Go
This rules depends on the rules governing the proper method of submitting
proposal, the proper methods for retracting proposals and on the rules for
scores given to author of proposals.
1.a. Any number of Players may submit a Joint Proposal.
b. A proposal submitted by a single author is reffered to in this rule as
an individual proposal.
2. Each of the co-authors of the Joint Proposal will submit the proposal
according to the rules describing the proper method of submitting proposals
to the Player whose duty it is to accept and distribute proposals
3. Each submitted copy will list the names of all the co-authors of the
proposal.
4. The proposal will be numbered and distributed to the entire list when the
following conditions are met:
a. A copy has been received from each of the Players listed as co-authors.
b. All the copies are identical, and all contain identical lists of
co-authors.
5. If 4.a is satisfied and 4.b is not satisfied, or more than a week has
passed since the first copy of the proposal has been received, and 4.a has
not been satisfied. The proposal will not be submitted to the list, and a
message explaining the reasons will be sent to all the co-authors.
6.Retracting a Joint Proposal:
a. Any single co-author may publically retract es own name from the
proposal before the end of the voting period. The score of any single
co-author who retracts es name from a proposal is adjusted, as if e were a
Player retracting an individual proposal.
b. If each co-author has retracted es own name from the proposal , in
accordance with 6.a, the proposal shall be declared officially
retracted.
7.Scoring :
a. When a Joint Proposal passes:
Let S be the score a Player receives when es invidual proposal passes
Let N be the number of co-authors at the time the Voting Period for the
proposal is over each co-author receives P points when P=S-(N-1) or P=4
whichever is greater.
[[if individual proposal awards the author 10 points, two co-authors will
receive 9 points each, three co-authors will receive 8 points each and
so on, with a lower limit of 4]]
b. When a Joint Proposal fails:
Let S be the number or points a Player loses when es invidual proposal fails
Let N be the number of co-authors at the time the Voting Period for the
proposal is over each co-author loses P points when P=S-(N-1) or P=4
whichever is greater.
[[if individual proposal penalizes the authoer 10 points, two co-authors
will lose 9 points each, three co-authors will lose 8 points each and so
on, with a lower limit of 4]]
Reasoning:
There seems to be a trend in ackanomic to discuss in forums of varying sizes
proposals and porto-proposals. I feel that when several people come up with
a complex proposal together, and there is no reason they should not share
the credit/penalties involved. Hence this proposal.
clause 4. follows the same guidelines on which the FM market is based. A
transaction takes place when all parties express their intent. Likewise, a
joint proposal is considered to be submitted when all parties express their
intent.
My use of terminology such as "Plyer whose duty ..." and "rules describing
the proper methods of makign proposals..." allow for the fact that these may
change, and emphasize the point that this rule is an enhancement of an
existing procedure and not a replacement.
clause 6 is debatable. The way points are awarded could encourage or
discourage Players from making joint proposals rather than individual ones.
I see no reason to do either, that's why I left the points as they are.
clause 1 seems clear and obvious. "Any number of Players" means just that,
no Party affiliation, commission participation, prior public anouncement, or
anything of the sort is necessary. The only requirement is mutual consent,
and clause 4 takes care of that. together with rule 5 it also serves to
clear up possible errors, like discrepancy in the list of co-authors, which
can cleared up with a message in private e-mail from the Promoter to all the
co-authors, no need for complicated procedures for a simple matter of
beaurocracy.
Proposal 652 - Tue Apr 23 10:12:25 EDT 1996
Mutability Ratio
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
(a) Each Rule shall have a Mutability Ratio (MR), expressed as a
decimal number significant out to four places to the right
of the decimal point. If the Rules fail to specify a MR for
a Rule, the MR for that rule shall be .6666
(b) No Rule may have a MR less than .6666 nor greater than .9000
(c) Where Y stands for the number of votes cast in favor of a
Proposal, and where N stands for the number of votes cast
against a Proposal, the Voting Ratio (VR) of a Proposal is
equal to Y/(Y+N), rounded down to a decimal number significant
out to four places to the right of the decimal point.
(d) If the VR for a Proposal to amend or repeal a Rule is less
than the MR of the Rule it proposes to amend or repeal, the
Proposal is rejected.
(e) 1) A Proposal to create a new Rule should specify the MR of
the Rule that will be created. If it fails to do so, the
MR of the Rule to be created shall be .6666.
2) If the VR for a Proposal to create a new Rule is less than
the MR of the Rule to be created, the Proposal is rejected.
(f) A Rule takes precedence over all Rules with a lower MR. No
claim of precedence over a Rule with a greater MR has any
effect.
(g) After acceptance of this Proposal, the following will occur in
the stated order:
1) The MR of the Rule created shall be .8000
2) The MR of all mutable Rules shall be .6666
3) The MR of all immutable Rules shall be .7500
4) 5 points shall be removed from the score of pTang1001001.
5) 5 points shall be added to the score of ThinMan.
6) section (g) of the Rule created shall be stricken from the
Rule.
Proposal 653 - Tue Apr 23 10:13:47 EDT 1996
Here We Go #1
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
This Proposal is Dependant upon the Proposal entitled "Mutability Ratio"A Proposal to create a new Rule of MR .6700, that will read:
------------------------------------------------------------------
A Rule Change to transmute all immutable Rules into mutable Rules shall be a valid Rule Change.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 654 - Tue Apr 23 10:14:31 EDT 1996
Here We Go #2
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
This Proposal is Dependant upon the Proposals entitled "Here We Go #1" and "Mutability Ratio"A Proposal to transmute all immutable Rules into mutable Rules.
Proposal 655 - Tue Apr 23 10:16:09 EDT 1996
Rule Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
This Proposal is Dependant upon the Proposal entitled "Here We Go #2" A Proposal to amend the Rule entitled "What is a Rule Change?" so that it reads, in whole: ------------------------------------------------------------------ A valid Rule Change is one that has one or more of the following effects, and no others: (a) The creation of one or more mutable Rules. (b) The change of the MR of one or more Rules. (c) The amendment of one or more Rules. (d) The repeal of one or more Rules. ------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 656 - Tue Apr 23 10:16:27 EDT 1996
Voting Ratio Requirement
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
This Proposal is Dependant upon the Proposal entitled
"Rule Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes"
A Proposal to create a new Rule of MR .6700 that reads:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
An Overall Voting Ratio Requirement (OVRR) is calculated for each
Proposal by calculating the Voting Ratio Requirement (VRR) for each
effect it proposes and taking the greatest of these as the OVRR.
The VRR for any given effect is:
(a) For the creation of a new Rule, the MR of the Rule that will
be created.
(b) For the change of the MR of a Rule, the greater of:
1) The current MR of the Rule.
2) The proposed MR of the Rule.
(c) For the amendment or repeal of a Rule, the MR of the Rule.
(d) For the overturning of a CFJ, .6666
A Proposal is rejected if its VR is less than its OVRR.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 657 - Tue Apr 23 10:17:13 EDT 1996
Point Reductions
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
A Proposal to create a new Rule of MR .7700 that reads: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Any time a Player who has a number of points greater than the number required to win the game is supposed to have his point total decremented, he will instead have his point total adjusted to 21 points less than the number of points required to win. -------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 658 - Tue Apr 23 10:19:20 EDT 1996
Mutability Ratio v.2
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
This Proposal is Dependant upon the Proposal entitled
"Voting Ratio Requirement"
Amend the Rule entitled "Mutability Ratio" as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Strike section (d).
Relabel section (e) as section (d), then amend it to read:
"
(d) A Proposal to create a new Rule should specify the MR of
the Rule that will be created. If it fails to do so, the
MR of the Rule to be created shall be .6666.
"
Relabel section (f) as section (e).
[[This makes the appropriate changes to "Mutability Ratio"
in case "Rule Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes" passes]]
------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 659 - Tue Apr 23 10:31:00 EDT 1996
Repeal 355 by Bribery
Wayne (Wayne Sheppard)
Decision: Rejected
Rule 355, "The Voting Gnome" shall be repealed.Every player who voted YES on the proposal that created this Rule Change shall be considered SMART. Every player who voted NO on the proposal that created this Rule CHANGE shall be considered FOOLISH. Every player who voted PRESENT or ABSTAINED on the proposal that created this Rule CHANGE shall be considered STUPID.
Every player who spends A$100 to buy an extra vote in favor of the proposal that created this Rule Change shall be considered GREEDY as well as SMART.
The penalties and awards listed below are in addition to any other penalties and awards that may occur.
STUPID players shall lose 7 points.
FOOLISH players shall lose 12 points and A$7.
SMART players shall gain 5 points and A$10.
GREEDY players shall have thier A$100 returned to them plus A$20 as interest.[[Once evey couple of weeks I have to submit a proposal trying to repeal "The Voting Gnome". This is based on my earlier "Free Points, Revisited" proposal.]]
Proposal 660 - Tue Apr 23 13:56:28 EDT 1996
Protected Entities
Mohammed (Jason Orendorff)
Decision: Accepted
A new rule shall be created, reading:"Rules, the rule set, proposals, game custom, judgements, points, currency, Officers, Players, and PFbonds are protected entities. Rule changes may manipulate rules and the rule set."
Proposal 661 - Tue Apr 23 13:59:44 EDT 1996
Limitation to Rule Effects
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Retracted By Author Using Rule 423
This Proposal is Dependant upon the rule entitled "Mutability Ratio" A Proposal to create a new Rule of MR .8200 that reads: ------------------------------------------------------------------- A Rule may not amend, repeal, nor create a Rule. A Rule may not change the MR of a Rule. -------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 662 - Fri Apr 26 12:59:15 EDT 1996
Score Reduction
snowgod (Phil Ackley)
Decision: Retracted by author
Upon passage this rule will immediatly reduce the score of all eligible players by 24 points. If this point reduction causes any player's score which is currently above zero to fall below zero that players score shall be reset to 13. Any player with a score belowAn eligible player is defined as any player who has a score that is a positive integer.
After the point reduction is complete, this rule shall repeal itself.
Proposal 663 - Fri Apr 26 13:00:38 EDT 1996
Resolutions
The Governor (Dan Marsh)
Decision: Accepted
A player may declare that a proposal is a resolution. A resolution may not change, add, or delete any rules. If a resolution is adopted, the effect described in the resolution shall occur, and the resolution shall not be added to the rule set.
[[The idea here is basically that we should be able to adopt resolutions "Congratulating Mr. X," "Granting Mr. Y a reward of A$35," "Declaring Vernors the Official Beverage of Ackanomia," and so on, which shouldn't be rules but can't be done otherwise within the rules.]]
Proposal 664 - Fri Apr 26 13:00:38 EDT 1996
Every other day, every other day, every other day of the week is fine, yeah
The Governor (Dan Marsh)
Decision: Accepted
When any length of time is specified which is three days or shorter, no time on Sunday shall be counted. Sunday shall be defined as Sunday in the Eastern time zone of the United States.This rule does not apply to this rule.
[[This should prevent weekends from messing anyone up, while not unduly delaying anything.]]
Proposal 665 - Fri Apr 26 13:03:57 EDT 1996
Treasury and Hard Money
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Accepted
A Proposal to create a new Rule that reads: ------------------------------------------------------------------- The acka-entity called the Treasury now exists. Treasury: The Treasury serves as a storing house for acka-entities that belong to no Player. Items in the Treasury may not be manipulated in any way except as explicitly allowed by the Rules. Paragraph A: This is the first sentence of Paragraph A, which also includes the header "Paragraph A:" just before the first sentence. Upon passage of this Rule, each Player shall own a number of A$ equal to his A$ as of 12:01am (EST), 22Apr96, plus an additional A$800 per Player, rounded down to an integer number of A$. The Treasury shall receive a number of A$ so that the total number of A$ in existence shall be 75,000. Paragraph A, which ends with this sentence, shall then be stricken from the Rule. Hard Currency: AckaDollars may not be created nor destroyed. This Rule claims precedence over any Rule that would create or destroy A$. Whenever the Rules specify that a Player should receive A$, and do not indicate where those A$ should come from, they shall come from the Treasury. Whenever the Rules specify that a Player should lose A$, and do not indicate where those A$ should go to, or specify that they should be destroyed, they shall go to the Treasury instead. The total number of AckaDollars shall always be 75,000. No Ackapennies: AckaDollars may not be broken into fractional AckaDollars. If the Rules specify a transfer should be made that includes a fractional reckoning of AckaDollars, the transaction will instead be conducted in an integer number of AckaDollars, and the rounding shall be in favor of the Player or entity receiving AckaDollars. Bankrupt Treasury: Whenever some number of Player are to receive A$ from the Treasury, and there are insufficient A$ to meet those obligations, the remaining A$ in the treasury shall be given to the Players in proportion to the number of A$ owed each Player. -------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 666 - Fri Apr 26 13:05:03 EDT 1996
End of Cycle
pTang1001001sos (Mark Nau)
Decision: Accepted
A Proposal to create a new Rule that reads: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Whenever there is a winner declared, the following process shall be conducted: a) Ackanomic play is suspended. b) All Chartruese Goose Eggs and Right-Handed Grapefruit are eliminated. c) The winner is declared winner of the cycle, and given a Right-Handed Grapefruit, should such an entity be defined by the Rules. d) All players who have zero or fewer points are given a Chartruese Goose Egg, should such an entity be defined by the Rules. e) 20% (round down) of each Player's A$ balance is transferred to the Treasury. The winner shall pay only 10% (round down), however. f) In every instance where a Player owns Bonds issued in another Player's name, 25% (round up) of such Bonds will revert back to the Player in whose name the Bonds were issued. g) Each Player is awarded A$ equal to his point total, not to exceed the number of points required to win. h) Bond payments are held in suspension. i) All Players' points are set to zero. j) Bond payments are reinstituted and a new two-week bond cycle begins. k) The game cycle number is incremented. m) Ackanomic play resumes. Paragraph B: This is the first sentence of Paragraph B, which includes the header "Paragraph B:" just before this sentence. Upon passage of this Rule, Robert Sevin shall be declared the winner of cycle one, the game cycle number shall be set to one, and the full process described above shall be conducted. Then, Paragraph B, which ends with this sentence, shall be stricken from this Rule. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 667 - Fri Apr 26 13:06:14 EDT 1996
Justices Rock Bottom
Dr McSpong (Julian Richardson)
Decision: Rejected
Amend rule 508 by deleting the following two sentences from it:"They may nullify a decision made by the President. They may nullify a decision made by the Senate."
Proposal 668 - Fri Apr 26 13:07:14 EDT 1996
Recall Petition
ThinMan (John Bollinger)
Decision: Retracted by author
According to R507, I call for a vote to remove Malenkai from the Supreme Court.
Proposal 669 - Wed May 01 11:21:52 EDT 1996
Winning
this is not a name (Mike Epstein)
Decision: Retracted by author
This rule has no effect when a game is won by paradox.(a) Upon the end of a game, all Offices will become vacant and their Officers will serve as Acting Officers until new Officers are selected, except that the winner of the game will become Speaker for the new game, that the Appointer will be the first office filled after Speaker, and that Justices of the Supreme Court and Senators will retain their offices. Elections or the appointment process, as appropriate, will then be held promptly for each Office in the chronological order of its creation. No election or appointment process may begin while another of its kind is pending. [No elections during another election and no appointments during another appointment.] [[This way people won't run for everything to be assured of winning one thing.]]
(b) All pending proposals and CFJs, and any other official business not discussed below, will proceed as before. All players will have their scores reset to zero and will retain any currency and other objects they owned in the previous game. The resetting of scores to zero will not be included for the purposes of computing PF Bond profits or debts.
(c) The new Speaker may, at its discretion, propose to retain all Officers. If e does, a general election will be held whose voting period is 72 hours, whose votes are to be sent to the new Speaker, and for which a quorum of one-half or more of Players is required. Only players, and not other entities, may vote. Only votes of YES (to allow the Officers to stay in office) and NO (to remove them) are permissible. If two-thirds or more of those voting vote YES, then the old officers will retain their positions and section (a) of this Rule will not be followed. Otherwise, the provisions of section (a) of this Rule will be followed.
(d) This rule defers to all other rules that deal with procedures after a game is won. This rule takes precedence over any rule granting voting privileges to any entity other than Players.
Proposal 670 - Wed May 01 11:23:37 EDT 1996
What's an action?
Device (Dave Mackenzie)
Decision: Rejected
An action of a player is defined as anything that any other player who is not involved in an office can do (ie: voting, submitting proposals, etc.) This definition shall be called "Acting in a normal way".
An action of an office of Ackanomic (ie: the president, the senate) is defined as acting within the borders of the office. These actions must not be able to be preformed by any player acting in a normal way. (ie: declaring an AOJ). This definition shall be called "Acting in an official way".
Proposal 671 - Wed May 01 11:24:59 EDT 1996
Left-Handed Grapefruit
Malenkai (Randy Hall)
Decision: Retracted by author
1) This rule is wholly dependent on the passage of Proposals 665, and 666; titled "Treasury and Hard Money", and "End of Cycle" respectively. Should either one of these proposals fail to pass, this rule is wholly void and without effect.2) The player named pTang1001001sos shall be known as the Nomic Hero, as referred to in the text of this rule. Should a player by that name (pTang1001001sos) not exist at the time of the passage of this rule, this rule is wholly void and without effect.
3) Immediately, upon the passage of the proposals referred to in 1) above, the Nomic Hero shall be awarded the Left-Handed Grapefruit and given the Right-Handed Lemon as recognition for his service in finding a Nomic solution to allow the game to continue "unambigiously", and "without paradox and crash". Note that after these artifacts are awarded/given, it will no longer be "immediately" after the passage of this rule, therefore this clause 3), cannot be applied a second time.
4) Receiving the Left-Handed Grapefruit will be considered a high honor, but not as high an honor as receiving the Right-Handed Grapefruit, should such an entity exist.
5) If, by rule or resolution, other than this one, a player is ever declared a "Nomic Hero", the Left-Handed Grapefruit shall pass from its current owner to the player so declared.
6) Upon receipt of the Right-Handed Lemon, the Nomic Hero must either give that artifact to the Treasury, or to any player he feels materially assisted in allowing the game to continue "unambigiously", and "without paradox and crash". Should the Nomic Hero feels that no such player exists, he must give the artifact to the Treasury.
7) These artifacts shall exist, even in the absence of these artifacts having properties, except, of course, such properties as defined in this rule. It is permissible for properties to be added or amended to these artifacts later, if a proposal to do so is properly submitted and passed.
8) All transferrence of the Left-Handed Grapefruit and Right-Handed Lemon shall be noted by the Historian in the appropriate place. Should that office be vacant, this clause has no effect until the office is non- vacant. This clause superceeds language in the rule titled "Histiorian" which would otherwise allow the content of the History Page to be entirely up to the Historian.
Proposal 672 - Wed May 01 11:26:31 EDT 1996
Game Over
Bascule (Matt Black)
Decision: Retracted by author
The term "a_game_of_Ackanomic" shall refer to a game called "Ackanomic" or "Ackanomic x", where x is an integer.When a_game_of_Ackanomic has been won according to conditions specified in other rules, this rule shall take effect.
"invasion_from_outer_space" is defined as an integer. The value of invasion_from_outer_space is defined to be equal to the number following the word Ackanomic in the name of the game for which a winner has just been found. If no such number exists, then invasion_from_outer_space is defined to be equal to 1.
The game for which a winner has just been found shall henceforward be referred to as "A_bungee_jump_of_horrendous_proportions".
A new game shall be created, henceforth referred to as "Oh_no_my_legs_have_been_torn_off". This game will be named "Ackanomic invasion_repelled!_the earth_is_free", where invasion_repelled!_the earth_is_free is an integer, defined by the following formula: invasion_repelled!_the earth_is_free = invasion_from_outer_space+1.
The ruleset of the game known as A_bungee_jump_of_horrendous_proportions shall be used as the ruleset for the game Oh_no_my_legs_have_been_torn_off.
All players in the game referred to as A_bungee_jump_of_horrendous_proportions shall be entered into the game referred to as Oh_no_my_legs_have_been_torn_off. [All scores in this game will of course be zero. All official positions in the new game will be vacant, with the exception of the Speaker.]
The winner of the game referred to as A_bungee_jump_of_horrendous_proportions shall be given a Mad God's Omelette to treasure and enjoy for the duration of the game known as Oh_no_my_legs_have_been_torn_off.
The game referred to as A_bungee_jump_of_horrendous_proportions shall end.
Proposal 673 - Wed May 01 11:28:03 EDT 1996
Repeal R403
Malenkai (Randy Hall)
Decision: Accepted
Repeal R403
Proposal 674 - Wed May 01 11:33:04 EDT 1996
Repeal 431
Simon Marty Harriman (Andy Swan)
Decision: Rejected
I propose to repeal rule 431
Proposal 675 - Wed May 01 11:34:16 EDT 1996
Repeal 219
Simon Marty Harriman (Andy Swan)
Decision: Rejected
I propose to repeal rule 219
Proposal 676 - Wed May 01 11:35:16 EDT 1996
Repeal 443
Simon Marty Harriman (Andy Swan)
Decision: Accepted
I propose to repeal rule 443/1
Proposal 677 - Wed May 01 11:37:26 EDT 1996
Repeal 521
Simon Marty Harriman (Andy Swan)
Decision: Accepted
I propose to repeal rule 521.
Proposal 678 - Fri May 03 11:48:09 EDT 1996
Quoting rules to Repeal
snowgod (Phil Ackley)
Decision: Accepted
Any proposal to repeal another rule is required to contain the text of the rule it repeals.
Proposal 679 - Fri, 3 May 96 11:52:05 EDT
Voting is good!
SnafuMoose (Stephen F Roberts)
Decision: Rejected
Preamble: Since it is a good thing to vote, players should be rewarded for eir efforts. Let this rule be created to reward players for eir dilligence and loyalty to AckaNomic.a) Let there be created a thing called a "Voting Reward".
b) After any legal vote in which any players are awarded points construant with other rules, players who receive no points shall be granted the "Voting Reward".
b) 1) The value of the "Voting Reward" shall be one (1) point.
c) The "Voting Reward" is not a bonus point and is not to be added to other points that may be scored for that vote.
c) 1) If a player receives any points during a voting round, e is ineligible for the "Voting Reward".
c) 2) The "Voting Reward" is not a minimum point. If the player loses points during a voting round, e does not receive the "Voting Reward".
c) 3) The "Voting Reward" is only for players who score exactly zero (0) points during a scoring round in which others score points.
c) 4) If a player both gains and loses points such that his net change is zero (0) e is ineligible for the "Voting Reward".
d) This rule defers to all other scoring rules unless such rules specifically defer to this rule.
---
[[I really hate voting then reading voting results and not scoring anything for my troubles... Thus is created this here reward!]]
Proposal 680 - Fri May 03 11:52:12 EDT 1996
Fix the penalty paradox....
SnafuMoose (Stephen F Roberts)
Decision: Rejected
preamble: In order that the Penalty Paradox be eliminated, let rule 422 (Required Number of Votes to Win) be ammended to read in whole:a) The winner is the first person to acheive a score of at least XPOINTS points.
a) 1) In the event that two or more people acheive at least XPOINTS points, the winner shall be the person who has the highest actual score.
a) 2) In the even that two or more people still are tied, the winner shall be chosen at random from all players who meet the above two requirements.b) The value of XPOINTS shall be 257.
---
[[This shoule precude someone backing into the victory...]]
Proposal 681 - Fri May 03 11:53:33 EDT 1996
The Game
Bascule (Matt Black)
Decision: Retracted by author
If this proposal is being submitted to a game of Ackanomic where no winner has been found, it shall be renamed "Ackanomic II: The Return", with "Just when you thought it was safe to read your Email" as it's advertising slogan, should it ever be marketed in the future. This game may be referred to as "Ackanomic" for short.If this proposal is being submitted to a game of Ackanomic where winner or winners has been found, a new game, called "Ackanomic II: The Return", with "Just when you thought it was safe to read your Email" as it's advertising slogan, should it ever be marketed in the future, shall be started. This game may be referred to as "Ackanomic" for short.This game will have as part of it's game custom paragraph A:
This is the first sentence of paragraph A. Whenever a player legally wins Ackanomic, the current "cycle" of Ackanomic ends and the next cycle begins. All scores are reset and any PFBonds, should they exist, will be "reset" (i.e. they will act as if the past scores of all players were 0). All CFJs, other than those dealing with whether or not the winner won the game, are continued. All things remain the same other than those mentioned herein. This piece of game custom will exist until a rule is made governing how the end of the game is handled. This is the last-sentence-but-one of paragraph A. This is the last sentence of paragraph A.
Proposal 682 - Fri May 03 11:54:57 EDT 1996
For Personal Glory...
SnafuMoose (Stephen F Roberts)
Decision: Accepted
Preamble: Such that each player should be able to strike his own mark upon AckaNomic; And that all future AckaCitizens should remember the exploits of those that went before them; Let this rule be enacted.a) The official copy of the official rules should include with the text of each rule the name of the originator of the rule and the date the rule was enacted.
a) 1) The originator's name should apear just below the title of the proposal and before the text of the proposal.
b) Likewise, any changes to the rules should be noted with the name of the changer and the date the changes were enacted.
b) 1) The names of any changers should appear at the end of the rule, after the body text of the rule, and before the beginning of the next rule.
c) The requirements in (a) and (c) do not have to apply to rules created before the enaction of this rule if such data is not known.
Proposal 683 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
ExtraNomic Entites.
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Accepted
By this rule, Ackanomic recognizes the legitimate existence of entities that live the InterNomic realm, which is composed of (potentially) all Nomics, and that players from Ackanomic itself are allowed to be a part of them. These organizations are governed by MetaNomic rules as set down by whatever InterNomic entity is recognized by Ackanomic, while the members of such organizations must abide by the rules of their respective individual Nomics.
Proposal 684 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Refugees and Immigrants.
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
By this rule, Ackanomic declares itself to be the land of the Freedom Players, and all players (members of Ackanomic) can be referred to by that name.Ackanomic recognizes that there are Nomics with different rules and whose players are not as free. Ackanomic will give special consideration to members of other Nomics who seek Political Asylum. Any two political officer (Senator, President, ProConsul) can grant political asylum to any person not a Freedom Player that seeks it. That person will then be called a Refugee and will have a special status. He will have all the attributes of an observer, and also be allowed to make proposals at the rate of up to two a week, but cannot vote on anything, is not counted for quorum, cannot hold an office, nor be selected as judge. Any breaking of the rules will result in the immediate revoking of the person's status as a refugee.
A refugee can ask to become a full player, at which time he must follow the procedures as set down in the current rules.
Proposal 685 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Back Up (part I)
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
When this passed, all the current rule set will be amended at its end in one bit text. Then, any new proposal that is passed will also be added at the end. Any amending proposals that are passed are copied as such, not their effects.
Proposal 686 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Back Up (part II)
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
Every day, the person in charge of the keeping the rules will add the text below at the end of this rule, incrementing the number by one (1) each time. The text is the following:"This is example #1 of a recursive loop gone wrong."
Proposal 687 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Back Up (part III), Or Specifying The Base Case.
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
Any proposal that contains all the integers from 1 to 10 (inclusive) as part of its text will have every sentence after the one containing the number 1 (one) deleted. If that sentence is the last one, then the entire rule is replaced by the following:"Recursive Virus Found In Sacred Rule Set. Virus Terminated."
Proposal 688 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Is This A Virus?
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
Every week, all proposals and rules with number greater than 200 which contain the number "13" anywhere in its text, or as part of its number (eg: 113, 131, but not 311, etc...) then the following action will be taken:This line is added at the end:
"This is #10."If this line already exists in the proposal then the number is decremented (that is, the second time it'll be #9), and the text added.
Proposal 689 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Judicial Unification.
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
The following rule supersedes all rules it may contradict, but accepts all the definitions and powers it does not mention.The Judicial system is organized in the following way. When a player (hereby referred to as the "grincheux") disagrees with the action or interpretation of the rules of any other players (or ruling by a judge), be it by the power an office confers onto them, then the grincheux can make a CFJ on the matter.
Any effect of a CFJ is delayed 72 hours after the ruling is rendered. This is referred to as the grace period of a CFJ. A CFJ is considered successful if it was ruled in favor of the grincheux and the grace period is over. During the grace period, another CFJ can be called to overturn the ruling. The Supreme Court can overturn any CFJ ruling by an AOJ.
If the CFJ (even if aided by an AOJ) is successful and the target player holds an office from which he can be removed, then an IP can be filled to removed him from office. No IP can ever be filled if no CFJ or AOJ has ruled against that player within the last week.
An AOJ can be used to overrule any action of an officers it is granted power of AOJ over, so long as that action is explicitly defined as a power of that officer through that office.
If a justice is removed from office as per the mechanism in place, then this dishonorable discharge results in all AOJs which that Justice signed and approved within the last 10 (ten) days to be nullified. All processes that were interrupted by the AOJ(s) nullified are restarted.
Proposal 690 - Fri May 03 23:18:24 EDT 1996
Game Custom Defined And Refined
Calvin N Hobbes (Thierry Joffrain)
Decision: Rejected
When the rules granting powers or responsibilities to a player holding a specific office are unclear or undefined, then that player may make his own interpretation of the rule, attempting at all times to obey all the rules, their spirit and previous game custom.If a rule relates directly to all or more than half of all players, then game custom will be defined as what most people have thus far tacitly accepted (informal poll by the speaker can be used). When in doubt, the person who disagrees with some interpretation that has been used by another player must put forward a proposal either amending the rule or specifying a special case. While it is recommended players call a CFJ upon the matter even if only one or so people disagree, it is not required.
If no CFJ is made on how an officer or player interprets a rule within two weeks of that proposal passing, then the tradition is tacitly recognized as game custom, with all the effects this derives. When in doubt at a later time, a CFJ can be called, asking the officer (who was in charge when the rule was passed... when dealing with the players as a whole, this means the speaker) to specify what game custom it is they were (are) following. That officer will then provide as complete and detailed a description as possible. This will become the second premise of the CFJ (added to the text), and the judge will rule TRUE once he has verified that this game custom broke no explicit rules or earlier game custom.
Once the two weeks are over, and no CFJ(s) are appealing the interpretation of the officer/players, then the only way to alter game custom is to pass a proposal that explicitly specifies another interpretation for a special case, or by amending the rule in question.
If in doubt as to what the game custom actually is, the player not content with how the matter is handled should make a new proposal.
Proposal 691 - Fri May 03 23:19:17 EDT 1996
No Deadbeat Judges
Malenkai (Randy Hall)
Decision: Accepted
If a player is selected to judge a Call for Judgement by the officer responsible for making such selections (hereafter called the CotC), and the judge-designate does not respond within the required period [currently 3 days, qv ARN 588], the judge is deemed to be "a deadbeat judge", and the CotC must make this fact public.A player on vacation may not be declared a deadbeat judge. This has precedence over the previous paragraph.
When the fact that a player is a deadbeat judge is made public,
The Speaker must send a message to the player who is a deadbeat judge. In this message the Speaker must ask the player if he or she wishes to continue playing the game, and points out why the message is being sent. If the player does not reply within four days, then the player is no longer a player in the game. The ex-player may rejoin the game later, if he or she desires, with the same score he or she had when he or she left.
[[note that four is used here, and two is used in ARN 378, where this was stolen from. This gives about 3 + 1 + 4 days of grace]]
Proposal 692 - Fri May 03 23:20:17 EDT 1996
Hungry, silly, and poisonous
Malenkai (Randy Hall)
Decision: Accepted
Should the Gnome Buddy ever come to hold the Magic Potato, the Voting Gnome will immediately become uncontrollably hungry and eat the Magic Potato, thereby destroying it and removing it from the game.[As Magic Potatoes are poisonous to Gnomes,] this action by the Voting Gnome will immediately kill it, thereby removing the Voting Gnome from the game as well.
If, however, the Voting Gnome had legally chewed a Gumball on the thursday before the day the Gnome Buddy received the Magic Potato, the hunger described above will not have occurred, its effects will not have occurred, and will not occur as long as the Gnome Buddy continiously holds the Magic Potato.
Proposal 693 - Fri May 03 23:20:58 EDT 1996
The Crying Towel
Techno (Jerome Herrman)
Decision: Rejected
Any player wasting bandwidth by posting public messages crying or complaining about the same thing for more than three(3) days can have the Crying Towel thrown at them. Any player, who feels that the Crying Towel is deserved by another player acting like a crybaby, may throw the Crying Towel. The player throwing the Crying Towel must include comments giving reason(s) for throwing the Crying Towel. The player having the Crying Towel thrown at them must make a public apology for wasting bandwidth, and for being a crybaby. If the crybaby makes this public apology within two(2) days of having the Crying Towel thrown at them, his/her score shall remain unchanged. If the crybaby fails to issue the public apology, his/her score shall be reduced by 10 points, pay a fine of A$10.00, and sit in the crybaby corner for a period of one day. While sitting in the corner, the crybaby shall not be allowed to vote for the day they are in the corner. The player throwing the Crying Towel shall recieve 10 points if, and only if, the crybaby fails to issue the public apology. If the public apology is issued, the thrower of the Crying Towel shall receive nothing. If the crybaby has more than one Crying Towel thrown at them on the same day, the penalties for failure to issue the public apology shall be multiplied by the number of Crying Towels thrown at him/her.
Proposal 694 - Sat May 04 22:34:54 EDT 1996
Multiple winners
this is not a name (Mike Epstein)
Decision: Rejected
The following text shall be appended to Rule 422:In the event that more than one player simultaneously achieves the score of 257 points, a winner of the game will be picked at random by the current Speaker from among those players achieving 257 points. However, each player achieving 257 points shall be considered a winner for the purposes of the rule entitled "End of Cycle" [currently 666], should it exist, and any other rules providing special benefits for winners.
This rule takes precedence over the rule entitled "End of Cycle" [currently 666], should it exist, and any other rules providing special benefits for winners.
[[
Rule 422 now reads:
The winner is the first player to achieve a score of exactly 257 points (no more or no less).
]]
Proposal 695 - Sat May 04 22:35:42 EDT 1996
Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy
The Governor (Dan Marsh)
Decision: Accepted
(a) The Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy shall exist.
This office may be referred to as CSRR.
(b) The purpose of the Office of Common Sense, Redundancy, and Redundancy
is to make changes to the rules when it finds that the rules, as written, do
not make sense, are redundant, do not conform _in fact_ to their
interpretation in game custom, or are redundant. The Office may perform
other functions if they conform to the rules. [The Office should make minor
changes. But if it can get major changes past the, shall we say, review
process, it can.]
(c) CSRR shall be a Functional Office with one seat.
(d) (1) The CSRR Officer may publish suggested changes to the rules. Such
a publication may be referred to as a "Common Sense Report" or "CSR." The
CSRR Officer shall assign a unique number for reference purposes to each CSR
he publishes.
(2) Changes to the rules suggested by a CSR shall be limited to
modifying an existing rule or repealing an existing rule. A CSR may not
propose the modification or repeal of immutable rules.
(e) (1) If any player objects to the changes in the CSR within the Official
Voting Period, he shall publish his objection. The changes proposed by the
CSR shall not be made. This subsection shall not prevent any formal
proposal from being made. [In other words, even if there are objections to
the CSR, the CSRR Officer, or anyone else, can still propose it as a formal
rule proposal.]
(2) If no player objects to the changes in the CSR within the
Official Voting Period, the changes proposed in the CSR shall be made. The
CSRR Officer shall publish a notice that the changes have been made. All
Officers responsible for modifying any official rule set(s) [e.g., the
Web-Harfer] shall modify such rule set(s) upon receipt of such publication.
Proposal 696 - Sat May 04 22:36:01 EDT 1996
Quorum Crisis II (Amending R201)
Malenkai (Randy Hall)
Decision: Rejected
Replace "50%" in R201 with "40%"
Proposal 697 - Sun May 05 16:12:36 EDT 1996
Make 201 immutable
this is not a name (Mike Epstein)
Decision: Rejected
The rule entitled "Quorum" [currently 201] is hereby transmuted to be immutable.
Proposal 698 - Sun May 05 16:12:36 EDT 1996
Amend 218 so observers can't hold office
this is not a name (Mike Epstein)
Decision: Accepted
Add the following text to the end of the rule entitled "Registered Players" [218]:No person who is not a player may hold office or have any tasks, duties or responsibilities within the game.
Proposal 699 - Sun May 05 16:12:36 EDT 1996
No -60 bonus
this is not a name (Mike Epstein)
Decision: Rejected
Remove the second sentence from rule 339 "Keep 'Em In The Game"
Proposal 700 - Sun May 05 16:12:36 EDT 1996
Specify gumball times
this is not a name (Mike Epstein)
Decision: Accepted
Append the following text onto rule 495 "Gumball":For the purposes of this rule, alternate Wednesdays and Thursdays are defined as the second and fourth Wednesdays and the first and third Thursdays of each calendar month.