If in doubt, stick it in: Difference between revisions

If in doubt, stick it in (view source)

Revision as of 14:43, 20 October 2022

612 bytes added , 20 October 2022

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,510

edits

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 So: better advice: ''[[murder your darlings]]''. Or, as our brethren [[legal eagle]]s would say, [[murder your darlings|subject one’s darlings, or procure that such darlings are subjected to, culpable homicide]].
-There are two kinds of pointless things we habitually stick in contracts: absurd asks by the risk team, which all at the coalface know will be just as habitually rejected by any counterparty advisor with a pulse, even if the senior risk team draw come kind of delusional comfort from the fact they such terms are being sought at all; the other is matters of tedious compliance — be they accommodations of [[Prime brokerage disclosure annex|misconceived pedantries buried in developing regulation]] or internal [[policy|policy overreactions]] brought about during the recovery process from [[blunt trauma]] — in either case resulting in gnomic confections piped into the back end of your contract templates like so much kitchen dirt swept under a rug, only to fossilise there, unloved, undisturbed, until overlaid with yet more scar tissue.
+There are two kinds of pointless things we habitually stick in contracts.
+The first: absurd aspirations of the [[credit team]]. All those at the coalface know these will be rejected, just as habitually, by any counterparty advisor having a pulse. Yet the credit team seems to draw strength and even delusional comfort from knowing they are being sought at all. We know not why.
+The second: matters of tedious internal compliance — be they accommodations of [[Prime brokerage disclosure annex|the manifold misconceived pedantries of bad regulation]] or internal [[policy|policy overreactions]] sustained in the aftermath of some collapse or other blunt trauma in the markets in times gone by. If you wonder why [[terms of business]] are such lengthy, irrational, illogical, random tracts, this is the reason. They are a graveyard for random matters of tedious compliance. Can’t we just shove something in the tobs? is a refrain the legal department will hear once a week. No matter how strong his heart or earnest his resolution, the poor fellow responsible for the TOBs will eventually lose the will to resist.<ref>You may detect the tang of personal experience here. I cannot deny it.</ref>
+In either case the result is the same: resulting in gnomic confections piped into the back end of your contract templates like so much kitchen dirt swept under a rug, only to fossilise there, unloved, undisturbed, until overlaid with yet more scar tissue.
 ===Worked example===