83,240
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a| | {{a|plainenglish|}}[[Chicken licken]]s can have fun with this one. A “prior” notice must be given ''before'' the event in question, right? | ||
But what if the notice is given ''afterward'', but is ''expressed to have retrospective effect''? You may wish to strike someone who asks such a stupid question, for such a person is indeed worthy of a walloping, but it does happen. Spotted, negotiated into a [[prime brokerage]] document — no doubt granted at length by an exasperated [[negotiator]] who was ultimately not prepared to [[die in a ditch]] about it: | But what if the notice is given ''afterward'', but is ''expressed to have retrospective effect''? You may wish to strike someone who asks such a stupid question, for such a person is indeed worthy of a walloping, but it does happen. Spotted, negotiated into a [[prime brokerage]] document — no doubt granted at length by an exasperated [[negotiator]] who was ultimately not prepared to [[die in a ditch]] about it: |