Eric: harrumph...legally speaking...there are no such
things as empty words harumph
Alain: It just seems that way to us non-lawyer types!
Eric: (:-]
Alain: What does this smiley mean?
Eric: Uli, this is in need of optimization. If 20
partners want more than 20 partners, they can have
more -- they have unamity, they can change the
agreement. If they don't want more, they don't get
more -- it requires unamity.
Alain: If unanimity is required for changes like
adding some new partners over and above our original
estimate of how many partners we thought we were or
that we thought we would have, then I hesitate to
specify such things until such time that our plans are
more definite.
Uli: There is no need for a limit. It is just extra
words, which are without any real meaning.
Alain: I tend to favour this view too, despite its
lack of legal rigour.
Eric: (...) every comma counts. 'Legal documents are
interpreted in their context' so the words are
actually not meaningless, they only appear redundant
and ineffective because your reading is analytic
rather than synthetic (i.e. teleological).
Alain: That where the lawyer stereotypes come from, no
doubt!
Eric: (Last phrase is deliberately obscure in a cheap
and egoistic attempt to demonstrate my technical
expertise... 8-� ^---(me with glasses looking
learned...)
Alain: (gut-busting laughter)
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
