I retract my CFJ On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:15 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > I CFJ on: If the Rules say you CAN do something by paying assets, without > specifying a destination for the payment, you CAN do it by transferring > those assets to anyone. > > Arguments: > > Straightforward argument for TRUE: > R2166 overrides common definitions by making "pay" a synonym for transfer: >> An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. paid, given) by >> announcement by its owner to another entity, subject to >> modification by its backing document. > > Straightforward argument for FALSE: > Payments without destination are error-trapped by this later clause in > R2166: >> If a rule, proposal, or other >> competent authority attempts to increase or decrease the balance >> of an entity without specifying a source or destination, then the >> currency is created or destroyed as needed. > so if "payment without destination" is a method in the rules for doing > something, it happens via asset destruction only (not transfer). > > > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> This CFJ doen't answer the question. >> >> The question is: If the Rule says you CAN do something by "paying" without >> specifying a destination, can you do it by paying anyone? (the important >> thing is triggering the CAN that's tied to the action). >> >> On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: >> > also in the >> > " >> > doesn't THIS apply to "pay" without a destination? >> > " >> > thread >> > >> > ~Corona >> > >> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Ned Strange <edwardostra...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > I call a CFJ with the statement "To "pay" assets is to transfer them to >> > anyone" >> > > >> > > many arguments in the recent Setting up money-printing machine >> > > discussion thread. >> > > -- >> > > From V.J. Rada >> > >>
-- >From V.J. Rada
