[Foundation-l] Mission & Vision statement updated

[Thomas Dalton]

> (incidentally, the law
> is rarely objective, that's why we have judges and lawyers)

By my understanding, that's why we have *juries*. Judges are meant to
be objective, and leave subjective decisions to the jury.

I pretty much agree with the key points of the rest of your email.

(Incidentally, I've just been researching UK law on the issue, and the
key phrase there is "public benefit". What the benefits are seems to
be pretty much irrelevant, as long as there are some (and they
outweigh any harm), but they are very strict on the definition of
public. I'm not sure if aristocrats would qualify, mainly because I'm
not sure what the exact definition of an aristocrat is.)