Subject: ackanomic Digest V4 #260
From: [email-masked]
To: ackanomic digest users <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 00:00:01 -0400 (EDT)

ackanomic Digest	Sunday, September 26 1999	Volume: 04  Issue: 260

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

Subject: Acka: *ping*
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 04:42:05 -0400 (EDT)

Today is Sunday, the 26th day of September, and 
the Machine That Goes *ping* Has Gone *ping* today.
Since I have been scholar, the Machine has gone *ping* 11 times.

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

From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Acka: Thread Split
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 06:00:20 -0400 (EDT)

Mueller wrote:
> 
> So we are in a thread split where 4371 was or was not a null proposal.
> 
> In the Null-Thread we currently have no CFJ on the issue but should one be
> made, it will be assigned to EA!P!^H^H^H^H^H  

...assigned by the speaker of the other thread to reduce the possiblity
of self invalidating threads.

Given the interest in Ackanomic Lite I'd say that game exists now
regardles of weather Ackanomic Pro bought it into existance or not, so
any CFJ in the Lite version regarding its existance should return true.
All that remains is to determine if the Ackanomic Pro game state
has/will merge with the Lite version....

Presonally given how The Proposal is worded it, it is clear that a rule
should have been created and indeed what text was to compse the new rule
all that it lacks are the words which make it so. I don't think the
implicit creation was ambiguous...

K 2
in both threads.

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

From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: CFJ in thread 2.
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 11:40:57 -0400 (EDT)

Gabe Drummond-Cole wrote:
> 
> In the invalid (kernel) thread, I submit a CFJ which
> 
> *agrees that there is only one rule, the rule created by Malenkai's Kernel.
> 
> I vote FALSE on it.

I vote TRUE.

K 2

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

From: K 2 <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Indistinctly Vague
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 11:45:21 -0400 (EDT)

As acting speaker I declare the game state to be one of crisis.
As acting president I issue the following crisis resolution document:

Create a new rule numbered zero with the title "Ackanomic" and the text:
'
The game state of Ackanomic is adjusted to correspond to a game state
where the effect of P4371 was to replace the text of rule one with its
double-quote (") delimited text, modified by those actions people have
undertaken (which were legal with respect to the resultant rule set) on
the basis that this had already occurred.

This rule takes precedence over all rules.
'

K 2
prolly not acting speaker - shrug.

I resign all offices I hold in an acting capacity.

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

From: "Aaron V. Humphrey" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: Oh Well
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 14:13:07 -0400 (EDT)

I leave any games of Ackanomic of which I am a player(and any subgames
thereof, which I'm not managing to participate in very well anyway).
I confess to a decided lack of interest in young nomics--the elaborate
ruleset of Acka after a year or so was what attracted me to it.  I may
come back if it's gotten interesting again.  If whoever is doing
postmasterly things could ensure that I am subscribe to the digest lists
only, so I can keep track...

--
--Alfvaen(Web page:http://www.connect.ab.ca/~alfvaen/)
Song In My Head--Oingo Boingo:Fool's Paradise
Current Book--W. Somerset Maugham:Cakes And Ale
Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from malice.

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

From: "Bryan Federico" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Acka: WTF?
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 20:12:14 -0400 (EDT)

ll this stuff is way too confusing much worse than a huge ruleset. Is there
one or are there 2? Has anything even been woeked out? would some one tell
me whats up? plz?

R-Attila

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

End of ackanomic Digest V4 #260
*******************************