Page 2 of 2

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 12 Jan 2019, 13:14
by Aussie
SethBullock wrote:So here's my lawyer story.

I arrested a guy for DUI. Now, in my state, this triggers two things that move along on their own separate tracks.

DUI is a misdemeanor crime, so the arrest triggers a prosecution for that crime. This adjudication moves along at its own rate, on its own time.

On a separate track, if the arrested driver refused to take a breath test, or if they took the breath test and failed it, our Dept of Motor Vehicles (DMV) will suspend their drivers license for a period of time. They will suspend that license 30 days after the arrest. Now, if the driver wishes to contest the suspension before it takes effect, they are entitled to a hearing with an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who is an employee of the DMV. The driver may be represented by a lawyer, and the arresting officer is sworn and gives testimony. It is very similar to a trial. The probable cause for the stop must be weighed, and the officer must prove that there was probable cause to then make the arrest and request the breath test.

So a couple of weeks after I made the arrest, I received a subpoena to appear at the hearing. So I arrived at the appointed time and place. The driver was not there, but his lawyer was there. (The driver does not have to be present if he has a lawyer there to represent him.) The lawyer was a nice younger fellow in his middle 30s, nicely dressed, and polite and friendly. We introduced ourselves to each other. I'll call him Mr Smith.

He told me, however, that our driver had hired him but that he had not yet received his retainer fee from him, and he wasn't sure he could go through with the hearing. There was about 10 minutes before the hearing was supposed to begin, and he called his secretary on his cell phone.

"Hi Shirley. Hey, has the mail come in yet? Yes, I'll wait."

A minute later ...

"No? OK, thanks."

With 5 minutes to go, he makes another call to his secretary. Same result.

Now it's time for the hearing to begin. The ALJ asks the lawyer if he's ready to proceed. Sheepishly, he explains that he hasn't received his retainer and asks for a delay of about 10 minutes or so. He says his office ought to receive its mail any minute now.

The ALJ replies that his client's hearing is scheduled for the 10:30-noon time slot, and "so it's your time, counselor. We can wait."

So another 10 minutes goes by, and he calls his secretary. The mail hasn't come in yet.

Another 10 or 15 minutes goes by, and he calls his secretary.

"Hi, it's me. Has the mail come in yet? It has? Is that retainer there in the mail?"

Pause while she looks ...

"It isn't? You're sure? Okay. Thanks. Bye."

The ALJ, the lawyer, and I had all been sitting around a table, and so the ALJ had also heard his end of the conversation.

"Well counselor, what do you want to do?", asked the ALJ.

A look of consternation on his face as he thought about it. Then he said with a sigh and sort of a roll of his eyes, "OK, let's go ahead with it."

So, first the police officer gives his testimony, which I did, and answers any questions posed by the ALJ. Then it's the lawyer's turn to question the officer.

This lawyer asked me two questions. Both questions were very intelligent questions that went to the heart of the probable cause for the initial stop. They were good questions. I expected I was in for a very good grilling.

Then he offered a brief argument for the record, and had nothing further.

The ALJ ended the hearing and said that she would render her decision and notify the lawyer and client by mail, as is normal. Hearing closed.

Now we're off the record and the lawyer says to me,

"Officer *****, I just want to say that I appreciated your testimony. I thought you were very honest and professional."

"Well thank you, Mr Smith. I appreciate that. And I thought your questions were really good questions."

"Well", he replied ...



"If that retainer had come in, there would have been a whole lot more of them."



I laughed, he laughed, we shook hands and went our separate ways.

About a week later I received a copy of the ALJ's decision. Suspension upheld.

True story.


Ironically, Smith probably exposed himself to a professional negligence claim. You either do the job properly, or get out of Court entirely.

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 12 Jan 2019, 16:00
by johnsmith
Sprintcyclist wrote:
HBS Guy wrote:Depends on the pupil too, Sprint!


Your teaching abilities are about the worst I have ever encountered.
You have none. You know beer, you have no idea on teaching.

I have learnt about learning and passed a course on teaching. Many people congratulate me on my teaching.
I passed my degree with a commendation award and passed every exam the first time.
What you do is terrible and has almost no teaching outcome.



good thing he's not your teacher then, :roll :roll :roll

If you like his advice, say thank you and shut up. If you don't like it, skip straight past it. Ya ingrate.

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 12 Jan 2019, 19:08
by Sprintcyclist
HBS Guy wrote:OK so I won’t try to help you anymore with your beer making.

When I did brew lessons, even just brew demos at the shop I got a high number who became advanced mash brewers so I do not think my teaching is too bad.


Well, you have been almost zero help so far, so I appreciate your new offer.

What aspect of your teaching do you think good?
It is not listening or answering any questions, because you do not do that.
it's not accepting any other ideas either, as you don't even accept ideas about yeast from yeast manufacturers !

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 12 Jan 2019, 22:22
by HBS Guy
That is right, I would not do direct pitching. It is not hard to do and the yeast is ready to go as soon as it hits the wort.

Good luck with your beermaking.

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 13 Jan 2019, 04:15
by Sprintcyclist
Sprintcyclist wrote:
HBS Guy wrote:OK so I won’t try to help you anymore with your beer making.

When I did brew lessons, even just brew demos at the shop I got a high number who became advanced mash brewers so I do not think my teaching is too bad.


Well, you have been almost zero help so far, so I appreciate your new offer.

What aspect of your teaching do you think good?
It is not listening or answering any questions, because you do not do that.
it's not accepting any other ideas either, as you don't even accept ideas about yeast from yeast manufacturers !


The question was What aspect of your teaching do you think good?

not 'are you going to ignore the advice of yeast manufacturers ?
You have already said that, I accept you will ignore their advice.

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 13 Jan 2019, 07:09
by DonDeeHippy
Remember Monk there r no Stupid questions just stupid ppl

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 13 Jan 2019, 08:55
by HBS Guy
Heh.

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 13 Jan 2019, 09:21
by johnsmith
DonDeeHippy wrote:Remember Monk there r no Stupid questions just stupid ppl



they're usually the ones asking the stupid questions :roll

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 13 Jan 2019, 19:39
by Sprintcyclist
Q / What aspect of your teaching do you think good?
No answer


Q/ Can I make beer using just the can and a kg of malt,not a can and a mix?
No answer for a week, then the wrong answer !!!!!!!!!!
it's a yes/no question. A 50/50 chance, he finally answers and get's it wrong

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 13 Jan 2019, 20:59
by HBS Guy
I gave you good advice there. Rehydrate your yeast is another bit of good advice.

Re: Who understands gobbledegook writing?

PostPosted: 14 Jan 2019, 07:23
by Sprintcyclist
HBS Guy wrote:I gave you good advice there. Rehydrate your yeast is another bit of good advice.


You typed up directives. That is not a learning experience.
I did not ask for that. I asked 2 specific questions that you chose not to ask.


The Yeast manufacturers did experiments and concluded that is should be used dry. They said 'Use it dry, that is how it is made to be used.'
Given they make it and have done experiments on it, I tend to agree with them.
Did you notice the mark on the bar graphs showing the variations ?
Dry pitching shows less variation over any other way.

Take care