4 ms·

> I will most certainly take care to properly read and understand And when you don't understand the dense legalese how did you get clarification? Did you pay a

by josho 6y ago

> I will most certainly take care to properly read and understand And when you don't understand the dense legalese how did you get clarification? Did you pay a few hundred dollars to have a lawyer review the contract and explain it to you? Perhaps call the company up to have a minimum wage call center employee explain it to you? Or just come up with an interpretation of the text that seems to make sense and conclude that must be what they mean? After awhile even doing that grows tiresome for all but the most important services. So, we really do need something better.

freeflight 6y ago
> And when you don't understand the dense legalese how did you get clarification? By asking people knowledgeable in the field I trust, if it's big and relevant enough I might even invest in a lawyer, but at the very least I will put effort into trying to understand it. If that doesn't work then I will be way more skeptical of whatever I'm supposed to agree to because anything written to be purposefully vague, and difficult to understand, does not entail a lot of trust nor confidence in me. But not understanding, and making no efforts on your end to understand, is a very poor defense for entering anything legally binding: Making sure you understand is ultimately up to you and only you because at the end of the day it will be your ass and your assets on the line. Which is a mindset even shared by WSB: That submission is full of regulars reiterating how people have been told not to buy GME on margin exactly because of what ended up happening.
anomaloustho 6y ago
> when you don’t understand the dense legalese This confuses me a bit because I have personally never encountered anything in a legal document that I didn’t understand. I am not in support of reading all of the TOS, as that seems like an impossible feat, but when I have read any TOS or contract, it seemed understandable. The hardest thing for me is comma separated if statements written in plain English. But that’s mainly because it can be difficult to hold the conditionals in short term memory - but it has always been manageable. What’s an example of dense or unintelligible legalese?
- josho 6y ago
  I opened a new bank account earlier this week, I've got 8 documents to review. Here's a section at random on how interest is calculated. > We calculate interest each month based on the lowest Daily Closing Balance. We pay interest on the last Business Day of April and October. To earn any interest, the account must stay open for one full calendar month before the payment date. Not dense language at all. But, note how Daily Closing Balance is title case, so that means its been defined elsewhere, so I need to flip back and refer to the definition then flip back to page 8. The definition which by the way isn't how you'd likely define a closing balance. Next part of interest is April, and October. So, interest is only paid twice a year⁉ That makes no sense, so I scan around and see this is for the Savings X account. But, I don't think that's what the name of my account is called, so now I have to flip through all 8 docs to find what specifically my account is named. Except none of the docs actually tell me which product I signed up for, instead I figure this out by comparing the fees outlined in the account types with what I wrote down when choosing the plan with the agent that I spoke with earlier. Now back to the paragraph above and realize I'm realizing I've been analyzing the interest schedule for an account that isn't relevant to me. Scanning for my account I find that the interest is calculated as one would expect--some special conditions around the daily closing balance. I'm frustrated and growing tired, but that is only 1 paragraph in 1 of 8 documents. The bank clearly made no effort to include only the sections that apply to me. So there is a great chance that I'm either going to miss a nuance in a section (like how they've defined daily closing balance to have some exclusions), or ignore a section believing that it doesn't apply to me. Keep in mind you and I are likely both college educated, have training in logic and can figure this out if we spend the time/energy. Do you think the average American has a chance to understand what they've signed?

by josho 6y ago

freeflight 6y ago

> And when you don't understand the dense legalese how did you get clarification? By asking people knowledgeable in the field I trust, if it's big and relevant enough I might even invest in a lawyer, but at the very least I will put effort into trying to understand it. If that doesn't work then I will be way more skeptical of whatever I'm supposed to agree to because anything written to be purposefully vague, and difficult to understand, does not entail a lot of trust nor confidence in me. But not understanding, and making no efforts on your end to understand, is a very poor defense for entering anything legally binding: Making sure you understand is ultimately up to you and only you because at the end of the day it will be your ass and your assets on the line. Which is a mindset even shared by WSB: That submission is full of regulars reiterating how people have been told not to buy GME on margin exactly because of what ended up happening.

anomaloustho 6y ago

> when you don’t understand the dense legalese This confuses me a bit because I have personally never encountered anything in a legal document that I didn’t understand. I am not in support of reading all of the TOS, as that seems like an impossible feat, but when I have read any TOS or contract, it seemed understandable. The hardest thing for me is comma separated if statements written in plain English. But that’s mainly because it can be difficult to hold the conditionals in short term memory - but it has always been manageable. What’s an example of dense or unintelligible legalese?

josho 6y ago
I opened a new bank account earlier this week, I've got 8 documents to review. Here's a section at random on how interest is calculated. > We calculate interest each month based on the lowest Daily Closing Balance. We pay interest on the last Business Day of April and October. To earn any interest, the account must stay open for one full calendar month before the payment date. Not dense language at all. But, note how Daily Closing Balance is title case, so that means its been defined elsewhere, so I need to flip back and refer to the definition then flip back to page 8. The definition which by the way isn't how you'd likely define a closing balance. Next part of interest is April, and October. So, interest is only paid twice a year⁉ That makes no sense, so I scan around and see this is for the Savings X account. But, I don't think that's what the name of my account is called, so now I have to flip through all 8 docs to find what specifically my account is named. Except none of the docs actually tell me which product I signed up for, instead I figure this out by comparing the fees outlined in the account types with what I wrote down when choosing the plan with the agent that I spoke with earlier. Now back to the paragraph above and realize I'm realizing I've been analyzing the interest schedule for an account that isn't relevant to me. Scanning for my account I find that the interest is calculated as one would expect--some special conditions around the daily closing balance. I'm frustrated and growing tired, but that is only 1 paragraph in 1 of 8 documents. The bank clearly made no effort to include only the sections that apply to me. So there is a great chance that I'm either going to miss a nuance in a section (like how they've defined daily closing balance to have some exclusions), or ignore a section believing that it doesn't apply to me. Keep in mind you and I are likely both college educated, have training in logic and can figure this out if we spend the time/energy. Do you think the average American has a chance to understand what they've signed?