On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 2:06 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 13:58 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote: >> Proto: >> >> Append the following text to Rule 2166 (Assets): >> >> Creation, destruction, and changes in ownership of assets not >> explicitly permitted by their backing document are secured, with >> a power threshold equal to the power of the backing document. >> >> I'll propose this once I verify that it doesn't break any of the >> existing assets. > Wouldn't this break contract-defined assets?
That's what the phrase "not explicitly permitted by their backing document" is for; the backing document itself could still do whatever it liked with the assets. > (Can you secure something at power 0?) Sure, it just prevents that thing from being done by a non-instrument. -root
