My studies are lacking, but the use of the word party seems "legal" to me. I don't see parties. Any "party", fictional entity, or PERSON who writes a check out to Michael Lamb/Mike Lamb/Michael Lamb II merely represents commerce between two "dead" entities. To me, Michael Joseph is alive and privately administrates the NAME. Michael Joseph does not own it. Michael Joseph merely administrates the interchange/transaction, no different than any other entity, i.e. DJ Lamb Productions, IBM, or Walmart. To me, Michael Joseph is not surety for any of it, but is lawfully recognized and competent as the sole administrator for such party (name). That is how I simplify it. I am alive, everything else is dead, unless I am actually contracting with another being, so that agreement would include our True Names, not any "parties".

I suppose this relates to the strawman, but I simply see something as either fiction (dead) or real (alive), and act accordingly. I am me. To define me in any capacity is to dictate who I am, which is not possible, without my consent.

The core truth amongst all of this (some of it crap), is that living, sentient beings simply NEED to keep their promises to each other. If you say and agree to do something for someone else, you do it. That's it. The essence of legal tender stems from NOT keeping one's promises (word, bond, whatever). For those who break their "promises", there should be a consequence. Unfortunately, over history, so many have not suffered just consequences, and instead, have gotten away with as much as they can, due to others ignorance and/or consent. Note, this does not include force, which is obviously criminal. To force someone else to do something is NOT a real contract/agreement/promise in any capacity; it is merely a reaction to survive.