On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
So if another rule says "you can do X by paying [without destination]", then since paying for it is an attempt to decrease your balance, that's a pretty strong implication that you do it by destroying it. And if you pay someone else, you're not doing what the rule says you need to do.
Something something "direct forward reasoning". Greetings, Ørjan.
