OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3876 Judged FALSE by G.

[Kerim Aydin via agora-official]

status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3876
(This document is informational only and contains no game actions).

===  CFJ 3876  ===

  Jason is not an interested judge.

==

Caller:Gaelan

Judge: G.
Judgement: FALSE

==

History:

Called by Gaelan: 30 Jul 2020 18:46:23
Assigned to G.:   30 Jul 2020 19:58:57
Judged FALSE by G.:   30 Jul 2020 19:58:57

==

Caller's Evidence:

Proposal 7899 (Oct 2017) appended the following to rule 991 (calls for
judgement):

{
  The Arbitor's weekly report includes a summary of recent
  judicial case activity, including open and recently-judged
  cases, recent judicial assignments, and a list of players
  interested in judging.
}

That text is still there, unchanged, in the current 991/33.

Rule 2125/12 reads (in part):
{
An action is regulated by a body of law if […] (3) it would, as part of
its effect, modify information for which some person bound by that body of
law is required, by that body of law, to be a recordkeepor.

If a body of law regulates an action, then to the extent that doing so is
within its scope, that body of law prevents the action from being performed
except as described within it, including by limiting the methods to
perform that action to those specified within it. […]
}


Caller's Arguments:

“Recordkeepor” is defined by the rules only in the context of assets, but
it seems fairly obvious to parse this as “information… for which some
person bound by that body of law is required to include in eir report.”
Therefore, becoming interested in judging is a regulated action.
Therefore, one can only become an interested judge except as described by
the rules, which provide no mechanism to do so. Jason registered in Jun
2019, after Oct 2017 when interested judgeship became a regulated action.
Therefore, there is no way ey could have become a interested judge.

--

Judge G.'s Arguments:

First, note that this doesn't affect judicial assignments. By Rule 991,
the Arbitor CAN assign to any "eligible" judges (which are defined in that
rule and unrelated to "interest").  So if there are no interested judges,
the SHALL requirement for judicial assignments is trivially satisfied.  In
fact, it's satisfied if the Arbitor specifically refuses to assign to any
interested judges (0 for everyone is equal).

Second, the judgement CFJ 3740 included an extensive history and analysis
of the term "recordkeepor" and came to the following conclusion:

> "Recordkeepor" in R2125 refers strictly to instances where the term is
> used in the rules, and any records cascading from that explicit use.
> Currently, this only applies to the R2166 definition cited by the
> caller, but also the "Ribbons" that cascades recordkeeping to Ribbon
> switches in general (duplicating the "tracked by" lanugage for
> switches in R2162).

(https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3740)

Holding with that precedent, "interested in judging" is not regulated due
to having a recordkeepor, and can be determined by a common-sense
application of the common defininition of the term.  E.g. by initially
expressing interest to the Arbitor, and being removed either by their own
professed lack of interest, or if their failure to judge without
explanation shows that they lack interest.

Jason expressed interest in judging when e was an eligible judge, and has
produced regular and timely judgements including on eir most recent
assignment (judgement delivered 21-July), so e was clearly interested in
judging at the time of this CFJ.

I judge FALSE.

==

OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ renumbering (3873 and 3876)

[Kerim Aydin via agora-official]

The CFJ with the statement "Jason is not an interested judge" was
initially assigned the ID# 3873.  I assigned to myself on-the-fly and
judged it without updating any records.  I assign/renumber it to #3876.

The CFJ with the statement "It is Shelvacu's birthday" is assigned the
number #3873, if the previous attempt to assign that number failed.

Resulting Records:

3873 Judged TRUE by R. Lee [Mon 10 Aug 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3873
 It is Shelvacu's birthday.

3876 Judged FALSE by G. [Thu 30 Jul 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3876
 Jason is not an interested judge.

OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

[Kerim Aydin via agora-official]

Agoran Court Gazette (Arbitor's Weekly Report)
Fri 14 Aug 2020


DEADLINES (details below)
---
3874 Assigned to Gaelan  Due Fri 21 Aug 2020 18:34:34
3875 Assigned to G.  Due Fri 21 Aug 2020 18:35:40


INTERESTED JUDGES AND THEIR MOST RECENT CASE
---
3867 Jason
3868 ATMunn
3870 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
3872 Murphy
3873 R. Lee
[na] shelvacu
3874 Gaelan
3875 G.

(Occasional)
3797 Falsifian
3807 Warrigal
3815 Cuddlebeam
3869 Aris


OPEN CASES
---
3875 Assigned to G. [Due Fri 21 Aug 2020 18:35:40]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3875
 Somewhat Annoying Experiment has exactly 5 coins.

3874 Assigned to Gaelan [Due Fri 21 Aug 2020 18:34:34]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3874
 If G. demonstrated a Rulebending Form with text {This statute
 takes precedence over all rules of power equal to this statute.
 This statute, not any rule, determines the relative precedence of
 rules and non-rule statutes in cases where they contradict. Rules
 to the contrary notwithstanding, ais523 hereby becomes a
 Rulebending Magister.}, this would be effective in making ais523 a
 Rulebending Magister.


RECENTLY-JUDGED CASES
---
3873 Judged TRUE by R. Lee [Mon 10 Aug 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3873
 It is Shelvacu's birthday.

3872 Judged FALSE by Murphy [Sun 02 Aug 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3872
 Under SEAMSTRESS, Trigon was PROHIBITED from denying quoted
 signature suggestion.

3871 Judged FALSE by Murphy [Sun 02 Aug 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3871
 As a result of the above actions, three coins were transferred
 from Trigon to Gaelan.

3870 Judged FALSE by Publius Scribonius Scholasticus [Tue 04 Aug 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3870
 The "this message" in the disclaimer in evidence applies to the
 whole email, not merely the {{{ }}}-delimited section.

3869 Judged TRUE by Aris [Sun 09 Aug 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3869
 A player CAN send a message to agora-business by some method.

3868 Judged FALSE by ATMunn [Fri 17 Jul 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3868
 The above-quoted message created an Agoran proposal.

3867 Judged TRUE by Jason [Tue 21 Jul 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3867
 In the above message, I broke a pledge.

3866 Judged FALSE by Aris [Mon 27 Jul 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3866
 More than one Contracoli Contract exists right now.

3862 Judged IRRELEVANT by R. Lee [Fri 17 Jul 2020]
 https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3862
 Facts (for example, 2 + 2 = 4), for the purposes of Agoran play,
 rely on some function of the collective Agoran opinion and not
 necessarily some objective reality. For example, if enough Agorans
 believe that 2 + 2 = 5 is true, it is then so for Agora.

OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3873 Judged TRUE by R. Lee

[Kerim Aydin via agora-official]

status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3873
(This document is informational only and contains no game actions).

===  CFJ 3873  ===

  It is Shelvacu's birthday.

==

Caller:Falsifian

Judge: R. Lee
Judgement: TRUE

==

History:

Called by Falsifian:  08 Aug 2020 15:07:48
Assigned to R. Lee:   09 Aug 2020 21:55:34
Judged TRUE by R. Lee:10 Aug 2020 07:52:16

==

Caller's Evidence:

On 8 Aug 2020 15:06:00 +, shelvacu via agora-business wrote:
> I wish to register to become a player. If my registration is successful,
> I cause myself to receive one Welcome Package and announce that it is my
> Agoran Birthday! How exciting.


Caller's Arguments:

I'm not sure about the birthday, though. R2585 says

   It is considered to be a player's Agoran Birthday on the
   anniversary of the day e first registered.

and after quickly checking a few definitions of anniversary, most of them
seem to say something about "previous year". E.g. Wikipedia: "An
anniversary is the date on which an event took place or an institution was
founded in a previous year, ...".

--

Gratuitous Arguments (multiple contributors in thread):

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044452.html

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044453.html

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044454.html

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044455.html

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044458.html

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044456.html

--

Judge R. Lee's Arguments:

CFJ 3873 presents a fun question: is it the "anniversary" of something
happening on the very day that it happens, instead of beginning a year
thereafter. This matters because shelvacu tried to declare eir agoran
birthday on the first day of eir registration, which e may not do if a
birthday, defined as an "anniversary", commemorates only an event that
happened a year or more in the past.

Dictionary meanings are split both ways.

Merriam Webster: the yearly recurrence of the date of a past event (yes
birthday, as shelvacu claimed eir birthday on the date of a "past event",
which was eir registration.)

Collins: An anniversary is a date which is remembered
 or
celebrated 
because
a special 
 event happened
 on that date
in a previous year.  (no birthday)

Yourdictionary: the annually recurring date on which some event took place
(yes birthday, because the purported birthday was indeed the date on which
shelvacu registered)

Cambridge: the day
 on
which an important
 event
 happened
 in a previous
 year
 (no birthday)


As dictionaries are split, the first inclination is to go to the game
factors analysis. But not so fast. "In settling on a fair reading of a
statute, it is not unusual to consider the ordinary meaning of a defined
term"
Description
Bond v. United States, 572 U.S. 844 (2014). The ordinary meaning of
"anniversary" is not so clear, but the ordinary meaning of the word it is
defining, in this case "birthday", is crystal. It is a baby's birthday when
they are born. A birthday is, after all, the day of birth. It's in the
word.  By analogy, it was shelvacu's birthday the day he registered.
Although we must respect definitions, even when they diverge most strongly
with the terms they are defining, in a case where the defined word's
ordinary meaning is clear and the definition is itself ambiguous, it is
proper to resolve the ambiguity with the common-sense proposition that the
ambiguous definition probably comports with the ordinary meaning of the
defined term  unless there is a clear indication of intent otherwise. For

OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3874 Assigned to Gaelan

[Kerim Aydin via agora-official]

The below CFJ is 3874.  I assign it to Gaelan.

status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3874

===  CFJ 3874  ===

  If G. demonstrated a Rulebending Form with text {This statute
  takes precedence over all rules of power equal to this statute.
  This statute, not any rule, determines the relative precedence of
  rules and non-rule statutes in cases where they contradict. Rules
  to the contrary notwithstanding, ais523 hereby becomes a
  Rulebending Magister.}, this would be effective in making ais523 a
  Rulebending Magister.

==

Caller:ais523

Judge: Gaelan

==

History:

Called by ais523: 10 Aug 2020 00:56:23
Assigned to Gaelan:   [now]

==

Caller's Evidence:

On Sun, 2020-08-09 at 20:21 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> RESOLUTION OF PROPOSALS 8478-8487
> =
>
> IDTitle Result  
> 8483  a minor adjustmentADOPTED 
[snip]
> ID: 8483
> Title: a minor adjustment
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: G.
> Co-authors: 
>
> If G., acting as emself, has published a single body of text clearly
> labeled as "THE MYSTERY DOCUMENT" after the voting period on the
> referendum for this proposal has began, this proposal applies all
> effects specified in that body of text.

On Wed, 2020-08-05 at 11:11 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
> THE MYSTERY DOCUMENT:
> -
>
> The patent title Rulebender is hereby awarded to each player whose valid
> vote on the decision to adopt Proposal 8483 evaluated to FOR at the
> end of the decision's voting period.
>
>
> Create the following Rule, "Rulebending":
>
>   G. CAN, by announcement, make a Rulebender (defined as being an
>   active player holding the patent title of Rulebender) into a
>   Rulebending Magister, or make any entity cease being a rulebending
>   magister.  Changes to an entity's rulebending magister status are
>   secured.
>
>   A rulebending magister CAN demonstrate a Rulebending Form by
>   announcement, specifying a published document as being the
>   form.  When e does so, the form's power is set to the power of this
>   rule, it takes effect as an ephemeral instrument, and then its power
>   is set to 0.  However, a rulebending form CANNOT apply any of the
>   following changes:
>
>   - rule changes;
>   - the creation, destruction, or transfer of assets;
>   - the flipping of switches;
>   - the creation, modification, or termination of any pledge, promise,
> or contract;
>   - the changing of an entity's rulebending magister status.
>
>   G. CAN cause this rule to repeal itself by announcement.
>
>
> Hereby, there are no rulebending magisters.
>
> G. is hereby made a rulebending magister.
>
> -
> END OF THE MYSTERY DOCUMENT


Caller's Arguments:

We have plenty of rules for resolving conflicts between rules. We do
not, however, have much legislation for resolving conflicts between
rules and non-rule statutes, especially when they have equal power.

The rule created by proposal 8483 has power 1 (rule 105, paragraph
labeled 1). If G. performed the hypothetical demonstration in the CFJ,
this would create an ephemeral instrument, a statute, also with power
1. The two statutes outright contradict each other (the Rulebending
Form claims it can change rulebending magister status, the rule claims
that Rulebending Forms can't).

Note that rule 2140 states that ephemeral instruments are bound by
restrictions in rules of /lower/ power, unless some rule explicitly
allows them to override these restrictions, but does not say anything
about being bound by restrictions in rules of /equal/ power.

It's probably impossible to logically resolve a contradiction like
this. Rule 1030 has protections against allowing rules to change the
precedence mechanisms (so as to prevent the ruleset containing two
precedence mechanisms that contradict each other, long recognised to be
an unresolvable situation). With the passing of proposal 8483, we now
have a situation in which it would be possible to have two separate
contradiction-resolution mechanics in our statues as a whole, because
non-rule statues are a way of getting around all our existing
protections that try to prevent unresolvable contradictions betweeen
contradiction-resolution mechanisms.

This sort of thing has happened before (e.g. rule 2240 came about
because someone found a contradiction between a rule and itself, and
this was IIRC considered paradoxical if there were no contradiction-

OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3875 Assigned to G.

[Kerim Aydin via agora-official]

The below CFJ is 3875.  I assign it to G..

status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3875

===  CFJ 3875  ===

  Somewhat Annoying Experiment has exactly 5 coins.

==

Caller:Gaelan

Judge: G.

==

History:

Called by Gaelan: 14 Aug 2020 06:17:58
Assigned to G.:   [now]

==

Caller's Evidence:

On 8/14/2020 03:15 UTC, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> I transfer 10 coins to the above contract.

On 8/14/2020 06:17 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> I revoke 5 coins in that contract's possession by announcement.


Contract at time of the revokation announcement, from Notary's Report:

"Somewhat Annoying Experiment" (revision 1)
Parties: Gaelan

--

The Eligible Revocation can be calculated as follows:
Let x be the lowest positive integer that, represented as a decimal
number in ASCII, has the SHA256 hash
9b722e5d98390e12c7f29dc74d30a52f2c152a35fd47f9614e35f235e025b085.
The Eligible Revocation is x % 10 (where % is the modulo operator).

This contract accepts any transfers of assets.

A party to this contract can, by announcement, revoke a number of coins
in its possession exactly equal to the Eligible Revocation.

Gaelan can, by announcement, transfer assets owned by this contract to
emself.

--

--

Gratuitous Arguments by shelvacu:

Argument for FALSE:

Rule 1742 says that

"The portion of a contract's provisions that can be interpreted with
reference only to information that is eitherpublicly or generally
available are known as its body; the remainder of the provisions are
known as the annex."

and

"A party to a contract CAN perform any of the following actions as
explicitly and unambiguously permitted by the contract's *body*."

Because the integer x specified in the contract is information that is
not publicly or generally available, all portions that depend on it are
an "annex". Thus, revoking 5 coins was not effective because no part of
the contract's body allowed it.

While the contract states that "The Eligible Revocation can be
calculated as follows", that is simply not true. What is provided is a
way to /verify/ the Eligible Revocation. While theoretically 'x' could
be found via brute force has exactly one correct value, the process of
finding that integer would require resources that are certainly not
publicly or generally available.


Side note: I was going to add "... and does not exist on this earth" in
reference to what resources would be required, but I remembered that
bitcoin exists, and because of it so do large amounts of heavily
optimized ASICs that compute SHA256. I decided to do the calculation to
check. https://www.blockchain.com/charts/hash-rate shows the average
hashrate of the bitcoin network peaked at 126.941 petahashes/s (that's
right, /peta-/). At that rate (that is, if everyone in the world
currently running a bitcoin miner instead switched to finding Gaelan's
number), it would take */145 seconds! /*That's it!


Side note to my side note: I misunderstood Gaelan's note. The hash
itself is completely random, I misread and though it was a hash /of/ a
value between 0 and 2^64-1 (a 64-bit value). As such, brute forcing with
all the world's ASICs would be on the order of 10^60 seconds, or 10^50
centuries.

==

OFF: [Notary] The Notes (pledges & promises)

[ATMunn via agora-official]

This is a continuation of the Notary's weekly report. Information about
contracts can be found in a separate message.


=== PLEDGES 


If any pledge(s) has/have no name currently, I assign it/them the
name(s) displayed in this report.

The following 12 pledges exist:


"You can make it happen, R. Lee!" created by Gaelan
Time of creation: 11 Mar 04:16 2020
Time window:  1 year
Time of expiry:   11 Mar 04:16 2021
Text:

I pledge to transfer 100 coins to R. Lee by the end of this pledge’s
time window if Peter Suber registers as a player. The time window
for this pledge is one year.



"G's encouragement" created by R. Lee
Time of creation: 3 Jun 03:24 2020
Time window:  3 months
Time of expiry:   3 Sep 03:24 2020
Text:

I pledge to pay G. (or any other player) all my coins and victory points
if e fills in all the gaps in the CFJ database in the years 2018 and
2019. Time window is 3 months.



"No Fraud, Becca" created by R. Lee
Time of creation: 3 Jun 03:34 2020
Time window:  3 months
Time of expiry:   3 Sep 03:34 2020
Text:

I also pledge not to transfer coins to other entities to avoid the above
pledge for the same time window of 3 months. Violating this pledge
shall be a class 8 crime.



"Offer for those interested in creating a bridge" created by P.S.S.
Time of creation: 22 Jun 22:50 2020
Time window:  60 days
Time of expiry:   21 Aug 22:50 2020
Text:

I will create a contract compensating the creator and maintainer of such
a bridge[1] with good uptime and usability after it has functioned for a
month. The compensation shall be no less than that received by a
competent, law-abiding officer or its reasonable equivalent in cards.

[1] context: 
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-June/043564.html




"No power abuse" created by Jason
Time of creation: 23 Jun 23:20 2020
Time window:  60 days
Time of creation: 22 Aug 23:20 2020
Text:

If I acquire the office of Prime Minister, I pledge to exercise no
cabinet orders and to initiate an election within 7 days.



"No emergency regulations" created by Jason
Time of creation: 23 Jun 23:27 2020
Time window:  60 days
Time of creation: 22 Aug 23:27 2020
Text:

I pledge to issue no intents pertaining to emergency regulations if I
become Prime Minister.



"Honor in scammery" created by R. Lee
Time of creation: 30 Jun 14:26 2020
Time window:  60 days
Time of expiry:   29 Aug 14:26 2020
Text:

I pledge to transfer those 60 VP to G, giving em a win and the
speakership, within 24 hours after the indictments of me for Uncertain
Certification are resolved (I’m doing this so I can wipe my future blots
with the blot-b-gones without an economic reset, then I will give G. the
points and e will win like I promised). Violating this pledge shall be a
class 1000 crime.



"Honest officiating" created by ATMunn
Time of creation: 06 Jul 20:12 2020
Time window:  6 months
Time of expiry:   06 Jan 20:12 2021
Text:

I pledge not to include anything other than official duties in the same
message any official duties. This pledge shall be called "Honest
officiating" and shall have a time window of 6 months.



"Shiny loot" created by R. Lee
Time of creation: 08 Jul 00:26 2020
Time window:  60 days
Time of expiry:   06 Sep 00:26 2020
Text:

I pledge on pain of class 1 million crime that if this
intent succeeds, I will distribute X coins to each member of the
Plundership where X is the number of coins from that promise divided by the
number of members of the Plundership rounded down to the nearest integer,
then I 

OFF: [Notary] The Notes (contracts)

[ATMunn via agora-official]

I publish the following weekly report:


   ██   ██ ███   ███   ██  █   ███  ██
 ████   ██ ██  ██ ██   ██████  ██
 █████ █ ██ ██ ██ ██   ██████
 ████   ██ ████   ██   ██████   ██
 ████   ██ ███   ██   ███  █ █████ ██

 -~= Notary's weekly report =~-



~~ Someday I'll finish the generator script for the web report ~~

All times and dates in this report are given in Coordinated Universal
Time (UTC).

Date of last report: 2 Aug 2020
Date of this report: 14 Aug 2020

Abbreviations used in this report:
---
P.S.S.   |   Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
CB   |   Cuddlebeam
con. |   contract
---


If any contract(s) have no name currently, I assign it/them the name(s)
displayed in this report.


=== SHORT LIST OF CONTRACTS 

 Title   Parties
"The Dragon Corporation"  Aris, Jason, Falsifian, P.S.S.
"GRBaSTttPF"[1] Gaelan, twg, Warrigal, Falsifian
"TPP"[2]   CB, R. Lee, P.S.S., G., Bögtil, Jason ... [3]
"AAA"[4]  Jason, P.S.S., R. Lee, nix
"LoAFER"[5]Trigon, Jason, R. Lee, ATMunn, P.S.S.
"Co Dependents"  nix, R. Lee
"Cuddlebeam's Locker" Cuddlebeam
"Contract No. 1: GIFT"Trigon, R. Lee
"Contract No. 2: POEM"Trigon, R. Lee, ATMunn
"Contract No. 3: CARD"R. Lee
"Contract No. 5: DECK"Trigon, R. Lee, ATMunn
"Contract No. 6: BOON"Trigon
"SEAMSTRESS"[6]   Trigon, nix, Jason
"Dragon QuickExchange" Falsifian
"Obstruction"omd
"Obstruction 2: Electric Boogaloo"R. Lee
"SNOCS"[7]   omd, ATMunn, R. Lee
"Dragon Political Outreach" Falsifian, Jason
"Amusing Test Case" Aris
"The Bank"ATMunn
"The Platonic Parrot"   P.S.S., ATMunn, omd, ... [8]
"I bet that was written by G."   omd, ATMunn
"The Contract Awards: The Contract"   ATMunn
"The Agoran Underground Betting Ring" Gaelan
"Automatable Exchange Machine"   nix
"Somewhat Annoying Experiment"Gaelan
"Agoran Press" Falsifian


[1] Gaelan's Really Bad At Sending Things To The Public Forum
[2] The Plunder Partnership
[3] also Falsifian, Aris
[4] The Agoran Arbitration Association
[5] League of Agorans Facilitating Effective Recordkeeping
[6] Signature Enthusiast Allows Modification of Signature Through
Rigorous Exchanging of Signature Suggestions
[7] Simple, No-Opportunity-Cost Sets
[8] also R. Lee, Cuddlebeam




== FULL TEXT AND HISTORY OF CONTRACTS ==


All contracts currently have a Donation Level of 0.

The following 27 contracts exist:


"The Dragon Corporation" (revision 4)
Parties: Aris, Jason, Falsifian, P.S.S.

--

## Bylaw 1: Definition

This contract is named "the Dragon Corporation". The purpose of the
Dragon Corporation is to earn as much money as possible for its
shareholders.

All other provisions of this contract notwithstanding, this contract
does not permit any entity to act on behalf of any other entity.

Shares of Dragon stock (also known as "shares of DRGN", or, in this
contract, "shares") are a currency whose purpose is to represent
ownership of the Dragon Corporation. An entity which owns at least one
share is known as a shareholder.

If, at any time, the Dragon Corporation or the Lost and Found Department
owns any shares, then those shares are destroyed.

Any person CAN, by announcement, become a party to this contract or
cease to be a party to this contract. A shareholder who is a