Not sure how much I agree with this, but it's an interesting thread. Maybe I'm just happy_merchant.jpg, but I strongly prefer objective contracts to subjective / actively think subjective are bad / think that "but they were good" is propaganda that cherry picks scenarios & facts https://twitter.com/PereGrimmer/status/1298291421968052224 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
This Tweet is unavailable.1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
3/ related, a bit from my homesteading bookpic.twitter.com/Ahi8YHVSjB
3 replies 3 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted D.J. Schreffler
4/ Trust is necessary, but not sufficient, to a good contract. See my previous tweet.https://twitter.com/DJSchreffler/status/1298298673378582529 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
D.J. Schreffler @DJSchrefflerReplying to @PereGrimmer @MorlockPA gentleman's deal is ultimately based on trust. The two people trust each other, either because of direct relationship, because of reputation, or a trusted third party stakes his relationship/reputation for the two to extend trust to the other.2 replies 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted D.J. Schreffler
5/ Strongly disagree. If I don't trust someone, I'm not going to do a deal with them, period. If I do trust someone, I'm going to write a contract and walk them through it, to make sure that there is a 100% meeting of minds.https://twitter.com/DJSchreffler/status/1298299112211832838 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
D.J. Schreffler @DJSchrefflerReplying to @DJSchreffler @PereGrimmer @MorlockPIf a deal gets violated, then there's loss of trust and reputation. If the deal is upheld, trust and reputation are at least maintained if not increased. Contracts are for when there is no direct trust or relationship, but both people trust the law to be a neutral arbiter.4 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
6/ Autism >>>>> honor culture f̶i̶t̶e̶ ̶m̶e̶ put it on the block chain
4 replies 1 retweet 18 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted Zachary Clark - 🦬
7/ Valid point. If you trust the legal enforcement system, you can do deals with people that you don't trust. (Though I would still disaggregate 'no data to justify positive trust' vs 'actively distrust').https://twitter.com/ZacharyW_Clark/status/1298316352315224064 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
Zachary Clark - 🦬 @ZacharyW_ClarkReplying to @MorlockPI think the only thing I disagree with is the necessity of trust in contracting (though a good thing if you can find it when looking for a vendor, like you said). A good written contract takes subjective trust out of the equation of a transaction. That guy you trust could flake.1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted Dedicating Ruckus
8/ eh...no, I don't like this I mean maybe, sure, a little bit at the margins, but if I do a deal with the understanding of price X, and he has asymmetric knowledge of what risks exist and how much they cost (from multiple previous runs), onus is on himhttps://twitter.com/ded_ruckus/status/1298323082231201792 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
Dedicating Ruckus @ded_ruckusReplying to @VarangianSkull @MorlockPhmm proposed definition of "honor" in this context like "concern for the others' return on the transaction" e.g. if the sawyer loses a blade while doing your contract, you pay him extra rather than force him to take a loss on the deal3 replies 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted Dedicating Ruckus
9/ Sawyer knows what his blade loss rate is. He can either expose that to me and say "plus $500 per ruined blade, and you can minimize that by not giving me trees that might have steel in them", or he can bake it into the price, based on typical rateshttps://twitter.com/ded_ruckus/status/1298323964662435840 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread
10/ For someone to say "I will do task X, for flat fee Y", and then, half way through it, say "oh, my tool broke, and I'm going to lose money on this job unless you hand me $500" is BS. Fee just increased while the work didn't change. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT CONTRACTS PREVENT
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP
Logically, if a blade breaks every 500 jobs, then it should be built into the pricing at 1/500th per job. And it's absolutely the service provider's duty to know this about the care and upkeep of their tools, and account for it accordingly.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @moritheil @MorlockP
Surprising you with random surcharges is what scammers do. If your business looks like a scam, close down and don't reopen until it doesn't.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.