Re: [s-d] [s-b] (Burnt Sienna) Proposal: Contracts Plus

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>  >> Contracts may be modified with the explicit approval of all parties,
> as well
>  >> as in any other way allowed by that Contract. A Contract may specify
> ways
>  >> for Players to become, or cease to become, Parties to it, provided
> that no
>  >> Player shall be made a Party to a Contract without their explicit
> consent.
>
> This is a palatable compromise. Getting rid of "I now cause Joe to
> become bound by XYZ too" is the goal.
>
>  >> creates a Legal Entity known as a Corporation. Articles of
> Incorporation
>  >> must, at minimum, establish the name of the Corporation and at define
> at
>  >> least one Officer. Only parties to a Corporation's Articles of
> Incorporation
>  >> can be Officers of that Corporation.
>  >>
>
> That last sentence is in the proposal twice. I would advocate it being
> there zero times.


Because you're afraid of parties being mousetrapped? I think this might be
fine without this sentence, but then the earlier sentence ("no player should
be made a party to a contract without their explicit consent") should
mention officers too. That way, I can't draw up a Contract that makes you an
officer and imposes obligations on its officers.

Hmmm, it should also say legal entity instead of player, maybe, if we want
Corporations joining Corporations, again.


>  >> A Contract may declare itself to be a Power of Attorney, specifying a
>  >> Principal and an Agent, who must both be Parties to the Contract. A
> Power of
>  >> Attorney is either General or Limited, defaulting to Limited. A General
>  >> Power of Attorney authorizes the Agent to cause any actions except
> those
>  >> specified as Reservations, while a Limited Power of Attorney
> authorizes the
>  >> Agent to cause ONLY those actions specified as Delegations. When
>  >> authorized, the Agent may send a message to a public forum causing the
>  >> Principal to take any action which the Principal is legally able to
> take.
>  >> }}
>
>
> Perhaps Officers could be defined and empowered through this power of
> attorney instead? There are definitely times I would want to exercise my
> given powers on a corporation without being bound by its contract.


That sounds like a very good idea.

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