Ed Murphy wrote: >In combination with the explicit definition of "person" as excluding >multi-tier arrangements, it should be sufficient.
Ah yes, sorry. Still has a problem if we want to liberalise partnerships in the future, to any extent at all. >While I find it interesting to have other partnerships participate >in Primo, there are limits to the number of levels that I wish to >untangle. I think it's a pity to prohibit all multi-level structures out of hand. > I also want to avoid boring repeats of the HPn scam, >which "No Free Votes II" would also accomplish. I think "no free votes" is the right way to go about it. We probably should have a similar provision concerning support and objection for dependent actions. Basically, creating a partnership (whoever the partners are) shouldn't bring any benefit on its own; it should have benefit only as an organisational form. -zefram
