|
Sun May 14, 2006, 06:13pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
'Noms de net' is French, so I would consider suing the law school you purportedly attended. If you need the name of a good attorney, I can recommend one. A Latin ode - Semper ubi sub ubi. ~Julius Caesar's Mother (Happy Mother's Day)
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions. ~Naguib Mahfouz 
|
|
Sun May 14, 2006, 06:21pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wwtb
Quote:
You win. Not only do I lose, but I suck while doing it. I'm a terrible lawyer and a worse umpire. You get the last word, WWTB. Congratulations. Strikes and outs!
|
|
Sun May 14, 2006, 10:22pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
'Ping Pong' implies that you can volley...from what I've read that is not apparent. I didn't need the last word, most of yours sufficed as nails in your coffin. The only professions I know that use Latin involve legal and medical personnel. Your inability to recognize the difference between a simple French term and archaic Latin lead me to believe that you may better deserve the name 'Windy'. Which law school did you attend?
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions. ~Naguib Mahfouz
|
|
Mon May 15, 2006, 12:44pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Here's what I said when I brought up 1979 for the first time in this thread (my post was a discussion of both 1979 and 1999, and how the AMLU strike (IMHO) is more like 1979 than 1999): (And for the record: 1999 was not a strike. They were legally barred from striking...they signed their right to strike away in the CBA...so they "quit" instead. Why did they do this suicidal move? In my opinion, they did this because their lawyer had an ego the size of Texas. Why did he have a large ego? Because he had been kicking MLB around for two decades. Everyone remembers the 1999 disaster and many think the AMLU is following this same path. Few, however, remember that MLB umps went from making $10 to $30k in 1979 to where they are now ($100k to $350k) because of all those successful strikes). I believe that this strike is much more similar to 1979 than 1999. That MLB strike lasted 6 full weeks. It involved picketing at stadiums, press releases and press conferences. In many ways, the umpires in 1979 were worse off than today's MiLB umpires. In 1979 many were on the verge of going on food stamps, etc. The MiLB umpires are younger and can easily get work paying more than what they make on the field. (Many have kept their off-season jobs). So what happened in 1979? Eventually the umpiring product on the field caused others in baseball to put pressure on the Leagues to settle and get the "regular guys" back on the field. It took awhile for the press to start paying attention...but they did. Did some of the "replacements" do an adequate job on the field. Sure...many had (or are in the middle of) long MLB careers. OK windy...please point out where I stated 1979 was not a strike? I'll give you your props on one point, though: I admit that you have mastered one lawyerly skill: Your ability to make loud boisterous arguments, full of puffery, in an attempt to obscure the fact that the facts themselves are not on your side in a particular case is almost without equal. Actually that's not a lawyerly skill, that's the skill of a carnival potion salesman. "Semper ubi sub ubi" -- nah, I always keep my balls in a ball bag. Contra veritatem lex nunquam aliquid permittit.
|
|
Mon May 15, 2006, 03:13pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
You know, I couldn't resist
Quote:
Latin: "my fault." You are the picture of class and everything we want in an umpire. Just out of curiousity, WWTB, why do you want to know where I went to law school? I have a guess that if I said "Harvard" "Stanford" or "Yale", you'd find a reason to insult that school (for graduating me). If on the other hand, I said "East Pine Tree Tech", you'd find a reason to insult me (for not going to a prestige school). My biography, frankly, is none of your business at this point. I'm happy with it; I have no current need for validation or approval from you. Move to my town, become my assignor, maybe then it's a different story. Then again, you probably wouldn't like it here. We like and respect each other here; we stick together and we drink beer together. We're not perfect, for sure, but generally we don't feel the need to build ourselves up by tearing others down. You win, dude. Take your victory and be happy with it. Strikes and outs!
|
|
Mon May 15, 2006, 03:50pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Like I said.....THAT'S WWTB! You know what you get when you get into it with him. Generally, though, he's funnier.
__________________
Just where are those dang keys?! Last edited by NFump; Mon May 15, 2006 at 03:57pm.
|
|
Mon May 15, 2006, 05:54pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey, good catch on the mea culpa...
The comment about 1979, 1999 and now is pretty obvious. (And for the record: 1999 was not a strike. They were legally barred from striking...they signed their right to strike away in the CBA...so they "quit" instead. Why did they do this suicidal move? In my opinion, they did this because their lawyer had an ego the size of Texas. Why did he have a large ego? Because he had been kicking MLB around for two decades. Everyone remembers the 1999 disaster and many think the AMLU is following this same path. Few, however, remember that MLB umps went from making $10 to $30k in 1979 to where they are now ($100k to $350k) because of all those successful strikes). I believe that this strike is much more similar to 1979 than 1999. (ramble, ramble, ramble) Your first sentence states that 1999 wasn't a strike. Then the first sentence of the next paragraph argues that the current situation is more similar to 1979 then 1999. Duh! Those are your words and you felt compelled to relive the embrassment. Thank you for making my job easy. I would have made a fortune litigating against you.
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions. ~Naguib Mahfouz
|
|
Mon May 15, 2006, 08:17pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
|
|
Tue May 16, 2006, 08:18am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
You can't go back and change what everyone read (oh, wait...I guess you could with the "edit" feature on this website.) YOU wrote, "didn't you just write that there wasn't a strike in 1979," in your magic red font (tm). THOSE WERE YOUR EXACT WORDS. I responded and said I never wrote that there wasn't a strike in 1979. In fact, as you can clearly see, I wrote that there WAS a strike in 1979. YOU WERE WRONG. Now to obscure that fact, you are trying to change the course of this discussion by implying that you initially said that my argument that the AMLU strike is more like 1979 than 1999 was weak because it is so obvious. YOU ARE TRYING TO CHANGE YOUR ARGUMENT IN MID-THREAD. If you wanted to argue that my statement that, "the AMLU strike is more like 1979 than 1999" is/was weak because it is such an obvious statement (as you wrote, "duh!") then that is what you should have written. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU WROTE. You wrote, "didn't you just write that there wasn't a strike in 1979?" I simply corrected you (numerous times) and said NO WHERE HAVE I SAID THAT 1979 WAS NOT A STRIKE. In addition to engaging in puffery you are now engaging in slight-of-hand in an attempt to obscure the fact that you were wrong. Keep it up and soon you'll be able to open your own one-man carnival. Now, since you've indirectly argued ("duh!") that my assertion (that the AMLU strike is more like 1979 than 1999) is weak because it is so obvious...I agree with you that it is very obvious. However, many posters have suggested (on this and other sites) that the AMLU is heading down the path that the MLB umps followed in 1999. This has been directly stated by others. I felt it necessary to counter this argument (as I have in other threads) with the written assertion that I believe that this strike was more like 1979 than 1999. I know that this comparison is so painfully obvious for a man of your prodigious intellect. However, I will not assume that everyone else is on your level. So please be warned: this probably won't be the last time that I state something that, to you, seems so "obvious". Alas, you are not the only reader of my posts. Contra veritatem lex nunquam aliquid permittit.
|
|
Tue May 16, 2006, 08:30am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lawump,
Why do you engage in conversations with WWTB??? He doesn't have a clue and you are going down to his level. Let it go brotha - it's like arguing with a rat and/or manager - sometimes you just gotta walk away. I wouldn't even waste my time running him - he's not worth an ejection report.
|
|
Tue May 16, 2006, 05:28pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Spoken like a person who was beat down too many times. I'm sorry if it still stings a bit...you just never learned. Don't worry, time heals all.
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions. ~Naguib Mahfouz
|
|
Tue May 16, 2006, 05:34pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Alas and alack...I reviewed my contentious post and found that I had done exactly as lawump stated. Mistakenly, I had written 1979 instead of 1999. Mea culpa.
The fact that I furthered my position by talking about how you said there wasn't even a strike that year should have let you in on the topic. However, like an umpire that verbalizes one call while signalling another, I f-ed up. There, I hope you can rest tonight knowing that I was man enough to admit a foible.
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions. ~Naguib Mahfouz
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| corner flag folly | crabber | Soccer | 2 | Tue Dec 19, 2000 08:07am |
Linear Mode
