On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 17:46, Ed Murphy<emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>> 8. At any time, a nomic may
>> nkeplwgplxgioyzjvtxjnncsqscvntlbdqromyeyvlhkjgteaqnneqgujjpwcbyfrpueoydjjk
>> by announcement. Whenever a nomic
>> nkeplwgplxgioyzjvtxjnncsqscvntlbdqromyeyvlhkjgteaqnneqgujjpwcbyfrpueoydjjks,
>> they are pledging their unquestioned loyalty to Fookiemyartug and by
>> doing so declaring Fookiemyartug and each of its partners to be the
>> winners of that nomic.
>
> The obvious scam failed because non-parties were not bound by its
> definition (Fookiemyartug also attempted to apply various internal
> changes retroactively, though I forget exactly how that interacted
> with anything else).  See CFJs 1805a and 1819-21.
>
IIRC, Fookiemyartug was ruled to have never been a contract (and
subsequently a player) since it initially had only myself as the
basis. Provision 7 of the contract stated:
7. A person may become party to this agreement with the consent of the
partner known as BobTHJ. Becoming a party to this agreement
retroactively causes that person to be a party to this agreement since
its inception.

After being forced to reveal it's membership, comex agreed to join and
I attempted to (unsucessfully) argue for Fookiemyartug's personship
based on the retroactive provision above.

BobTHJ

Reply via email to