Kerim Aydin wrote: > A contest is a public contract that an originator (hereafter > the contestmaster) may create without 3 objections, provided > e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Members other > than the contestmaster are known as contestants.
How does this fit together with the general contract formation rule? I suggest a better way may be to leave the formation itself unrestricted, but have the granting of contest status subject to w3o. > A contestmaster may, each week, award to its contestants a > number of points equal to 5 times its basis, where the basis > is calculated using only contestants who have been contestants > for a week or more at the time of award. I don't understand this bit. A contest generally doesn't have a basis, as that term is currently used in the rules. I suggest that there should be a waiting period of at least a week after the contest has been in existence and open to contestant entry before it is allowed to award points. Is that part of what you're trying to do in this sentence? You should clarify that you're referring to contestants of the contest in question, rather than to persons who happen to be a contestant anywhere else. > An award is made by > a public announcement and must be made according to the terms > of the contract. Is that a CAN or a SHALL? > A contract is public if its text identifies it as such, or if it > a particular class of contract which the rules require to be > public. I think that's going to be confusing, especially if you apply it to contests as a class. We've had more than one contract that identified itself as a contest without actually being one. > The contract is considered to exist as a continuous entity so > long as its originator is a member; An exception to the general rule for contract dissolution? I don't like it. -zefram
