| Ed Murphy on Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:58:35 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 183 |
ehird wrote: > On 9 Jan 2009, at 00:21, Ed Murphy wrote: > >> What aspect of 5E57's "No Player shall be made a Party to a Contract >> without their explicit consent" is being disputed? The only way I >> see it working is if it's backed by one of the "5E10 is broken and >> lets anyone do anything" interpretations. > > "shall" "shall" wrt the passive voice is not explicitly defined. See also the Comex Doctrine. _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss