Re: [s-b] [s-d] Proto: Beating a dead horse

["Craig Daniel" <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:14 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> /* Flavour, Entanglement, and Platforms still appear to have no
>   rule-defined functions.  Are they intended to be referenced
>   by contracts? */

As the proposer of Platforms, the answer to that part at least is:
Yes. They're also intended to potentially be referenced by the rules.

(And note that there are two contracts, the political parties, which
do reference Platforms: the Neo-Dadaist Alliance for Creampuff Rights
(which, in proper dadaist fashion, is against things found in its
members' platforms) and the Pocketbook Party (which makes it costly to
go against other members' platforms and profitable to have unpopular
stances in your own platform). I am the only member of either
contract, at the moment, but if that changes the interaction between
the two could get interesting. And by interesting I mean "the kind of
confusing only found in bureaucracies and nomics.")

I intend, without objection, to cause the Operantly Conditioned Beast
to become bound by the Neo-Dadaist Alliance for Creampuff Rights.

 - teucer
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business