[WikiEN-l] Using language which represents events

• Previous message: [WikiEN-l] No, I don't think censorship is too strong a word
• Next message: [WikiEN-l] Playing to the Audience
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

>Instead of using the words "inadmissible evidence" I 
>could have said,
>"during arbitration the users shouldn't be able to 
>drag in everything 
>that
>happened during mediation", but the short phrase
(from
>law, after all I 
>was
>a lawyer) serves. It doesn't imply all the bullshit 
>that goes with 
>formal
>court proceedings, after all we are talking about
>mediation followed by
>arbitration for participants in a voluntary 
>cooperative effort. 
>Nevertheless
>it is useful to use short hand exppressions which
>represent events or 
>things
>which otherwise have to be spelled out at length.
>Having to reinvent a 
>new
>language for our particular proceeding would be quite
>burdensome 
>although we
>probably will develop some language unique to our
>situation.


I wasn't talking about semantics, it's just that when
you start bringing in formalities like making people
redo their entire testemony in arbitration that they
already did in mediation, it makes the whole thing a
lot less efficient.

LDan
Fred

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

• Previous message: [WikiEN-l] No, I don't think censorship is too strong a word
• Next message: [WikiEN-l] Playing to the Audience
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]