Re: Code as Law: How Bitcoin Could Decentralize the Courtroom

You need to try to work out whether you think you are talking about what is or what should be.
Because in the real world, the one that is, you don't get to avoid the consequences of your actions by just saying you don't agree to subject to the law. No matter how much you redefine the phrase common law, it simply doesn't have the effect that you seem to think it does.
Try it and see.

No matter how anyone defines anything, what counts is what works. Again, the three links to what works:

http://www.broadmind.org/

http://www.unkommonlaw.co.uk/

http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html

i heard about people doing the 'common man' stuff, and i tried to ignore the whole drama about birth certificates being liable for the debt not the human being part. and if you call your self "frank of the family y-one" blah...

i seen many stuff about saying that people should start making their payment schedules/structure (charging for consultation, replying to letters, appearing in court)

but is there videos showing someone receiving a cheque from such practices? as it just seems like a bit of legal waffle just to waste courts time until their irritated enough to leave the courtroom, making your case automatically dismissed

Thanks, franky1. I noticed that you constantly use lower case when you use the pronoun "i." Normally, when people use this pronoun referring to themselves, they use the upper case "I." That's exactly what Karl says on his website, http://www.broadmind.org/. Take a look. Karl uses the lower case "i" when speaking about himself. For example, he says,"i : a man; Karl Lentz..." He also writes why he does it this way:

CAPITALIZE: adj.: Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 § 4

1. "To take advantage of - To use to ones own advantage."

john doe: a person who is his own master, (sui juris)

Notice the lack of capitalization of the name "john doe." Doing it this way has legal significance. Look at Karl's website. So, you are doing it correctly.