On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Roger Hicks wrote: > Why not just limit initiation of dependent actions to first-class > persons only? We've taken away all the other advantages of > partnerships, why keep this one?
That of course was my first thought, but then I thought that there may be trivial dependent things that it's perfectly reasonable and convenient for the AFO (or someone else) to be able to do. General opinions all around, based on the current ruleset? Anyone have examples of dependent actions we should keep available to second-class persons? In any case, I think I came up with a relatively more elegant fix. -Goethe
