Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 20, 2009, at 5:37 PM, ais523 <callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
As for your two-possibilities argument; giving notice that there's a
possibility that something might happen is still notice. There are two
possibilities; but if either leads to something happening, the
notice is
there. After all, it isn't the case that every dependent action intent
in Agora is resolved; so if I intend to do something, there are two
possibilities: (1) that I resolve it, (2) that I don't. It's
ambiguous.
Therefore, by your argument, there isn't notice there? Your reasoning
seems rather spurious here.
You specifically gave notice that you would do it without 3 objections
(or without objection, etc.). I believe that "I intend, without
objection, to do X", when evaluated as a statement, means one of:
a) "I plan that, if I don't get an objection, I will do X in 4-14 days."
b) "I plan that, in 4-14 days, I will do X without
objection." [implying, I don't plan to receive objections]
In case a), after an objection is posted, the statement becomes a
tautology. In case b), after an objection is posted the plan becomes
impossible to execute and is invalid. If I'm given notice that I'll
be kicked off a train for not having a ticket, then show my ticket, I
wouldn't expect to be kicked off the train anyway.
Either way, the statement says nothing about your plans knowing
there's an objection. Notice is, after all, inherently a warning, and
I wasn't warned that you were going to amend the contract other than
without X objections. Given the warning I had, I could have retracted
my objections, gone to bed, and felt confident that the scam couldn't
be pulled off for 24 hours. Had I been warned without a method being
specified, I wouldn't be so sure.
