Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Proposal: For consistancy

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoth Dan Waldron:
> > 
> > Hmm. I'm not sure I like the idea of the game being an Agent, simply 
> > because it doesn't appear to be one by the current definition of Agent. I 
> > suppose if you want to redefine the set of things with Agency as the union 
> > of {whatever meets the current definition of Agent} and {the Game}. I won't
>  
> > vote for this without a little more explanation--how is it exactly that the
>  
> > Game can take independent action?
> > 
> 
> 
> The game is an agent because it has ways of getting its component agents
> and officers to do things for it.
> 
> I guess this would give the game the power to vote, make proposals, etc.
> That might be interesting and I can see why you are nervous about it.
> Perhaps declaring the game to be an agent might be a bad thing after all.
> 
> I will propose some sort of Bank, to own things for us, and perhaps also
> do things like pay officer salaries, etc.

I already have a proposal written to create a Treasurer, Treasury, and Assessor, which I'll present as soon as I'm no longer working from this gimpy windows telnet terminal.