yep, i'm also quite sure that this works, a person can consent entirely by contract and consenting is sufficient to create a contract. this could be called, quite circular.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 4:30 PM omd via agora-discussion < [email protected]> wrote: > at 11:26 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2020-07-07 23:59, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote: > >> I have no idea if this works, but it might be useful for certain > >> applications. Experimentation!!! > >> I create the following contract called "Contracoli": > >> ---- > >> Cuddlebeam is the sole member to this contract. After 24 hours have > >> passed since this instance of this contract has been created, a copy of > >> this contact (a new instance of it) is made. Cuddlebeam consents and > >> agrees > >> with themselves that these new contracts are made in this specific way. > >> ---- > >> I hereby publicly consent to and agree with myself to have Contracoli > >> contracts be generated in the way described above. > > > > As fun as this is, contracts cannot perform actions automatically. I > > guess you could amend it so that you CAN do so, but at that point, > > there's no real reason for the contracts to fork like this since you > can > > just create a large number of dummy contracts and that would be > probably > > just as effective at annoying the heck out of the Notary. > > They can’t perform actions in general automatically. But by Rule 2519 > they > can give consent, and CFJs 3849-50 held that consent is actually the > mechanism for contract changes. So I think this works. > -- >From R. Lee
