Double full stop: Difference between revisions

Double full stop (view source)

Revision as of 12:03, 24 July 2020

8 bytes removed , 24 July 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 What is left is a tract with all the usual [[tedious]] legal tropes but improbably strewn with unextinguished [[blob]]s, square brackets and miscellaneous harmless typos, the most feckless of which is the [[double full stop]]..
-The [[double full stop]] — a fossil record indicating the insertion, and then removal, of a sentence that you suspect started, “[[for the avoidance of doubt]], ...” is unusually acute in its [[bathos]]. It says, “this mattered to me once, gravely, but now I am past caring. I hate you all. Just deliver me from this godforsaken project. Let me go. I don’t even want a [[tombstone]]. And ''closing dinner'' did you say? ''Bite'' me.”
+The [[double full stop]] — a fossil record indicating the insertion, and then removal, of a sentence of which no other trace remains, but that you can be sure started, “[[for the avoidance of doubt]], ...” is unusually acute in its [[bathos]]. It says, “this mattered to me once, gravely, but now I am past caring. I hate you all. Just deliver me from this godforsaken project. Let me go. I don’t even want a [[tombstone]].”
 This may, but does not have to, arise during the end game of a vigorously-negotiated [[deal]]. Regulators are prone to it, too. A celebrated example comes from the [[Cayman Islands Monetary Authority]]’s recent, bished, attempt to update its rules on [[asset segregation]] for [[investment fund]]s. Yes, yes: I know what you are thinking: ''be still, my beating heart.'' But ride along with us for a while.