‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Thursday, November 7, 2019 4:31 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, I've had a bunch of ideas for developments around contracts and the > like. I've been working on a proposal, but I wanted to solicit public > comment before going ahead with it. > > - Create an office of Notary, responsible for tracking contracts, pledges, > and promises (see below). I don't particularly have the resources to do > this myself, but I'm sure someone would volunteer. Between thee three > systems, there would IMO be enough to track that an officer is warranted. > > - Reenact the promise system [1]. Yes, I'm aware this could be done with > contracts. However, no one is likely to do the work without a standard > architecture, which doesn't technically need to be in the ruleset, and it > makes sense for the Notary to track them, which does need to be in the > ruleset. > > - Enact a lightweight system for governing commercial transactions, along > the lines of the "trade order" thing, but stripped down enough that it can > fit in a short rule > > - Optionally, redefine all of the above so that everything is just defined > as a type of contract. This would involve making contracts in general > slightly more powerful. > > [1] > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2013-June/010166.html > > -Aris > I'm very for this. I also think we should keep contracts in and be very hesitant to repeal them again. We tend to repeal them when they're not being used, then want them, reinvent them, and find new problems with the new versions.
