<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Arbitration organisations exist but
have unfortunately drifted towards being a lucrative business. So
perhaps some ingenuity might be built around the basic principle:<br>
<br>
1) Each party picks a reputable (semi) independent person.<br>
<br>
2) Those persons agree that each other are not loonies and capable
of rational discussion.<br>
<br>
3) They then pick a third person and then either come to a
complete consensus or at least a 2:1 decision.<br>
<br>
Perhaps just formalising the above might safe enough and flexible
regarding cost? I dimly remember international contracts in the
early '90s using such wording before arbitration became
formalised.<br>
<br>
I suggest that the most straight-forward approach right now is to
leave the text as but flag as a question for formal legal review:<br>
<br>
"We are conscious of cost. 1) Can we reasonably safely drop "in
person" 2) If so, what in your opinion would be the rough cost
effect of stipulating a "certified" mediator?"<br>
<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 18/10/2013 08:15, Simon Poole wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5260D1FB.2050305@osmfoundation.org"
type="cite"> 12, true in person will be expensive, I don't have a
strong feeling about that, anybody else?<br>
<br>
Simon <br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 17.10.2013 20:21, schrieb Eugene
Alvin Villar:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPhqi6+g8pFxZDk2xkwL4tv=ahGnd8Ecx8REpnwx3V2YSDuuhA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Some comment</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
snip<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5260D1FB.2050305@osmfoundation.org"
type="cite">
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPhqi6+g8pFxZDk2xkwL4tv=ahGnd8Ecx8REpnwx3V2YSDuuhA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div> <br>
(12) "to be conducted in person before a certified mediator
agreed by the parties". This seems expensive since an
in-person mediation is required. Who will pay for such
mediation? Unlike in an actual suit where the judge/jury may
award legal fees to one party, there seems to be no cost
provision for mediation.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Otherwise, the document is quite good.<br>
<br>
Eugene<br>
</div>
<div>(OSMPH)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 5:45 PM,
Simon Poole <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:simon@osmfoundation.org" target="_blank">simon@osmfoundation.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">As
agreed at the last LCWG meeting, I've reworked the draft
agreement to<br>
contain most of the changes I proposed, see<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/Agreement"
target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/Agreement</a><br>
<br>
Please review, comment and discuss. The document should
not be<br>
considered the final legal text and insofar you should
focus more on the<br>
general contents and not on specific wording, it will go
through a<br>
formal legal review before being finalized.<br>
<br>
Simon<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>