I CFJ on the statement "The Left Hand is a public contract."

Arguments:

The Left Hand agreement includes this text:

0. Each party to this agreement is also a party to the Right Hand
agreement, and vice versa.

By this clause, being bound by one agreement automatically binds one
to the other, and ceasing to be bound by one must necessarily release
one from the other.  I argue that the implication of this is that the
two are not separate agreements, but are in fact two parts of the same
agreement.  Since the text of the whole has never been published, the
agreement cannot therefore be considered public.

-root

Reply via email to