Unlike the argument about blogs, this argument stretches annoying textual ism beyond its breaking point. To transfer in this context means to change from the ownership of one entity to anothwr. So the auctioneer CAN transfer the switch: from agora to the auction winners.
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019, 12:09 PM James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote: > Warning: I don't think paying Agora for one's prize will cause that > zombie's Master switch to be flipped to the payer, and I plan to call a > CFJ about it once someone tries to claim their zombie (easier to phrase > the CFJ after that's happened). > > (I think the winners are still obligated to pay for their prizes.) > > My argument: > > R2551 says: > > > The winner of a lot SHALL pay the Auctioneer the number of the > > Auction's currency equal to eir bid, in a single payment, in a > > timely fashion. When e does so, if the auctioneer CAN transfer the > > items in that lot to that winner at will, e immediately does so; > > otherwise, e SHALL do so in a timely fashion. > > I don't think Agora CAN "transfer" a zombie to the winner. In a zombie > auction, transferring means flipping the zombie's Master switch. That's > a regulated action, and no rule says Agora can do it. >
