On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't see how this makes any difference whatsoever. A person > entering into the agreement in this manner would either have to agree > to the Right Hand, forgoing eir R101(v) right to not be considered > bound by it, or else e would be agreeing to everything in the Left > Hand *except* clause 0, meaning that e has really not agreed to be > bound by the Left Hand at all. This again leads back to the > conclusion that the two are separate components of a single agreement.
At Place X, if I buy a chocolate bar I must buy an ice cream cone, and if I buy an ice cream cone I must buy a chocolate bar. Therefore, the chocolate bar and the ice cream cone together are one item. --Ivan Hope CXXVII
