On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You quoted it yourself: > "The PerlNomic Partnership shall act by using the > mechanisms of the PerlNomic game to send messages to the appropriate > Agoran fora. This is the only mechanism by which the PerlNomic > Partnership may act.") > > If the PerlNomic Partnership did not use the mechanisms of the game to > cause the partnership to publish a message, then the contract > stipulates that the partnership may not act, and no other mechanism > for its action is provided.
Interesting interpretation. You're asserting that the PerlNomic Partnership "uses the mechanisms of the PerlNomic game" whenever a party to it does so; I believe, though, that there is precedent that the PNP can send messages even by the Googlebot using the mechanisms of the PerlNomic game. By the way, in response to ehird's arguments, I publish the following (but do not agree to it or claim its text to be true): "This is a public contract and a pledge known as ehird's Mousetrap. Parties to this contract are known as Mice. This contract is also the rules to a game known as Bolero; playing Bolero therefore indicates that one agrees to this contract. Mice SHALL do anything Warrigal tells them to. If a Mouse is not a player, e ceases to be a Mouse. A player plays Bolero by making an announcement (other than an announcement of eir deregistration)." --Warrigal
