--- On Sun, 25/10/09, comex <[email protected]> wrote: > I suppose. One point is that it would be nice to > limit mousetraps to > "impose unfair obligations", not "I can act on behalf of > you to steal > all your assets and deregister". Your home is your > castle and > whatnot-- in this case, your person.
This is almost certainly a loophole; it was unclear whether it existed beforehand, but definitely existed once act-on- behalf was defined in the ruleset. (I was carefully giving feedback on the proposal in question in such a way as to try to ensure that a version with the loophole in question was the one adopted, so that I could use it with my recent mousetrap; once that's resolved, I'd be fine with locking contract act-on-behalf down a bit more tightly.) -- ais523 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
