Template:In writing capsule: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Template:In writing capsule (view source)

Revision as of 11:43, 23 December 2023

15 bytes removed , 23 December 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

83,544

edits

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 Who has not stumbled morosely into the newsagent of a Sunday morning, wordlessly pushed a copper across the counter and left with a copy of ''The Racing Post'', not having exchanged as much as a glance with the proprietor? Do we doubt for an instant that a binding contract was formed during that terse interaction?
-There is, in theory, a whole ecosystem of non-verbal communications — winks, nods, wags, shaken heads, facial tics and cocked eyebrows — and nor should we forget, those who stand on distant hills and communicate by smoke signal, Greek heroes who mis-communicate their safe return by sail colour<ref>Sail configuration can be tricky especially if you are absent-minded, however, as [[Theseus]]’ father-in-law might have told you, had he been around to do so.</ref> or modern admirals who transmit instructions to the fleet by means of flag sequence.
+There is, in theory, a whole ecosystem of non-verbal communications — winks, nods, wags, shaken heads, facial tics and cocked eyebrows — and nor should we forget, those who stand on distant hills and communicate by smoke signal, Greek heroes who miscommunicate their safe return by sail colour<ref>Sail configuration can be tricky especially if you are absent-minded, however, as [[Theseus]]’ father-in-law might have told you, had he been around to do so.</ref> or modern admirals who transmit instructions to the fleet using a flag sequence.
 Any of these can, in theory, convey [[offer]], [[acceptance]] and [[consideration]] as well can a written or oral communication.
-===Authority on legal effect of emojis===
+=====[[Emoji]]s=====
-The King’s Bench of Saskatchewan — not an English court to be sure, but of persuasive value, especially when speaking this much sense — has recently affirmed the [[JC]]’s conviction about emojis. In an argument about whether a merchant was bound to supply a consignment of flax on the back of an exchange of SMS messages.
+The King’s Bench of Saskatchewan — not an English court to be sure, but of persuasive value, especially when speaking this much sense — has recently affirmed the [[JC]]’s conviction about [[emoji]]s 😬.
+In an argument about whether a merchant was bound to supply a consignment of flax on the back of an exchange of SMS messages.
 The plaintiff drew up a contract to purchase SWT 86 metric tonnes of flax from the defendant, wet-signed it, took a photo of the contract and texted the photo to the defendant with the text message: “Please confirm flax contract”.