81,821
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A theory of negotiation which posits that as the number of people involved in negotiating a {{tag|contract}} goes up, the contract’s brevity, comprehensibility and utility ''goes down''. The longer a negotiation continues, the more complicated and tedious the contract will become, even though its meaningful content will stay constant or, more likely, decline. | A theory of negotiation which posits that as the number of people involved in negotiating a {{tag|contract}} goes up, the contract’s brevity, comprehensibility and utility ''goes down''. The longer a negotiation continues, the more complicated and tedious the contract will become, even though its meaningful content will stay constant or, more likely, decline. | ||
Briefly stated, however anal it may be to add qualifications, clarifications, [[for the avoidance of doubt]]s, [[without limitation]]s and other forensic {{f|celery}}, once these “correctives” have been made it is even ''more'' anal to try to remove them again, seeing as, [[Q.E.D.]], they make no difference to the legal or economic substance of the agreement either way. So, inevitably, one won’t [[I’m not going to die in a ditch about it|die in a ditch about it]], however appealing by comparison that experience might, to a [[prose stylist]], seem, and the agreement will silt up to the point where its original intent is hard or impossible to make out. | Briefly stated, however anal it may be to “[[Adding value|add value]]” through qualifications, clarifications, [[for the avoidance of doubt]]s, [[without limitation]]s and other forensic {{f|celery}}, once these “correctives” have been made it is even ''more'' anal to try to remove them again, seeing as, [[Q.E.D.]], they make no difference to the legal or economic [[substance]] of the agreement either way. So, inevitably, one won’t [[I’m not going to die in a ditch about it|die in a ditch about it]], however appealing by comparison that experience might, to a [[prose stylist]], seem, and the agreement will silt up to the point where its original intent is hard or impossible to make out. | ||
Hiring a dredger is expensive, and since the operating assumption of all [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyers]] is that no-one ever got sued for writing an unintelligible agreement<ref> | Hiring a dredger is expensive, and since the operating assumption of all [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyers]] is that no-one ever got sued for writing an unintelligible agreement<ref>“[[What the eye don’t see the chef gets away with|What the eye don't understand, the chef gets away with]]”.</ref>, you leave it (perhaps tossing in a [[disclaimer]] for good measure) until one day your {{tag|contract}} nears the [[event horizon]] of intelligibility, beyond which it risks collapsing in on itself, taking you with it, and precipitating the [[boredom heat death]] of the universe. | ||
It almost happened in [[2008 ISDA Master Agreement|2008]], so don’t joke about it. | It almost happened in [[2008 ISDA Master Agreement|2008]], so don’t joke about it. | ||
{{seealso}} | {{seealso}} | ||
*[[Adding value]] | |||
*[[Schwarzschild radius]] | *[[Schwarzschild radius]] | ||
{{plainenglish}} | {{plainenglish}} | ||
{{c2|Egg|Astrophysics}} {{c|Paradox}} | {{c2|Egg|Astrophysics}} {{c|Paradox}} | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} |