I've always thought that Agora -- should it wish to grow a commercial pseudopod -- would make sense as an independent dispute resolution venue, for real world contracts. This would amount to essentially hanging out a shingle as an arbitration service. Prerequisite of course would be allowing for such activity in the Agora rules. And probably setting up the necessary details of interacting with non-Agora entities on their terms, like empowering the pseudopod to register itself as a LLC somewhere, or not. Depends if Agora Pro wants to get paid in dollars or bitcoins or what. Probably walruses.
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 4:49 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, it’s hard to argue that they aren’t a contract. There have been times > in the past when that’s been explicitly specified (well, at least that > they’re construed as if they’re a contract between the players). > > -Aris > > On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 9:44 AM Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Upon my first reading, this didn't surprise me that much. It makes sense > > that these systems would look similar because AFAIK Contracts were > > actually modeled after the rules. However, then I realized that CFJ 3664 > > where G. and D. Margaux informally agreed to do something but because it > > satisfied all the requirements for a contract it was considered to be > one. > > > > So let's see: > > > > 1) Is it an "agreement"? > > 2) Did players consent to it? > > 3) Did said players have the intention that it would be binding upon > > them and governed by the rules? > > > > These are the same tests judge twg wrote for CFJ 3664. And I'm pretty > > sure the rules satisfy them. > > > > I CFJ: "The Rules are a Contract" > > > > For this CFJ, this message is evidence. > > > > Thanks, Cuddles, for the idea. > > > > On 2/9/19 10:14 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > > I might have something wrong, hence why I'm posting it here for > > > scrutiny, but I suspect Agora itself is a contract (with all that > > > implies, oh boy). > > > > > > > > > We have in Rule 869 with Power 3: "A person, by registering, agrees to > > > abide by the Rules. The Rules CANNOT otherwise bind a person to abide > > > by any agreement without that person's willful consent." > > > > > > So, registering is an agreement, an agreement to abide by the rules > > > (by power 3). > > > > > > > > > We also have Rule 1742 with power 2.5: "Any group of two or more > > > consenting persons (the parties) may make an agreement among > > > themselves with the intention that it be binding upon them and be > > > governed by the rules. Such an agreement is known as a contract." > > > > > > Now, this is a bit of a rough part but, a contract doesn't need to be > > > called or known to be a contract, to be a contract. Its just a name to > > > a form of agreement. > > > > > > We've all agreed to the Agora-contract with intention that it's > > > binding onto us and be governed by the rules via registering, because > > > it expressly means that we agree to abide by the rules. > > > > > > It's a bit weird that the contract and the rules that govern them are > > > the same thing, but that's the case in Agora itself. > > > > > > > > > So, Agora is a contract. > > > > > > > > > [image: 980x.gif] > > > > > > > -- > > Trigon > > > -- "I don't know about that, as it is outside of my area of expertise." -- competent specialized practitioners, all the time
