83,057
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
So perhaps, by contrast, unnatural ''adeptness'' with securities offerings laws characterises the [[New Hampshire]]man or woman — so much so that an offeror can feel justified shouting at those who don’t quickly grasp the minutiae. | So perhaps, by contrast, unnatural ''adeptness'' with securities offerings laws characterises the [[New Hampshire]]man or woman — so much so that an offeror can feel justified shouting at those who don’t quickly grasp the minutiae. | ||
Or it might be the misconception that this is “important” stuff<ref>Not clear, if the [[Uniform Commercial Code]] is any guide, that a [[disclaimer]] of something for which the disclaiming party was not, in any case, responsible, needs to be said | Or it might be the misconception that this is “important” stuff<ref>Not clear, if the [[Uniform Commercial Code]] is any guide, that a [[disclaimer]] of something for which the disclaiming party was not, in any case, responsible, needs to be said “[[conspicuous]]ly”. But that is an argument too [[tedious]] even for [[JC|this contrarian]] to get into.</ref> that must, by the lights of the [[Uniform Commercial Code]], be said “[[conspicuous]]ly”, and that means ''in [[BLOCK CAPITALS]]''. But, firstly, no it ''doesn’t'', and secondly, no it ''isn’t'': the usual [[New Hampshire]] residents’ notice is a rather feeble [[disclaimer]] roundly denying something that no-one was inferring, let alone implying, nor, dare we say it, giving a flying hoot about, in the first place: | ||
:{{NH residents}} | :{{NH residents}} |