On Wednesday 21 May 2008 10:31:28 Ed Murphy wrote: > Pavitra wrote: > > > Simply put: persons make binding agreements; Agora makes those > > agreements into contracts, and eventually perhaps contests. The > > judgement for a question on equation is not even a contract. > > Counterargument: R1742 says "Contracts are binding agreements > governed by the rules". While the judgement for a question on > equation is in effect, it is a binding agreement governed by the > rules, thus it is a contract.
Ah, I missed CFJ 1901. Nevertheless: persons make binding agreements, which Agora then defines to be contracts. At best, a party CAN make a contract a contest as a dependent action. There is a fundamental difference between actions that Agora *recognizes* as possible, such as making a binding agreement, and actions that Agora *defines* as POSSIBLE, such as making a contract into a contest. Pavitra
