I concur, I see nothing stopping you from bundling many pledges together as an aggregate and transferring them. ---- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> On Sep 23, 2017, at 9:31 AM, ATMunn . <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Maybe the person you're giving the pledge to needs to agree to it for it to > be in effect? That might work, but it might not. That's my two (noob) cents. > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Sat, 2017-09-23 at 00:54 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > The idea is that someone seeking to create a contract can instead > > create a pledge, and then (in the same message, probably) create an > > aggregate containing the pledge and the other affected assets. This > > is limited - you can’t contract duties this way, only assets - but > > incredibly flexible as to what kinds of obligation may be > > transferred. Even if you receive an unwelcome pledge this way, you > > have ownership of it, and may retract it. > > You can mousetrap someone by giving them a pledge that they're already > platonically breaking, and then calling em on it immediately. That > doesn't seem right to me. > > -- > ais523 >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
