On Fri, 26 Dec 2008, Alex Smith wrote: > On Fri, 2008-12-26 at 10:27 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> On Thu, 25 Dec 2008, Alex Smith wrote: >>> Any person CAN agree to this contract. The agreement need not be done by >>> announcement; any action, in any nomic, which has the effect of agreeing >>> to this contract is sufficient to constitute agreement to this contract, >>> as long as such agreement is permitted by the rules (especially rule >>> 101). >> >> This was actually covered in a past CFJ; to wit, any action that has >> a primary purpose that doesn't have to do with giving permission to >> join a contract can't be construed to be a "consent-granting" action >> just because a contract says it is. Anyone remember the CFJ #? >> > The Agora the Beautiful CFJ (I can't remember the number) is relevant, > but I think the relevant rules have changed since. > > Anyway, I am intending to trigger off an agreement action. The argument > will probably end up about whether the agreement was to this Agoran > contract in particular.
I'm actually remembering something specifically older/different than ATB... that someone set a precedent that said "if a person is clearly attempting one type of game action, e can't be co-opted into the action doing a different type of action." It was something along the lines of a ruling against an Assessor posting "from here on out, I will take the act of voting FOR as Agoran slang for voting AGAINST, and since I've told you all, you should expect that slang to work in communicating your vote to me." -Goethe
