On Dec 3, 2007 11:20 AM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 6. This agreement may amended by the majority consent of the partners. > For the purposes of this agreement, all partners implicitly give their > consent unless they otherwise inform othe other partners within 24 > hours of such an amendment being distributed. Whenever this agreement > is amended, such an amendment retroactively takes effect at the moment > of this contract's inception.
This raises the question of whether such retroactivity is capable of changing the appropriate judgement in the case. Game custom does not allow retroactivity, but I believe the rule forbidding it has been repealed, and it may have applied only to rule changes in the first place. It seems to me that in order to support equity cases concerning Fookiemyartug, it must be allowed in general. I still support AFFIRM in 1799a and OVERTURN/FALSE in 1805a, however, on the grounds I argued previously; it makes no sense to ascribe meaning to a string of nonsense on the basis of a private contract that is unknown at the time. -root
