On 12 Dec 2008, at 19:41, Roger Hicks wrote:
Except the problem here is that by removing everything but the
definition you have suddenly removed any value that VP once had. Sure
the banks (due to not being able to instantly react to this change)
will still buy them, but really all you are doing
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:33, Elliott Hird
wrote:
> On 12 Dec 2008, at 19:21, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>
>> I object. This proposal lets the indebted parties off the hook for
>> value they got out of the VM without having to give anything of value
>> to the other parties in return.
>
> I think we s
On 12 Dec 2008, at 19:21, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I object. This proposal lets the indebted parties off the hook for
value they got out of the VM without having to give anything of value
to the other parties in return.
I think we should cut them some slack. After all, this removes
indebtedness
3 matches
Mail list logo
