Template:M comp disc 2018 CSD 1(c): Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "This is, remarkably, even less elegant at doing the same job that Para 1(b) does in the {{vmcsa}}. I don’t know what happened to {{icds}} between 2016 and 2018, but it someh...")
 
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
This is, remarkably, even less elegant at doing the same job that Para 1(b) does in the {{vmcsa}}. I don’t know what happened to {{icds}} between 2016 and 2018, but it somehow lost its new-found self-confidence, and eschewed the elegant “the {{vmcsaprov|Covered Transactions}} specified in Paragraph {{vmcsaprov|11}}” in favour of the more pedestrian — and I have in mind a drunk pedestrian, navigating the median strip of a busy motorway after nightfall — “the relevant {{imcsdprov|Covered Transactions (IM)}} specified in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph {{imcsdprov|13}}”.
[[1(c) - IM CSD Provision|This]] is, remarkably, an even ''less'' elegant means of achieving the same thing that Para {{vmcsaprov|1(b)}} does in the {{vmcsa}} that [[the squad]] managed in 2016.


Why do you do this to your reading public,. {{icds}}?
I don’t know what happened to {{icds}} between 2016 and 2018, but it somehow lost its new-found mojo, timidly eschewing the (''cough'') elegant “the {{vmcsaprov|Covered Transactions}} specified in Paragraph {{vmcsaprov|11}}” in favour of the more pedestrian — and I have in mind a drunk pedestrian, navigating the median strip of a busy motorway after nightfall — “the relevant {{imcsdprov|Covered Transactions (IM)}} specified in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph {{imcsdprov|13}}”.
 
Why do you do this to your reading public, {{icds}}?

Latest revision as of 09:24, 21 April 2021

This is, remarkably, an even less elegant means of achieving the same thing that Para 1(b) does in the 2016 VM CSA that the squad managed in 2016.

I don’t know what happened to ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ between 2016 and 2018, but it somehow lost its new-found mojo, timidly eschewing the (cough) elegant “the Covered Transactions specified in Paragraph 11” in favour of the more pedestrian — and I have in mind a drunk pedestrian, navigating the median strip of a busy motorway after nightfall — “the relevant Covered Transactions (IM) specified in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 13”.

Why do you do this to your reading public, ISDA’s crack drafting squad™?