On 4/3/22 21:21, juan via agora-discussion wrote: > 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. >
R2166: "An asset is an entity defined as such by a document that has been granted Mint Authority by the Rules [...]", and "Contracts have mint authority." The contract defines Snailpoints as an asset, and the Rules recognize that decision. Snailpoints are real, full Agoran assets. -- Jason Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
