On 2 Jun 2004 15:31:04 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 17:10:44 GMT, felton said:

I am not surprised that you view it that way. Those of us not blessed
with a "legal" background tend to view things in terms of
reasonableness, fairness and equity. It would seem obvious that
Haggie's slip agreement was a one-sided document ignoring those basics
tenets,

As I said in an earlier post, I'm not persuaded that there is any "right"
answer to the question in terms of fairness. Your conclusion is that it's
fairer for all the slip users, including those who are never gone, to bear
the cost of remitting the rental to the person holding the slip. Maybe, but
I don't see why. One thing you can be sure of--it ain't gonna be the marina
operator who bears the cost. Not if he intends to stay in business.

Dave
S/V Good Fortune
CS27

Can anyone else take pity on me and explain what "cost" Dave is
referring to?