On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree to the following contract:
> {
> This is a public contract.
> Only myself and ais523 may join this contract.
> As soon as ais523 joins this contract, e may, and shall, as soon as
> possible, one time only, by announcement act on Sgeo's behalf to cause
> Sgeo to give em 30VP. 2 weeks after ais523 joins this contract, Sgeo
> may, one time only, by announcement, act on ais523's behalf to cause
> ais523 to give Sgeo 30VP.
> After ais523 receives 30VP from Sgeo by acting on Sgeo's behalf, Ivan
> Hope CXXVII can and may, by announcement, one time only, act on Sgeo's
> behalf to cause Sgeo to give Ivan Hope CXXVII 50VP, if and only if
> doing so counts as fulfilling Sgeo's obligations towards Ivan Hope
> CXXVII
> }I CFJ on the following statement: "The contract quoted above currently has Ivan Hope CXXVII as a party." Arguments: 1. The contract itself purports to regulate becoming a party to it; however, at the time Ivan Hope CXXVII attempted to become a party it wasn't yet a contract, so arguably Rule 2198 doesn't apply to it as it only applies to contracts. 2. Sgeo attempted to cease to agree to the contract before Ivan Hope CXXVII's joining was announced in the Public Forum. However, if Ivan Hope CXXVII could become a party to the contract, it's ambiguous when eir joining became effective; before e joined the agreement was not a public contract and thus possibly not affected by Rule 2178's timing clause. 3. In light of the above ambiguities, Ivan Hope CXXVII's attempted contract change may have had no effect due to Rule 2197. --Wooble
