On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, comex wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, ihope wrote: >> > If Eris gives me up to four 4 crops within seven days, I agree to, as >> > soon as possible, give Eris the same number of 9 crops in exchange. >> >> I wonder if this is a pledge, a (proto-) contract, or neither? > > Interesting. > Although it doesn't make a functional difference for the purpose of > CFJ 1921, I would like to rule on this in that CFJ. > > But I can't think of any argument would which sway this one way or > another! I definitely think it's one of them.
As ihope pointed out, you have to use the word "pledge" for it to be a pledge, the rule says so (I didn't know that). One thought I had is that an informal statement that doesn't use the word "contract" or "binding" might become binding only when the first part of the exchange takes place (rather than when someone says "okay" off the cuff). A case to consider. You offer to give me a quatloo for a tingo. I say "okay" and give you a tingo. You say "I've changed my mind, here's the tingo back." Is the contract broken, or is equity satisfied? -Goethe
