On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
>> On 23 Oct 2008, at 20:20, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>> Show us why we all are, please? -G.
>>
>> I'd love to, but that'd violate section 7.
>
> [Shrug] okay, one more bit of noise to ignore.
>
> Though it does raise something: it it even possible for a contract
> under equity to impose CANNOTs (as opposed to SHALL NOTs) on rules-
> controlled actions enabled by a CAN? Any opinions?
>
> Anyway, I object to each and every action intent ehird has published
> in the last 24 hours.
>
> -Goethe
Obviously, a contract can state that anyone may act on behalf of the
person doing something that it doesn't want them to do, to cause that
person to reverse what the contract doesn't want them to do, if
possible
