Reenact not renact. there's a misplaced { in the middle of the
second-last change.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 12:42 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, here's a contracts system based on the model proposed by G. I
> welcome any clean-up suggestions or other improvements, although I
> think I've kept it fairly minimal, with the exception of the
> provisions in the assets rule, which will remain problematic until it
> sees its own reform.
>
> -Aris
> ---
>
> Title: Minimalist Contracts v1
> Adoption index: 2.5
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: G., V.J. Rada
>
> [This proposal saves allowing contracts to control assets until we decide
> to allow them to be persons, which is its own can of worms.]
>
> Renact Rule 1742, "Contracts", at power 2.5, with the following text:
>
> Any group of two or more consenting persons (the parties) may
> make an agreement among themselves with the intention that it be
> binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement
> is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including
> by changing the set of parties, by agreement between all existing
> parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all
> parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of
> parties to it falls below two. For the purposes of this rule,
> agreement includes both consent and agreement specified by
> contract.
>
> Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in
> accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired
> by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or
> between the contract and the rules.
>
> A contract may act as a backing document, as permitted by other
> rules. A party to a contract may act on behalf of another party
> to it as allowed in the contract.
>
> [Comments on whether the backing document bit belongs here would be
> appreciated.]
>
> [The portion below may be messy, but that's existing assets rule
> messiness, which is also my fault and also needs fixing.]
>
> If Rule 2166, "Assets", does not include the word "contract": {
> In Rule 2166, change the sentence containing the text "(hereafter
> its backing document)" to read
>
> "An asset is an entity defined as such by a (a) rule, (b)
> authorized regulation, (c) group of rules and/or authorized
> regulations (but if such regulations modify a preexisting asset
> class defined by a rule or another title of regulations, they must
> be authorized specifically to do so by their parent rule), or (d)
> contract (hereafter its backing document), and existing solely
> because its backing document defines its existence."
>
> In Rule 2166, append the paragraph
>
> "An asset or class of assets is private, rather than public, if its
> backing document is a contract."
>
> to the end of the rule.
> }
--
>From V.J. Rada
