<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Trusting Partners and Non-Tech Worlds on the Web</title>
	<link>http://verabass.com/2006/10/24/trusting-partners-and-non-tech-worlds-on-the-web/</link>
	<description>on freedom, entrepreneurship, web development and perspective</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Vera Bass</title>
		<link>http://verabass.com/2006/10/24/trusting-partners-and-non-tech-worlds-on-the-web/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Vera Bass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://verabass.com/2006/10/24/trusting-partners-and-non-tech-worlds-on-the-web/#comment-15</guid>
		<description>Good point about intent, and thank you for contributing your reminiscence.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Agreeing on intent in business dealing, and addressing it in detail, saves not only on intial legal fees, but also reduces the likelihood of litigation later. Compatibility of the individuals involved is, in my experience, just as important.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;From a legal perspective, a partnership is in many ways like a marriage. People generally consider all the aspects of getting married before doing so, yet often do not do the same before entering into a partnership. Take as an example, whether the parties are compatible in nature. We typically analyze business compatibilities in depth, yet often fail to give even a fraction of the same attention to personal compatibility. Part of this is because it takes time to get to know one another and develop trust, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be considered with equal gravitas. I am talking about individual business relationships here, but even in mergers or takeovers of big companies, where many people are 'disposable', culture clash can be a serious issue.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Some business landscapes are more crowded with sharks than others. When you find yourself 'in bed' with one, treating them to their own medicine is often the only antidote. (how many metaphors did I mix that time?). I'll second your preference for being sharkproof, rather than one or the other.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Vera</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good point about intent, and thank you for contributing your reminiscence.</p>
<p>Agreeing on intent in business dealing, and addressing it in detail, saves not only on intial legal fees, but also reduces the likelihood of litigation later. Compatibility of the individuals involved is, in my experience, just as important.</p>
<p>From a legal perspective, a partnership is in many ways like a marriage. People generally consider all the aspects of getting married before doing so, yet often do not do the same before entering into a partnership. Take as an example, whether the parties are compatible in nature. We typically analyze business compatibilities in depth, yet often fail to give even a fraction of the same attention to personal compatibility. Part of this is because it takes time to get to know one another and develop trust, but that doesn&#8217;t mean it shouldn&#8217;t be considered with equal gravitas. I am talking about individual business relationships here, but even in mergers or takeovers of big companies, where many people are &#8216;disposable&#8217;, culture clash can be a serious issue.</p>
<p>Some business landscapes are more crowded with sharks than others. When you find yourself &#8216;in bed&#8217; with one, treating them to their own medicine is often the only antidote. (how many metaphors did I mix that time?). I&#8217;ll second your preference for being sharkproof, rather than one or the other.</p>
<p>Vera</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://verabass.com/2006/10/24/trusting-partners-and-non-tech-worlds-on-the-web/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Nov 2006 13:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://verabass.com/2006/10/24/trusting-partners-and-non-tech-worlds-on-the-web/#comment-14</guid>
		<description>I am LOVING your blog... Another great post!&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;On the subject of agreements (including contracts)... I met a wonderful elderly (Jewish) lawyer back in 1984 with the subject of discussion "contracts in business". He said "intent of the parties will prove to be the critical factor relative to the successful outcome for a contract between two or more parties". This is, honest intent equals better chance of things working. The value of a thoughtfully drawn contract contract is primarily ascertained if things began to go wrong... At least the documented performance requirements of the respective parties can be objectively evaluated by the courts, and at those times of time and money having to be wasted in court the contract will prove of some (limited) value. His concluding comment, "spend time and thought to evaluate intent before undertaking a contract". &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;All these years later that elderly man's wise and beautiful advise still resonates in my head and heart.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;On another occasion we might discuss in depth the issues and implications of the "shark and sharkbait" model relative to a way of living in this world. In sum at this time... Many (including myself) take pride in not being shark, while at the same time, having some perverse measure of satisfaction in knowing that they are not sharks upon suddenly discovering that they have become sharkbait. It took me until 1991 to realize that while it is good I was not a shark, there also was no virtue in needlessly becoming sharkbait. Hmmm... Things do feel better now!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am LOVING your blog&#8230; Another great post!</p>
<p>On the subject of agreements (including contracts)&#8230; I met a wonderful elderly (Jewish) lawyer back in 1984 with the subject of discussion &#8220;contracts in business&#8221;. He said &#8220;intent of the parties will prove to be the critical factor relative to the successful outcome for a contract between two or more parties&#8221;. This is, honest intent equals better chance of things working. The value of a thoughtfully drawn contract contract is primarily ascertained if things began to go wrong&#8230; At least the documented performance requirements of the respective parties can be objectively evaluated by the courts, and at those times of time and money having to be wasted in court the contract will prove of some (limited) value. His concluding comment, &#8220;spend time and thought to evaluate intent before undertaking a contract&#8221;. </p>
<p>All these years later that elderly man&#8217;s wise and beautiful advise still resonates in my head and heart.</p>
<p>On another occasion we might discuss in depth the issues and implications of the &#8220;shark and sharkbait&#8221; model relative to a way of living in this world. In sum at this time&#8230; Many (including myself) take pride in not being shark, while at the same time, having some perverse measure of satisfaction in knowing that they are not sharks upon suddenly discovering that they have become sharkbait. It took me until 1991 to realize that while it is good I was not a shark, there also was no virtue in needlessly becoming sharkbait. Hmmm&#8230; Things do feel better now!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>