Reply – Re: CR(tm) "process"
Your Name
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: CR(tm) "process"
— by iamsomedude iamsomedude
I'm constantly updating the EXAMPLE docs so people can see how easy this all really is.

01. Establish initial contract/accord
02. After initial 30 day period, Accept Dishonor and tender 2nd Payment on NEW Contract AND in the meantime, Conditionally Accept ANY Reattempt at Collection
03. Finalize the contract/accord

If anything goes into Court, then hit them up with the Turnabout.

Now, one should see the entire contract and all one really need to know is "Where is the proof of claim?" for without the Proof of a Claim: a right to compel performance, all there exists is WRONG and the greatest enemies of PEACE is force (to compel) and wrong.

What one has in these docs is a simple contract, the time frame for responses (30 or 10 days) CONFIRMS the agreement(s) and this is what one is operating; the complexity of the agreements/accords/contract created is all dependent upon the one creating the contract and it is the creator of such that must comprehend the agreement in order to execute such properly and this is why I keep it to a simple "proof of claim else anything else is barratry (act against peace)"

Once you see the path that has been presented to me thru the Spirit, you see that very little of what other people call "truth" means a damn thing; hence why I keep saying "I don't really care" : for it is written that where 2 or more are gathered I (truth) shall be there, and this is what is being accomplished with the CR(tm).

Because in the end, all that matters is "where is the proof of claim?" for claim = right to compel performance.

Anything less is just plain uncivilized.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.