Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bmart who wrote (4013)	9/6/1998 11:24:00 PM
From: s martin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26163

1) There is no such thing as licensing for arbitrators. Pugs himself could be an arbitrator in virtually any forum with no licensing whatsoever. All he needs is to meet the requirements of the forum (AAA, NASD, whatever). For a private arbitration, all that has to happen is for the parties to agree to use him as an arbitrator. I had read his previous post as a flack about whether the attorneys representing parties were licensed in NV. Most states don't even require that a person representing parties in arbitration be an attorney; some do. Only California requires that an attorney representing a party in arbitration be licensed in California. But now he's talking about the arbitrators being licensed, which is another thing altogether. 2) It would be impossible to determine that, just because one couldn't locate the site of a purported arbitration, the arbitration didn't take place. Arbitrations can take place in the offices of the forum (AAA, for example), in hotels, in conference rooms of the parties, or in conference rooms rented or borrowed for the occasion. "