On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Pavitra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 23 October 2008 03:40:51 pm Alexander Smith wrote:
Wooble wrote:
I hereby initiate an equity case regarding the Protection Racket
contract, the parties to which are Wooble, ehird, and BobTHJ.
ehird and BobTHJ are, and have been for quite some time, in
material breach of Section 11 of the contract by remaining Supine
and thus ineligible to judge CFJs.
Heh, as a Favourholder I wanted to do that myself, but couldn't due
to not being a Don. Maybe we should change the rules so equity
cases can be made against arbitrary contracts, or at least
arbitrary public contracts?
I think we should create a more general solution. Rather than each
person be either a party to a given contract or not, there should be
a third state, that a person can be a witness to a given contract.
Witnesses are considered parties for the purposes of equity, but a
contract CANNOT impose obligations on witnesses. For a contract like
a bank or the Protection Racket, assetholders should be witnesses;
for a pledge, all first-class persons should be witnesses by default.
I had a similar proto back in September that I never got around to
proposing. Feel free to steal from it if you want:
Proto: It Takes Two to Tango (AI=1.7)
[ Generalizes the features of pledges to all contracts. Also adds a
small amount of red tape to pledge creation, by requiring the
participation of a second person who volunteers to enforce the
pledge. ]
Amend Rule 1742 (Contracts) by replacing this text:
Each contract requires a certain number of parties (two if not
otherwise specified by the rules). Any agreement made by one or
more persons, with the intention that it be binding on them and
governed by the rules, becomes a contract when it comes to have
at least the required number of parties, and terminates when it
comes to have less than the required number of parties.
with this text:
Any agreement made by one or more persons, with the intention
that it be binding on them and governed by the rules, becomes a
contract when it comes to have at least one party and at least
two participants, and terminates when it comes to have less than
one party or less than two participants. Any party to or
enforcer of such an agreement is a participant in the agreement.
Amend Rule 2197 (Defining Contract Changes) by replacing this text:
(a) a person who intends to be bound by a contract becoming a
party to the contract;
(b) a person ceasing to be a party to the contract;
(c) amending a contract; and
(d) terminating a contract
with this text:
(a) a non-participant who intends to be bound by a contract
becoming a party to the contract;
(b) a person ceasing to be a party to the contract;
(c) a non-participant who intends to enforce a contract becoming
an enforcer of the contract;
(d) a person ceasing to be an enforcer of the contract;
(e) amending a contract; and
(f) terminating a contract
Amend Rule 2198 (Making Contract Changes) by replacing this text:
If a contract does not purport to regulate becoming a party to
it, than any person CAN become a party to it by announcement.
If the minimum number of parties for a contract is at least two,
then Contract Changes CAN be made to it by agreement between all
the parties to the contract. Otherwise, any party to the
contract CAN make Contract Changes to that contract without
Objection. Any party to the contract CAN object to this
dependent action.
with this text:
If a contract does not purport to regulate becoming a party to
it, than any person CAN become a party to it by announcement.
If a contract does not purport to regulate becoming an enforcer
of it, than any person CAN become an enforcer of it by
announcement.
Contract Changes CAN be made by agreement between all the
parties to the contract, without the Objection of any enforcer
of the contract.
If a contract does not impose any ongoing or unsatisfied
obligations on its current parties, and will not do so in the
future in its current form, then any participant CAN terminate
it by announcing that it is obsolete.
Repeal Rule 2191 (Pledges).
Amend Rule 2169 (Equity Cases) by replacing this text:
An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract,
with this text:
An equity case CAN be initiated by any participant in the
contract,
and by replacing this text:
The members of the bases of the parties to the contract are all
unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case.
with this text:
The members of the bases of the participants in the contract are
all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case.
-root
