Prenuptial agreements may not be the best example for your argument. Ask any divorce lawyer, and you'll learn that they're basically a legal fiction used to fool the rich that they can safely marry the poor.
I'd be shocked at the latter but, if that is your knowledge then I'll take it. Are you basically saying that nobody has ever used arbitration the way it's written on the tin? (a low-cost way to have a third party mediate in case of minor disagreement?)
why does arbitration even exist in your opinion? (both in theory and practice).
someone's been downvoting me, but I'm just asking open-ended questions. I don't have a strong preconception myself. it's clear that in the rest of this article discussion thread, people are taking "arbitration" to mean "whatever the company wants." is this your experience too? (in such strong terms?)
It's a scam that was invented to keep the inventor out of the trouble they knew their shitty actions would cause for them.
You don't need a contract for voluntary arbitration, you only need it to force someone into it when it's not in their best interests.
> people are taking "arbitration" to mean "whatever the company wants."
The company is the party with the lawyers, and which forces the clause into the contracts. Of course they feel it benefits them.
I highly doubt they're wrong...