undefined | Better HN

0 pointstheli0nheart9y ago0 comments

What he wrote was a statement of fact, not of opinion. Gigster can in fact do something really awful and there is no recourse. In any contract negotiation, sometimes you need to be clear what the problem is. If you, as a party to a contract, indeed feel like there is zero chance that other party will do anything to injure you, will keep to their promises, and has your best interests at heart, what is the point of the contract in the first place?

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

dqv9y ago· 2 in thread

There is an appropriate way to be clear on what the problem is and an inappropriate way to be clear on what the problem is. My initial point is that he did not raise his objections in an appropriate way.

I completely understand why he objected and I would have objected as well, but I would have done so in a more appropriate way.

Mithaldu9y ago

Why is there any onus on him to conduct himself in any kind of appropiate manner if the contract sent to him was in turn wildly appropiate (and not even accompanied by a polite set of words)?

dqv9y ago

There isn't. He didn't have to respond at all. However, he expressed, through his language, an unwillingness to negotiate the contract. That's why he ended up not negotiating the contract.

It's also why when people address me or my employer the way he did, I just don't engage at all.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse