@the-gipper said:

@tour2ma said:

OUTSTANDING! Biggest LOL in a while...

Now we just have to decide what to call him...

Don't call me at all...not for the kind of cases Saul handled.

@mld-woody said:

No this has nothing to do with Michigan at this point. 

But yes, I am doing it on purpose lol

I am sure you were....but I still believe you really had no clue. 

But hey, at least lawyers have had a lot of TV shows based on their profession.  (most have been really bad).   I am trying to think if they have ever had a TV show based on the engineering profession.  (your kind) 

@nero said:

And I would say he is right. All architects are stupid. 

Nice self-deprecation. But sorry, you don't play dumb as well as Woody.  No one is buying it. 

@dutch-oven said:

Don't think for a second that Woody doesn't do this on purpose or secretly love this... 

These rambling threads are the closest thing to relevance TTUN players get. 

I suspect you are right.   Its just that he is really good at playing at being ignorant.   At least FMU has "Trained"  little Choo Choo well there. 

@darren15 said:

We need to create a TV show called .... Better Call Gip

No,  like I said, I am done with most of that sort of stuff.   I handle some Probate/estate planning/real estate/an occasional dissolution.  The only criminal I handle is when I am the magistrate. 

@darren15 said:

We need to create a TV show called .... Better Call Gip

OUTSTANDING! Biggest LOL in a while...

Now we just have to decide what to call him...

@dutch-oven said:

Don't think for a second that Woody doesn't do this on purpose or secretly love this... 

These rambling threads are the closest thing to relevance TTUN players get. 

No this has nothing to do with Michigan at this point. 

But yes, I am doing it on purpose lol

@the-gipper said:

I mean face it.....If Woody's idea of your profession was similar to his idea of my profession, then  he would have suggested that architects are just a bunch of guys that play around with Lincoln logs all day. 

And I would say he is right. All architects are stupid. 

These rambling threads are the closest thing to relevance TTUN players get. 

^ Simply based on previous experience, I'm not a soothsayer like Dutch. 

@mld-woody said:

The best part about Gip is that he will die fighting for his opinion / answer not matter how much it is proved incorrect.

Not really true. I change my mind a lot about things. 

The problem here is:  it is YOUR total misperception of what lawyers really do that is incorrect.  I suspect the only ideas you have about them is from what you see on TV.  Have you ever actually met a lawyer? Ever had to deal with a matter that requires an attorney?  Like I said, you are as clueless about it as the guy who asks you how your train is running. 

Gip could say the answer is 4. I say 3. Teacher says 3. Other students say 3. Solution manual says 3. Famous mathematician says 3.

Except, when it comes to this:  I say 4, the teacher says 4, the other students and the manual and the famous mathematician....people that know a little all say 4.  You will be the only one saying 2. 

Gip is still staying after class to argue the only real answer is 4 and he'll be there until the teacher goes home, and then he'll pick it up before class tomorrow. Again, he was trained in law. It isn't about getting the right answer. It's just about convincing someone else you're right. 

You here again, show your complete ignorance.  Why do you persist on continuing to be ignorant about what lawyers do with most of their time?   In this case...YOU have the wrong answer.  Now, one assumption may be that you are just being purposely contrarian...pulling all our legs.   Which is guess is OK.  Ha ha ha.  The problem is  that I don't think that is the case.  You really seem to be  going down the Trump Zombie  like route, where you are being purposely obtuse.  

But, here are the facts:  unless you are an attorney that specializes in hard core litigation, we spend little time trying to convince someone else we are right.   

When I make out a will or a trust for people, I certainly do NOT argue with them about what it is that they should put in their will.   When I do a probate estate I certainly do NOT argue with the heirs about how the deceased's property should be distributed. When I handle a real estate transaction there is rarely ever any kind of advocacy involved.  Occasionally there may be some negotiation involved.  When I handle a divorce or dissolution,  it is far more rare that there is a knock down drag out fight over matters.  The law fairly well settles things when it comes to various contentious matters. WE just implement the law. Same with a bankruptcy, which is primarily fact gathering and form filling, then a few minutes in front of a Trustee simply having questions asked of your client. There is no "argument" involved there at all.

Oh, I can argue something if I need to....but I would wager that in my personal career, out of  say 100 hours....maybe one of those would have been spent in "argument".   Unless you consider "negotiation" to be "argument".  Sometimes it can be, mostly not.   Then it would be maybe 5 out of 100.    So, if you are really interested  you could do these things:    Go get a divorce.  Go Bankrupt.  Commit a crime.  Have your kid commit a crime.  Have your loved ones die.  Buy a business or income property.   Sell a business or income property. . Become a Landlord and have to evict someone (rest assured...you the client will have far far more arguments engaging in that than the lawyer you hire would)  Get hit by a car.  Hit someone with a car. Commit malpractice in that job of yours.  Have an elderly relative have to placed into Guardianship because of dementia. Adopt a child.  etc. etc. etc.   Do all those things, and rarely actually will you see your lawyer "arguing" over something. Advising, couseling, interviewing,  implementing.   That is what we do. 

I have actually spent more time "arguing" with idjits like you on here than I ever have in my law practice.  (and, in my case now...my days of even doing that 1% of arguing are done).  

So, go on fiddling with your widgets, or driving your choo choo train.  If you can't see the light, or don't want see it,  then ye shall remain truly blind and you can gnash your teeth over it, or howl at the moon. 

@nero said:

The thing is that it seems funny to me that instead of limiting yourself to discuss said conceptions, you go after the man behind those words and compare him to a relative you are proud of (logically). 

Not knowing your son, I can only judge your sense by your words

I think YOUR perceptions are out of whack...  I didn't go after Woody....I went after his misconceptions....but you do seem to be a deserving person to go after.

I mean face it.....If Woody's idea of your profession was similar to his idea of my profession, then  he would have suggested that architects are just a bunch of guys that play around with Lincoln logs all day. 

@nero said:

I bet the son of the man who taunts and  picks on guys the age of his son has more common sense that said man, too. 

The best part about Gip is that he will die fighting for his opinion / answer not matter how much it is proved incorrect.

Gip could say the answer is 4. I say 3. Teacher says 3. Other students say 3. Solution manual says 3. Famous mathematician says 3.

Gip is still staying after class to argue the only real answer is 4 and he'll be there until the teacher goes home, and then he'll pick it up before class tomorrow.

Again, he was trained in law. It isn't about getting the right answer. It's just about convincing someone else you're right. 

@the-gipper said:

Sorry, a resolution isn't a solution. Resolution doesn't solve a problem. 

Just addition, subtraction, multiplication and division? Hopefully there isn't a mathematician on this board that sees that...

@the-gipper said:

I bet we all have more common sense than you do in our little fingers. Woody is a grown man he can take care of himself and if you actually saw what he said you would realize how far off from reality his conceptions are

The thing is that it seems funny to me that instead of limiting yourself to discuss said conceptions, you go after the man behind those words and compare him to a relative you are proud of (logically). 

Not knowing your son, I can only judge your sense by your words

@nero said:

I bet the son of the man who taunts and  picks on guys the age of his son has more common sense that said man, too. 

I bet we all have more common sense than you do in our little fingers. Woody is a grown man he can take care of himself and if you actually saw what he said you would realize how far off from reality his conceptions are

@the-gipper said:

No.   My son...who I think is not far off Woody's age,   has both more academic smarts  and common sense.  

I bet the son of the man who taunts and  picks on guys the age of his son has more common sense that said man, too. 

@dutch-oven said:

I'm starting to think Woody is Gipper's son. 

No.   My son...who I think is not far off Woody's age,   has both more academic smarts  and common sense.  He understands that there are different disciplines, and that with  those different disciplines have different methods by which "problems" are solved. 

I mean, take a custody dispute.  He has no clue how such a thing would be resolved...or how to arrive at a solution to the differing positions that two parties may take over such a matter that does not involve advocacy and negotiation.    Maybe he has come up with some magic mathematical equation that resolves it.   If so....he needs to advise the Ohio Supreme Court. 

@mld-woody said:

Resolution isn't solution

That is pure ignorance.  And just plain wrong.  When you resolve a dispute, you come to a solution.  At least on Planet Earth.

Advocating isn't problem solving

But it leads to solving problems.  Trust me.     

That is like saying that there is no math problem that can be solved by doing either addition, subtraction, multiplication or division.  

Maybe I was too kind to you when I laid off about you attending the school you did.  If you don't understand the basics of human nature, of conflict resolution...you must be living in some kind of a bubble. 

Advocating isn't problem solving