Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, comex wrote: >> Note that Rule 1728 takes precedence over Rule 2140 (Power Controls >> Mutability), so any issue of the power of the contract is moot. > > No it's not; it's been previously held that it's the power of whatever > rule described that X can be done without objection that matters. The > power of R1728 is irrelevant. I think it was a precedent set following > a scam with you and ais523, but that's a rather large set to sort through. > > -G.
In any case, all rules have 1 <= Power <= 4 (R2142), so an entity acting as if it has a rule acts as if it is an instrument with unspecified power; this probably defaults to 1, but it is certainly not less than 1. comex's action would create a power-1 rule, therefore concerns of power do not apply. -coppro
