean and P4207
passed in the process.

In Case II either Dragon Mage's first action ("I convert all of my
points except for 125 to A$ at the rate of 1 point to A$.") looped until
the treasury was empty (Case IIa), or misfired completely (Case IIb).

In Case IIa, enough of the right conversions worked (and he had all the
money he needed) that he could have changed his Voting Characteristic
and voted at least 1100 on P4207.  The scam worked, but mostly by
accident.

In Case IIb, the scam worked more directly (but still accidentally),
with only minor diviations in the math of Dragon Mages actions.  He
could still have changed his Voting Characteristic and voted at least
1100 on P4207.

All three routes pass through a successful P4207, so this CFJ is
trivially FALSE.

There is still the issue of the modern interpretation of Rule 1 in an
environment where explicit entityhood is the case and what the
definition of the gamestate actually IS is not well known...

I suggest another CFJ to find out which of these routes was taken.

Appealer's Reasoning:

One factor that the First Round Judge has not considered is whether or
not
the song on the ASS, "Ode to Joy", was played.  If the song was not in
fact played, then at no stage did any player gain any benefit from
having
the Sad Number as their score, and hence JT's attempt to gain huge
amounts
of A$ would have failed.

Playing songs on the ASS is regulated by Rule 7-16, "Ackanomic Sound
System".  Section II of Rule 7-16 contains the following quoted
paragraph:

--startquote

Any entity which is in the Library may play any Esoteric Song as a
public
action. To do so, that entity must state the name of the Song it
wishes to play and place either an amount of A$ equal to the Song's Cost
or a single Token into the banna-shaped slot on the ASS's control
panel. This action fails if the entity does not own sufficient A$, or
has
no Tokens. If the action was successful, the Esoteric Song requested
immediately begins playing as described below, with full effects, unless
there is already an Esoteric Song playing on the ASS. When this
happens, any A$ placed into the slot is transferred to the Treasury, and
any Tokens placed into the slot are destroyed. 

--endquote

This would appear to indicate that the placing of a token into the slot
resulted in the playing of "Ode to Joy".  However, it says also that the
song begins playing "as described below".  Nowhere later in Rule 7-16
does
it describe how a song begins playing, except in the following part of
Section IV:

--startquote

An Esoteric Song will begin playing immediately upon its Trigger
becoming
true as long as the Office of DeeJay is filled by an active player. In
this case, the Esoteric Song will begin playing regardless of any other
Song that may be playing on the ASS. The Song will continue playing
until one or more of the following become true: 

- its Duration is expired and its Trigger is not true, or
- another Esoteric Song's Trigger becomes true, 

upon any of which it will stop playing. All game Effects described in
the
Song's definition will begin instantaneously when the Song starts to
play, and cease immediately when the Song stops playing, unless
specified
otherwise in the Rule creating the Song. 

--endquote

So, if a song begins playing "as described below", this part of the rule
would appear to indicate that the Trigger must have become true, and the
Office of DeeJay was filled by an active player.  Ai! Pedrito! was
DeeJay
and Active, but no player without an accepted proposal had had one
accepted.

Secondly, consider the following quoted section of Section IV:

--startquote

The definition is encouraged, but not required, to include these three
attributes also: 

e) Cost: The amount of A$ which must be placed in the banna-shaped slot
in
the ASS' control panel to play this Song. If the Cost is not
specified, it defaults to Infinite; i.e., the Song cannot be purchased
with A$ as described above. 

--endquote

The first sentence in Section IV subsection e) indicates that to play
Esoteric Songs, an amount of A$ _must_ (my emphasis) be placed in the
banna-shaped slot.  This conflicts with the part of Section II which
allows either A$ or ASS Tokens to be used.  Being later in the rule, it
will win in the event of a conflict by Rule 1-1.

The second sentence, however, indicates that if no Cost is specified the
Song cannot be purchased with A$ as described above.  Indeed, the rule 
describing the song "Ode to Joy" has no specified cost, and hence it
cannot be purchased with A$ as described above.

What "above" is being referenced here?  Section II, or the preceding
sentence?  The preceding sentence indicates a way to purchase songs, by
putting A$ in the banna-shaped slot.  It is the closer reference to
make,
and hence I would argue that it should be taken as the more reasonable
one.

Do the two sentences of Section IV subsection e) conflict?  There is a
very reasonable reading of the rules in which they do not.  The second
sentence says that such songs cannot be purchased with A$.  The first
sentence says that the only way to purchase the song is with A$.  So
clearly the song cannot be purchased in any manner (including payment of
an ASS Token).

So Section IV subsection e) overrules Section II (by Rule 1-1), and the
attempt to pay for the playing of "Ode to Joy" with an ASS Token failed.
Hence JT's attempts to change his Voting Characteristic were
unsuccessful,
and hence Proposal 4207 failed.

Dragon Mage's Bronze Torch Reasoning:

I agree that the first round judge did not sufficiently consider the
issue, so this appeal is worthwhile regardless of the outcome.

I read the first quote brought up by Slakko as the rule describing
two ways of the song beginning playing. One, when the ASS token or A$ is
inserted, the other when the trigger is fulfilled.   The 'as below' here
refers to "All game Effects described in the Song's definition will
begin
instantaneously when the Song starts to play, and cease immediately when
the Song stops playing, unless specified otherwise in the Rule creating
the Song.".  However, it has further limitations in that it cannot be
bought while another esoteric song is playing, which is why it needs to
make that reference.

I believe the second quote brought up by Slakko definately points out a
contradiction in the rules.   We have here 5 possible cases.
a) the song begins playing via the trigger.  (not the case)
b) the song is purchased via A$ and has a cost defined.
c) the song is purchased via ASS token and has a cost defined.
d) the song is purchased via A$ and has no cost defined.
e) the song is purchased via ASS token and has no cost defined.

Reading the sentance with the referent where Slakko has placed it (which
does not define a way to purchase, but defines what cost means, which
are
two subtly different things), one could not purchase a song in either
case
c or e correctly.

Reading the sentance with the referent to Section II, and the only case
which is faulty is case c.

I think logic dictates to take the least conflicting interpretation, and
certainly game custom dictates that when choosing among equally logical
readings of the rules (and I do not dispute that his reading is one
possible one, nor do I think he disputes that mine is a possible one)
then one should and in fact must choose the reading which is most
consistant with the way the game has been played.

In this case (since we have had a song played via ASS token in the past,
and there is a reading which allows such) we should take that reading of
the rules.

-- 
Tom "I am not a walrus" Walmsley. mailto:[email-masked]
http://website.lineone.net/~t.walmsley/index.html ICQ: 2925739
"Among wizards?" said Ridcully. "Mister Stibbons, unusual behaviour is
perfectly ordinary for wizards." - Terry Pratchet, The Last Continent

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

From: Mueller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Dictate
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 07:07:32 -0400 (EDT)

Emperor Ai! Pedrito! wrote:
>>Therefore, in all threads where the Imperium exists or existed, I perform
>>the following actions as delimited by SLIP_HIM_A_FRANKLIN
>>SLIP_HIM_A_FRANKLIN
>>I give A$500 to Studge.
>>I give A$200 to Emperor Ai! Pedrito!
>>SLIP_HIM_A_FRANKLIN
>>
>
>I return the money to Dragon Mage.  I don't want any money; I was broke
>before, and I will be broke afterwards.  The point of my dictate was to
>resolve the threadsplit by changing the gamestate so that Studge's money
>was uniform in the emperor threads.  And I thought that the A$2000 that
>Studge had accumulated in his year of play was something he deserved to
>keep, even if he participated in a scam.
>

I too return the money.

Reasons:
1) Don't take "charity", 'specially not money I gave somebody.
2) Seems like good art.
3) Broke don't scare me.
4) If I need money, I can just scam for it some other time -- earn it, that
is.

Studge

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

From: "Duncan C. \"Slakko\" Richer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: CFJ 722 (FALSE)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 09:32:08 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, JT wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Duncan Richer wrote:
> > I am appealing this CFJ, and at the same time exercising the requirement
> > of being a Justice that I decline to hear said appeal. I give the
> > following YUHUH delimited appeal reasoning:
> 
> I am adding the following BT reasoning to this CFJ as delimited by BT_CFJ
> without including any of the quoted text.
> 
> BT_CFJ
> 
> I believe the second quote brought up by Slakko definately points out a
> contradiction in the rules.   We have here 5 possible cases.
> a) the song begins playing via the trigger.  (not the case)
> b) the song is purchased via A$ and has a cost defined.
> c) the song is purchased via ASS token and has a cost defined.
> d) the song is purchased via A$ and has no cost defined.
> e) the song is purchased via ASS token and has no cost defined.
> 
> Reading the sentance with the referent where Slakko has placed it (which
> does not define a way to purchase, but defines what cost means, which are
> two subtly different things), one could not purchase a song in either case
> c or e correctly.
> 
> Reading the sentance with the referent to Section II, and the only case
> which is faulty is case c.

You appear to be determining the level of contradiction in the rule
according to how many of the possible ways of playing songs are prevented
by the interpretation.  I see that as a measure of restrictiveness, not
of conflict or contradiction.

As far as I can tell, the more appropriate measure of conflict is how many
parts of the rule are brought into conflict with one another.

My interpretation means that the first clause in Section IV conflicts with
that in Section II, and that is the only conflict we need worry about.
Your interpretation requires us to have the first clause of Section IV
overrule Section II when there is a cost, and then the second clause of
Section IV to overrule Section II and the first clause of Section IV when
there is no cost.  That sounds to me like a much greater level of conflict
within the rule.

> 
> I think logic dictates to take the least conflicting interpretation, and
> certainly game custom dictates that when choosing among equally logical
> readings of the rules (and I do not dispute that his reading is one
> possible one, nor do I think he disputes that mine is a possible one)
> then one should and in fact must choose the reading which is most
> consistant with the way the game has been played.

I think that the treatment of the Literature rule in CFJs would indicate
that "the way the game has been played" is not necessarily a good
indicator of how the rule should be interpreted.  It takes on faith our
ability to get things right; in the past numerous CFJs have indicated the
game state to be not as anyone originally thought, so I am not necessarily
of that opinion.

> In this case (since we have had a song played via ASS token in the past,
> and there is a reading which allows such) we should take that reading of
> the rules.

Yours,
Slakko
-- 
Duncan C. "Slakko" Richer - http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~dcr24/
Queens' College Cambridge, 2nd Year Ph.D. (Pure Maths) - Graph Theory
Ackanomic - Web-Harfer, Map-Harfer, Justice

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

From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Proposal 4231
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 09:36:48 -0400 (EDT)

Boy this proposals sure is silly, stupid, weird, game-breaking,
pointless, or harfy,

K 2
Applying Rule 2-5

[email-masked] wrote:

> Proposal 4231
> Loud and Clear.
> K 2
> Due: Sun Jul  4 18:04:02 1999
> Sphere: Wombles of Wibbledon
>
> {{[This problem needs a more general solution - for now I'll just step
> on the scam]}}
>
> Replace the phrase "Any player may" in Rule 7-17-3 (lluminatine) with
> "Once a week, any player may".

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

From: "Gavin Logan" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: magic potato (K 2)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 09:54:48 -0400 (EDT)

K 2 has found the magic potato.
Therefore, rice has found the Great Tuba of Ackanomic.

King Felix
(OiCoRT)

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

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: magic potato (K 2)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 11:28:46 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Gavin Logan wrote:
> K 2 has found the magic potato.
> Therefore, rice has found the Great Tuba of Ackanomic.

Or at least, this will occur at noon today.

--Dragon Mage, ex OiCorT

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

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

From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: acak: new observer
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 12:49:23 -0400 (EDT)

An entity, known only as [email-masked] has joined as an observer.

rufus

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

From: "Bollinger, John C" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Acka] RE: acak: new observer
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:02:47 -0400 (EDT)

Rufus wrote:

> An entity, known only as [email-masked] has joined as an observer.
> 
I beg your pardon my dear Registrar, but you well know
that the Rules clearly say that only those things
designated entities by the rules are entities.  How dare
you promulgate such absurd claptrap upon the people of our
fair nomic?  With, even, the audacity to misspell "Acka"
in the subject line?  What sad times are these that
passing ruffians may say "Ni!" at will to old ladies!

ThinMan
Even those of us who arrange, design, and sell
shrubberies are under considerable economic stress in
this period of history.

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

From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: Shrubbery
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:27:24 -0400 (EDT)

I create a trinket named "A Shrubbery!", valued at A$50.

It is green.  More specifically, it is a hunter green, leafy, deciduous hedge
about fifteen cat-heights wide, two high, and one deep.  It is nicely, but
not entirely cleanly, trimmed, and appears to have been arranged in some
haste.  The face of the gift card is illegible, but the logo on the back
says "Shrubberies by Roger."

ThinMan

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

From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: Another Shrubbery
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:31:25 -0400 (EDT)

I create a trinket named "Another Shrubber!", valued at A$50.

It is hypothetical.  It looks much like A Shrubbery!, except that there is
no gift card.  If it were set beside A Shrubbery! it might create a nice
two-level effect with a little path running between.  It smells faintly
of herring.

ThinMan

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

From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: acak: new observer
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:31:41 -0400 (EDT)

David Scheidt wrote:

> An entity, known only as [email-masked] has joined as an observer.
>
> rufus

I beam "join" vibes at the non-entity, non-player, natural person controlling
that account - in the hopes e will prove telepathic :-)

K 2

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

From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: No rest for shrubbers
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:32:49 -0400 (EDT)

I destroy Another Shrubber! for cash.

I create a trinket named "Another Shrubbery!", valued at A$50.

It is hypothetical.  It looks much like A Shrubbery!, except that there is
no gift card.  If it were set beside A Shrubbery! it might create a nice
two-level effect with a little path running between.  It smells faintly
of herring.

ThinMan

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

From: [email-masked] (John Bollinger)
Subject: Acka: done
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:39:30 -0400 (EDT)

Ackans,

Okay, I'm done.  Got it out of my system.  Finis.

ThinMan
Ni!

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

From: Jonathan David Amery <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: email address.
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:07:24 -0400 (EDT)

 Since I don't actually know where my email address is listed can it
generally be changed from jda23@(hermes.)cam.ac.uk to
[email-masked] including the [email-masked]
forwarder.

 Thank-you,

  Burnt He Witch.

-- 
Jonathan D. Amery, http://www.trinhall.cam.ac.uk/~jda23/home.html     #####
Wild Card of Acka, member of SPAM, wearing Silly Agenda Hats.     o__#######
Holding the Silver Key to the Vault.                               \'#######
Standing between the light and the dark, the candle and the flame.

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

From: Eric Wald <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Wanderings
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:54:54 -0400 (EDT)

Upon learning about a party I seem to have missed,
(I really should visit the Earthward wing of my house more often,)
I decided to wander around the City for a bit.
A number of interesting-looking buildings catch my eye,
but I would rather not offend a possible owner of one.
Eventually, I spy what can only be a library, 
for it has almost as many books as my home, 
and has some organization to them.
Scanning the stacks, I enter, preparing to change the world.

Sir Galahad

from -> [email-masked]

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

From: Matt Miller <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Acka] RE: acak: new observer
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:53:25 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Bollinger, John C wrote:

> 
> Rufus wrote:
> 
> > An entity, known only as [email-masked] has joined as an observer.
> > 
> I beg your pardon my dear Registrar, but you well know
> that the Rules clearly say that only those things
> designated entities by the rules are entities.  How dare
> you promulgate such absurd claptrap upon the people of our
> fair nomic?  With, even, the audacity to misspell "Acka"
> in the subject line?  What sad times are these that
> passing ruffians may say "Ni!" at will to old ladies!
          ^^^^^^^^

ITYM 'rufusians'

IB
would like a nice shrubbery

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

End of ackanomic Digest V4 #172
*******************************