On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 21:41, Pavitra <celestialcognit...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/10/2011 11:24 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: >> I destroy my copy of this Promise. > > I'm not sure this actually works. I vaguely remember an attempt to fix > this problem with legislation, which I think passed, but... > > R2166 (power 2): > An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by > announcement > > R2337 (power 3): > Creating and cashing promises is secured with power threshold 3; > any other modifications to promise holdings are secured with > power threshold 2. > > 2166 alone implies you can destroy a promise you hold. 2337 alone > implies you can't. > > R1030 puts rule power at higher precedence than > If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their > precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for > determining precedence relations > which implies that R2337's attempt to only secure at power 2 basically > doesn't work.
No, "secured with power 2" means "cannot be done except as allowed by rules with power 2 or greater." This creates no conflict, so precedence is irrelevant.
