On Sun, 7 Oct 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> G. commented that e moved most of the provisions, rather than deleting
> them. All we'd be doing is reconsolidating them.
So after some thought, I don't think we'd be well-served by this approach.
I think that the original Rights did an ok job when it
G. commented that e moved most of the provisions, rather than deleting
them. All we'd be doing is reconsolidating them.
A few other rights we might add:
- The right to believe anything that isn't demonstrably false
- The right not to be ignored
- The right to have a path to obtain meaningful influ
I don't see much immediate benefit in adding this because a lot seems
redundant.
1 - Doesn't Regulated Actions already cover this?
2 - CFJs should cover this.
3 - Shouldn't Contracts cover this?
4 - I think this is new but it could be added I guess, somehow.
5 - I think this is already in the Fora
On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 2:46 PM Aris Merchant
wrote:
>
> I know we used to have a Bill of Rights in Rule 101. It might be neat
> to add that back again. Does anyone (particularly anyone who around
> when we last had it) have any comments on the idea of bringing back
> legal rights?
For public refe
On Sun, 7 Oct 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I know we used to have a Bill of Rights in Rule 101. It might be neat
> to add that back again. Does anyone (particularly anyone who around
> when we last had it) have any comments on the idea of bringing back
> legal rights?
My "if I ever get around t
On Sun, 2018-10-07 at 14:45 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I know we used to have a Bill of Rights in Rule 101. It might be neat
> to add that back again. Does anyone (particularly anyone who around
> when we last had it) have any comments on the idea of bringing back
> legal rights?
They were good
I know we used to have a Bill of Rights in Rule 101. It might be neat
to add that back again. Does anyone (particularly anyone who around
when we last had it) have any comments on the idea of bringing back
legal rights?
-Aris
7 matches
Mail list logo
