82,853
edits
Mark-up: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|brokerage|[[File:Hindenburg.jpg|450px|thumb|center|Launch party for the [[2011 Equity Derivatives Definitions]]]] | {{a|brokerage|[[File:Hindenburg.jpg|450px|thumb|center|Launch party for the [[2011 Equity Derivatives Definitions]]]] | ||
}} | }}{{d|Mark-up||n|}} | ||
A | 1. ''([[Brokerage]])'': A ''broker’s'' mark-up (or [[mark-down]]) is a [[dealer]]’s way of making money: the equivalent in a [[principal]] arrangement to [[commission]] paid to an [[agent]]. | ||
2. ''(Institutionalised pedantry''): A ''[[legal eagle]]’s'' [[legal mark-up|mark-up]] is an impenetrable melange of [[passive|passives]], [[passive-aggressive]]s, [[redundancy|redundancies]], {{tag|flannel}} and [[non-sequitur]]s injected into a perfectly sensible {{tag|contract}} by a perfectly tedious [[mediocre lawyer|attorney]]. The sheer inscrutability of one’s mark-up is a criteria for [[inhouse legal team of the year]]. | |||
Legal mark-up, being the fossil record of a legal [[negotiation]] between [[legal eagle]]s, bears a striking similarity to a playground argument. It will start as a broad, wide-ranging, harangue; each side adopting fundamentally opposed positions largely for the sake of it, yet summoning commendable outrage at the other’s position, notwithstanding it’s fundamental arbitrariness. | Legal mark-up, being the fossil record of a legal [[negotiation]] between [[legal eagle]]s, bears a striking similarity to a playground argument. It will start as a broad, wide-ranging, harangue; each side adopting fundamentally opposed positions largely for the sake of it, yet summoning commendable outrage at the other’s position, notwithstanding it’s fundamental arbitrariness. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
The process of counter-sniping at idiotic, haughty positions has a cleansing effect. As the blinds, battlements and barricades are gradually shot away, leaving just the serial absurdities behind, each follows the same slow, careful process of reversing, the way one descends a rickety ladder, shouting gleefully, but with ebbing enthusiasm, as they go and by the bottom the debate has reduced into petulant snickering: correcting split infinitives, interposing redundancies, clarifying the already plain, helpfully particularising the general and addending for the the satisfaction of having the last word{{strike||, and/or words, as the case may be}} | The process of counter-sniping at idiotic, haughty positions has a cleansing effect. As the blinds, battlements and barricades are gradually shot away, leaving just the serial absurdities behind, each follows the same slow, careful process of reversing, the way one descends a rickety ladder, shouting gleefully, but with ebbing enthusiasm, as they go and by the bottom the debate has reduced into petulant snickering: correcting split infinitives, interposing redundancies, clarifying the already plain, helpfully particularising the general and addending for the the satisfaction of having the last word{{strike||, and/or words, as the case may be}} | ||
Both sides will walk away declaring victory, but silently resenting the disappointing but pragmatic middle ground they have found. | Both sides will walk away declaring victory, but silently resenting the disappointing but pragmatic middle ground they have found. | ||
3. (''~ language)'': A way of coding ordinary text in a way that [[Machines are fungible|machines]] can understand. This works quite well sometimes: The internet runs on [[hypertext mark-up language]] — “[[html]]”— an acquired taste but one which any fule can understand with a little patience; the fabulous MediaWiki runs on [[wiki mark-up]], which even dear old five-thumbed [[Jolly Contrarian]] can understand — but other adventures have been less successful. There are lawyers at Linklaters who still can’t communicate unemotionally, having coded the entirety of the [[2011 Equity Derivatives Definitions]]— remember those? No? — in [[Financial products Markup Language]]. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Inhouse legal team of the year]] | *[[Inhouse legal team of the year]] | ||