On 2022-04-03 20:10, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: > CoE: either none of these Snailpoints exist, or they are all owned by > the Lost and Found Department. Any purported creation of Snailpoints > would result in their ownership being indeterminate, as their creation > cannot be verified to be consistent with the hashed document. Thus, the > Snailpoints would be in abeyance and thus transferred to L&FD, since the > contract does not state otherwise.
I don't think rules on assets necessarily apply here. Snailpoints are defined in contract, and are not assets per se. Despite there being a standard of clarity and unambiguosness to actions stated in R1742, actions which are specified by the contract's text, and that make no reference to actions created by Agora rules, are unregulated actions. There is an argument that, by creating Snailpoints as “assets”, the contract is infering all relevant definitions present in the rules apply. However, given the contract's text clearly defers decision to the text with the given hash, I'd argue all parties have clearly and unambiguously consented to having their Snailpoints governed by that text. In that case, that text is normative, and the rules on Assets apply only where it falls silent. -- juan
