Benjamin Caplan wrote:
> Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 18:32 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
>>> Alex Smith wrote:
>>>> attornee>'s behalf"). It is IMPOSSIBLE to attorn if:
>>>> - The action could be performed by the attornee by announcement, and
>>>> - At least one rule of power at least 1.7 explicitly permits the action,
>>>> and no rule forbids it, and
>>>> - The attornor is first-class.
>>> Surely this should say "It is POSSIBLE to attorn if"?
>> Should be IMPOSSIBLE to attorn unless.
>>
>> I withdraw my proposal "Some actual act-on-behalf legislation"; I'll
>> repropose it after a while if nobody notices other problems.
>
> I don't see the purpose of the power limit. Is there a particular reason
> not to allow attorning for, say, contract-defined actions? Or are you
> worried about creating a possibility where none would otherwise exist?
> In that case, "The attornee CAN and MAY perform the action by
> announcement" should be sufficient.
The rule itself allows any action specified by contract.
