Investors like the idea, brokerages hate it and, in the end, no one may be happy. At the center of the controversy is a proposed NASD rule that would require arbitration panels to detail in writing their decisions. The benefits to investors, reports Registered Rep, seem clear: They finally will get an idea of how the panel arrived at its decision. Brokerages, however, claim the rule is “inherently unfair” and “prejudicial” because it is an option open only to investors or registered representatives or registered investment advisers that have a disagreement with the industry. The danger of the written explanation, according to Registered Rep, is that it may cause delays and result in court challenges that could be costly. What’s more, given that arbitrators would get paid only $200 more for their writing efforts, it may discourage potential panel members. The rule is set to go into effect in the near future, possibly with revisions that would satisfy those complaining about the current version.