by DNCall 57 Replies latest jw friends
The tension here so much mirrors my situation with you
"WE" don't have a "situation." YOU have a situation. BOTR, this is the last post of yours to which I will ever respond. Your emotional outbursts are tiresome.
I was correcting my own post when I most recently referred to 144,001.
Earlier, I had posted that I thought he was an attorney. After reviewing his posts in greater detail, I no longer think so, and I didn't want anyone giving his opinions extra veritas based upon my prior statement.
You never state you were a member of the CA bar administration system. Oh, now I see. Excuse my drivel. I thought you were only a law student.
Somehow he will have to move forward in life after your decision that he is not competent in CA law. Where I come from such decisions are left to the state, not private individuals on forums that are not legal forums.
Band, I truly appreciate your expert opinions, however please quit wearing your feelings on your sleeve. Every public group has its @$$holes. If you find someone like that -- ignore them. Don't feed the trolls.
Thanks for coming back and continuing to provide your input.
Doc
Just, which law school did you graduate from? I might have asked you if you wrote for the "Law Review" for your school? We had a party for a friend who graduated in the the upper ten percent of his class in Lyola Law School. This guy is making $350,000 a year dealing with big developments fighting against the "Americans With Disabilities Acts" lawyers, he has not given his life up to make jr. partner. The thought of working eighty plus hours and moving a sleeping bag into the firm does not appeal to him.
Will you dedicate your soul to "the firm" to make "partner"?
<<<< Earlier, I had posted that I thought he was an attorney. After reviewing his posts in greater detail, I no longer think so, and I didn't want anyone giving his opinions extra veritas based upon my prior statement.>>>>
Get over yourself, Justitia. The reality is, you're not a lawyer, you know very little about the law and have made materially false statements about the law on this forum, and now you are purporting to be qualified as the judge of whether others have a legal background.
You were wrong when you stated that Conti would only get to keep 25% of the punitive damages awarded, and I corrected you. You foolishly relied upon a treatise in expressing a false statement of the law. A lawyer would know that one must check the validity of authority cited in a treatise before relying on it, but you're no lawyer, you're just a cocky student who wants others to believe that you actually know the law.
Your personal attacks were unprovoked, and illustrative of your low self esteem and shallow ego.
You have a lot to learn . . .
you're just a cocky student who wants others to believe that you actually know the law.
LOL! Well 144,001, nothing says "cocky student" like fully admitting to mistakes, as I did! Nothing say "cocky student" like posting disclaimers saying I don't know CA. law and haven't researched certain subjects! Ya got me there! ; )
now you are purporting to be qualified as the judge of whether others have a legal background.
I cannot remember ever commenting on "whether" you had a legal background. Can you point to an example? I commented on extent.
Regardless, I am qualified to make my own decision as to what I think is the extent of another poster's legal background, and it is appropriate for me to clarify my posts. In fact, everyone on this board is "qualified" to make a personal determination of "whether [any poster has] a legal background," and if so, the extent. And they can determine the weight to which they will give that person's posts based upon their personal determinations.
Your personal attacks were unprovoked, and illustrative of your low self esteem and shallow ego.
The above statement is interesting. Do you have an example of any post in which I personally attacked you?
That's a pretty 'off the chart' accusation. At the most, I recanted my prior post in which I said I thought you were an attorney, and I stated my reasons: you didn't cite to authority and responded negatively when other posters, such as Cedars, challenged your non-cited conclusions.
The tone of your post is incredibly hostile, as were your several other angry posts regarding me to which I did not bother to respond. It is a disproportionate response to my rather innocuous posts. Perhaps a little time reflecting on why you are so angry might be beneficial.
Nevertheless, if you felt personally attacked, I apologize for that. Perhaps I should have made the intent of my posts more clear. Good day.
I'm out for a week...or two...
| "Scott[77]...and when ugly arguments recently escalated to the point where forum members were deleted, you expressed the sick pleasure you derived from the unfortunate outcome" | |
| 144001 |
Hello Mr. 144001, You have knowingly violated forum # 11 which states, "Publicly disputing or arguing about moderator decisions
If you disagree with any action taken then please raise it via email or PM" The Mods are taking notice of this blantant violation.
Scott77
<<<< LOL! Well 144,001, nothing says "cocky student" like fully admitting to mistakes, as I did! Nothing say "cocky student" like posting disclaimers saying I don't know CA. law and haven't researched certain subjects! Ya got me there! ; )>>>>>
Indeed. And nothing says "cocky student" like continuing to put your foot in your mouth, as you have done here. You have chosen to represent yourself as an authority, based on the premise that you are a law student. You have also made certain statements about the law that were incorrect. You didn't qualify your statements that you hadn't researched them; rather, you simply presented them as facts that we all should accept since you're a law student and therefore know more than the rest of us. You don't. And you proved that on this forum. Yet you have the audacity to now make ignorant statements about my background, despite the fact that you know absolutely nothing about me. You are indeed a cocky student, and you will indeed learn some big lessons.
I will provide references to legal authority for anything I've stated here that you care to challenge, Justitia. Put up, or shut up.
