This essay responds to Jane Danielewicz's and Peter Elbow's recent piece on contract grading in "College Composition and Communication" (December 2009). I discuss the similarities of their approach to my own contract process, finding that we share a quantitative/performative method for grading. I also explore our differences. While they guarantee students a B grade for meeting quantitative minimums and do not judge writing quality unless it is "better than B," I grade writing along the full spectrum A-F. I also negotiate the syllabus and grading system instead of announcing it unilaterally, so as to position students as stakeholders who co-author the terms of the contract. Finally, I argue the value of negotiated contracts in light of the neo-liberal capture of school and society.