On Jul 15, 2013, at 4:57 PM, John Smith wrote: > Did you miss the point of the arguments? > "no interpretation of Agoran law or > binding agreement may substantially limit" > => "interpretations of Agoran law or > binding agreement MAY NOT substantially limit" > => Substantially limiting is ILLEGAL
My interpretation of "no interpretation of Agoran law or binding agreement may substantially limit" was "any interpretation of Agoran law or binding agreement which substantially limits [whatever] is invalid and incorrect". —Machiavelli
