Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

when I was patent examining a friend who was the examiner in marital aids got a call from an attorney who wanted to bring in a model to show why his client's device was so much better. em's supervisor made him turn it down. fuck the man.

Icky's rules for commuter train travel
 

I wasn't on that train but here are my train travel rules nevertheless.

Never ride in the 1st car. It is exceptionally rare that something bad happens but when it does, the casualties are usually in the 1st car.

If you can, sit by an emergency window. Understand how to use it. Pull the red handles down, pull the window gasket off, push the window out. I have had to do thus during my commute at least once with no instruction for the commuter RR people.

If something bad happens, don't be scared to bail. Don't wait for RR people to instruct you. They are more apt to give instructions like the Port Authority gave people in the TT 9/11 --"Every thing is fine, nothing to worry about." The people who bail quickly are usually the survivors in any such situation.

Never go anywhere near the 3d rail.

My heart goes out to the victims.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

I recently received a deal toy upon which the Investment Bankers got the company's ticker wrong.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

Oops. It's remarkable how a careless error can make someone look like an idiot (or, well, careless).

I am collecting proposals from brokers to market three properties that my clients received in the settlement of a trust. These are teardowns in a neighborhood that I lived in many years ago, before law school, where I regularly saw crack dealers and street hookers -- which means that each storefront is only worth $2MM or so in this insane city.

Each broker submitted thick glossy presentation books. Lovely. Lots of colors. But when I got to the price quote for one, it referred to charging "four percent (5%)" commission. WTF?

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

Counteroffer with three percent (2%) commission, and tell them you just asked them to shave a percent.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

You trying something new? Because it's not really working.

TM

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

Correct.

TM

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

Atticus had a big win yesterday, requiring a neighbor to cut his grass to 2" consistent with local zoning, so he was feeling his oats and getting a bit aggressive.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

Ugh. '85 Bears were 30 years ago.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

I would gladly kill to get those 30 years back.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

?

There was more than a minute left on the clock. The Seahawks used 40 seconds between 1st and 2nd down. When Marshawn Lynch (who hadn't had a negative run all day, by the way) drove them to the 1 yard line, Belichick should have called a timeout because everyone in the world (including Belichick) other than Carroll and Bevell knew Seattle was going to run the ball directly into the end zone the first chance they got because why risk it? Hell, people were saying that they should just let them score immediately since the probability was so high that they were going to score. That would give Brady a decent amount of time to mount a game-winning drive. He's done more with less.

Instead, he didn't call a timeout, betting the whole game on an improbable goal-line stand. And his post-game admission that he would have called a timeout if they had run it on second down makes absolutely no sense because he's basically saying, in order to maximize time after Seattle scored, he would have done then what he should have done on the previous down.

TM

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

How hard is it to explain the deal toy? My client has a wide product line and they are so thoughtful that they size the deal toy to the lawyer.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

You are starting to annoy me.

If you want to sit here and talk numbers, don't fucking ignore the ones sitting opposite your side of the argument. The ones that say Lynch hadn't been tackled for a loss the whole game. The ones that say Seattle is one of the top teams on short-yardage. The ones that say the Patriots are one of the worst teams on short-yardage defense. Hell, the very articles you sent me are fucking full of them. They state them and then try to formulate an argument for why the call could be defensible.

If you think you're somehow some sort of fucking genius because you can site a few articles that take a stand contrary to the dozens upon dozens of articles that say the call was idiotic, then enjoy that revelation. By yourself.

TM

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

I agree it would make no sense if Seattle had run Lynch and for the Pats to take a timeout then. Either Seattle takes a TO or it has to hurry to the line, and then why take a TO for that? The game ends on that play.

Re: A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single
 

Do you even comprehend how hard it is to get a unanimous verdict of “unkempt” on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard of proof? Well then, shut up.