It's Complicated: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1362

(or if not complicated, it's at least wordy).

On 2/4/2019 7:52 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
I assume G. was hinting to the fact that these are fungible assets yet distinguishable.  Not that the rules define what "fungible" means, anymore.

Which might make them hard to track, so just as well that there's no recordkeepor defined.

No idea how you intend to get any advantage out of this, though.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:

Niiice, Telnaior. c: It wasn't, in fact, what I was going for. I guess contracts are just horribly broken, huh.

I consent to be bound by the terms of the following document, with the intent for it to become a contract provided G. also so agrees. (Slightly modified from the previous version to improve G.'s security.)

{
This is a contract between twg and G. Other persons CANNOT become parties.

twg CAN modify this contract by announcement, with the exception that twg CANNOT (and SHALL NOT attempt to) modify this contract such that it imposes any obligation on G. or otherwise significantly harms eir standing in the game, or such that this paragraph is removed, altered or otherwise rendered ineffective.

Beads are a currency defined by this contract. Ownership of beads is restricted to any entity. twg CAN, by announcement, create a bead in the possession of any entity.

Each bead has a colour, which is one of the following: red, green, blue, cyan, magenta, yellow or white. The colour of a bead is set when it is created and cannot thereafter be changed. An attempt to create a bead is INEFFECTIVE if the colour of the bead is not specified.
}

*whistles innocently*

(I'm also quite happy to just explain the scam, incidentally, and will on request from G. But it seems more fun to give a relatively-harmless live demonstration.)

-twg

Reply via email to