On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 00:28 -0400, Ben Caplan wrote:
> On Friday 25 July 2008 06:39:35 pm Sgeo wrote:
> > I object. Players joining the Vote Market for the first time are
> > automatically in violation with this.
>
> Yikes.
>
> I object.
Good catch. I won't activate that change now. I still like
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ivan Hope wrote:
>
>> I agree to the following: {This is a pledge. Ivan Hope CXXVII can
>> leave this contract by announcement. The Beast is a fixed asset. Ivan
>> Hope CXXVII can cause it to be owned by anyone by announcement.
Ivan Hope wrote:
> I agree to the following: {This is a pledge. Ivan Hope CXXVII can
> leave this contract by announcement. The Beast is a fixed asset. Ivan
> Hope CXXVII can cause it to be owned by anyone by announcement.}
>
> I cause The Beast to be owned by Elliott Hird. (Precedent is that you
2008/7/26 Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Irrelevant. You can possess a contract-defined asset without
> belonging to that contract (I possess some chits, for instance).
>
>
Ah, true.
This means that contracts can affect non-parties.
Creepy...
tusho wrote:
> 2008/7/25 Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Such language!
>
> Sorry. Was agitated IRL when typing.
>
>> A player joining will have zero VP. Not undefined, zero.
>
> I disagree. They're not bound by the contract defining VP.
Irrelevant. You can possess a contract-defined asset with
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I cfj on the following statement "If an entity is not elgible to own a
> particular type of asset, then they own zero of that asset"
>
> I argue true, though ehird seems to thing otherwise.
No need to CFJ on it, in my opinion. Th
On 26/07/2008, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I disagree. They're not bound by the contract defining VP.
>
> But once they join, they are bound by it, and their holdings are
> defined at that point.
Once they join - so they'll have had it for 0 days.
> How about adding a provision
On Jul 25, 2008, at 7:12 PM, Elliott Hird wrote:
A player joining will have zero VP. Not undefined, zero.
I disagree. They're not bound by the contract defining VP.
But once they join, they are bound by it, and their holdings are
defined at that point.
How about adding a provision that
2008/7/25 Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Such language!
Sorry. Was agitated IRL when typing.
> A player joining will have zero VP. Not undefined, zero.
I disagree. They're not bound by the contract defining VP.
tusho
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bullcrap. They don't HAVE a quantity of VP.
Such language! A player joining will have zero VP. Not undefined, zero.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unkn
2008/7/25 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I object. Players joining the Vote Market for the first time are
> automatically in violation with this.
>
Bullcrap. They don't HAVE a quantity of VP.
11 matches
Mail list logo
