On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> True, it should probably be something like
> "A person CAN, without three objections, cause a contract [to which e
> is party] to become a Bank"
> (do we need to restrict it to parties?)
I don't think it's necessary considering the W3O.
--
-
c. wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> comex wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
A Bank is a public contract whose purpose includes facilitating a
means of asset exchange between players. Any party to a contract CAN cause
that
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> comex wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
>>> A Bank is a public contract whose purpose includes facilitating a
>>> means of asset exchange between players. Any party to a contract CAN cause
>>> that
>>> contract to be
comex wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> A Bank is a public contract whose purpose includes facilitating a
>> means of asset exchange between players. Any party to a contract CAN cause
>> that
>> contract to become a Bank without three objections.
>
> Which contract?
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
> A Bank is a public contract whose purpose includes facilitating a
> means of asset exchange between players. Any party to a contract CAN cause
> that
> contract to become a Bank without three objections.
Which contract?
> Any player CAN trans
5 matches
Mail list logo
