Zefram wrote: > You can see it that way. The present R1742, unless crippled by R1503, > achieves precisely this by making breach of contract a rule violation.
Which leads to my original assertion, that the previous R1742 (I'll standardize on R1742/4) allowed contracts and agoran courts to recognize each other as relevant to each other, without requiring non-players obey or be bound by the rules as a whole. A breach of contract wasn't a rules violation per se, but simply a contract adjudication which the Agoran courts had the authority to consider relevant. The contract itself would recognize the agoran court decision as binding, without requiring that the non-players "obey the rules" in general. That's what I'm saying: the present R1742 interacts badly with R1503, whereas the previous one (written for civil CFJs) didn't have this bad interaction. > > No its not. Without R1742, > I'm not talking about a situation that lacks R1742. Bad phrasing on my part, I'm talking about the situation in which R1742 is broken by R1503 (so we function "without it") rather a situation containing R1742/4. -Goethe
