Re:Ex-French trader must pay $6.7 billion for fraud
by frisco on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @11:50AM
(#1760175)
I'm confused by this title. Was being kicked out of France part of his punishment, but he's still a trader? Or is he a French ex-trader? This could be rephrased for clarity.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Ex-French trader must pay $6.7 billion for fraud
by bambax on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @11:57AM
(#1760210)
Ex-(French trader).
This ruling is crazy (pay back everything (how??) and go to prison for three years). I very much doubt it can stand on appeal.
Re:Ex-French trader must pay $6.7 billion for fraud
by randomtask on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @12:07PM
(#1760247)
I don't get why the parent was downvoted. Since when does HN get up in arms about grammar nazis? ;) The term "Ex-(French trader)" implies that he could now be, for example, a German trader. I think the proper nomenclature should be "French ex-trader" with the "ex-" prefix being most tightly bound to the thing that the subject was formerly. I may well be wrong about that and I'm fully willing to accept the consequences of the Law of Prescriptive Retaliation. :)