Goethe wrote:
> On Wed, 7 May 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
>> I should have followed this up with an example. An existing contest
>> seems apropos. Would you not agree that the Enigma contract's
>> contesthood is a part of that agreement? Or similarly, that the
>> Pineapple Partnership's partnershiphood is a part of that contract?
>
> For the contest, I would not. Enigma could function identically: post
> messages awarding "points", track those points, etc. even if it wasn't
> a contest. Whether Agora chooses to recognize those points is a part of
> Agoran rules, not an intrinsic property of the contract (though it is
> a property of players' motivations in joining).
Furthermore, Enigma explicitly acknowledges that it is /intended/ to be
a contest ("The purpose of this contract is to be a contest..."), and
thus implicitly acknowledges that it will fail to operate as intended
if it loses that status.
