Staking Thread caveats - debate thread.

[neeko]

IMO the clause is valid, better said up front than not, if the reduction in markup is less than the cost of the clause then don't buy.

I thought there was only one thread that policed people out of the discussion - even is you wanted to make a scientific point on the MMR thread you couldnt if you didn't have a kid.

[rfgqqabc]

How would people feel if a horse bought back action then resold to another investor? I think this caveat is fine. Mantis makes a point but as long as it is in the open then no big deal.

[Simon Galloway]

How does a horse feel if an investor re-sells the action?

[rfgqqabc]

Good point, happened to me once and I had no problem, slightly different situation though. Does a horse have a right to buy his action back at anytime? What if he just refuses to play, not much you can do. A lot of clauses require a deeper level of trust but it is a part of staking.

As far as policing posts is concerned, I believe no member has a right to say what is acceptable unless they believe a scam is taking place. If they link it is poor value deal they shouldn't. The marketplace should decide