Sage the Lawyer

Without the sun, we never would have existed. Can something that didn’t exist be dead? I think no. Silly sun, narcissistic asshole and bad at logic.

Oh, they think lawyers know about the loopholes, it’s actually a part of their brainwashing. They believe the entire legal profession is a giant conspiracy, that we’re taught how to get away with not paying for stuff in law school, and that we intentionally deceive the public so that they don’t find out how corrupt we are.

Cuz, y’know, it’s super easy to keep a conspiracy going in ~200 law schools, each of which admits hundreds of students at a time, and nobody ever drops out and feels spiteful enough to leak the “truth.” Yup.

No, I want you to provide a source that says Go was invented in Korea. I also checked Wikipedia, and several other sites about Go, because you made me curious, since I had always heard it was invented in China.

Everything I’ve seen has said it was invented in China.

As opposed to your source which is… “Trust me bro.”

They asked for your source, not why theirs was wrong. You still haven’t provided one.

Okay well I just uploaded it to an imgur album. Here you go: https://imgur.com/a/yoJch6n

My only experience with one wasn’t all that bad, but still kind of funny.

Client was charged with resisting/obstructing and disorderly conduct. Basically, the cops had closed a road because of an accident. Client was on his bike, and the officer told him the road was closed and he had to go a different way. Client flipped his shit, started yelling that the officer had no right to tell him where to go (yes they do), and no right to ask for identification (yes, they do).

Client finally started going an alternate route, and the officer was going to just let it go. But then he doubled back and tried to blow past the officer. Got arrested. Hired us.

I called the prosecutor to see what kind of reduction they’d be willing to do (standard procedure), and they were willing to drop one charge and reduce the other to an ordinance violation (pay a small fine).

Told the client this, who then flipped out on me for talking to the prosecutor without his consent (???) and without him there (which is, y’know, what he hired us to do). Fired our firm and demanded a refund. We all had a good laugh, and he did not get a refund.

Yep, this is a common expression, and I fully endorse it.

The Wisconsin Journal of Family Law published an article about them a couple months back, their October 2023 issue. I’m not sure exactly how public that is, might only be for members. And for some reason I can’t upload the pictures I just took to this comment. I’m probably doing something wrong, haven’t shared pictures in a Lemmy comment before. I’ll try something else in a bit maybe, or if anyone wants to walk me through it I’d appreciate it, but I can’t spend too much time trying to figure this out right now. Work and all that.

But I kind of said it wrong for simplicity’s sake. It’s not that 1 in 100 filings has something (well, maybe it is, but…), it’s that one of their strategies is to file a pleading with 100 points of nonsense, and then in that nonsense, they bury something that cites a real law which says a response is required. If you don’t respond, you lose.

The article said don’t engage them in face to face arguments because they’re insane and that’s a waste of time, but make sure to read their filings carefully.

Actual lawyer here. Just in case anyone was somehow unsure, this is utter nonsense.

In fact, calling it nonsense might be giving nonsense a bad name. Completely deranged might be better.

But yes. These people do exist. And they are a pain in the fucking ass. Every 100th filing they actually say something that does have legal precedent, and that you can’t ignore. So you have to actually read every line of their bullshit. Nobody wants to be the lawyer that actually lost to a sovereign…

But hey, at least they usually end up paying our fees in the end.

Maybe I was thinking of just birds, since the other one in my head is the European Starling, which is awful for pretty much the same reasons as Sparrows.

Thanks for the extra info!

If this is America, and it was a House Sparrow, bastard had it coming. Awful invasive species, and it’s one of, I believe, two animals birds which is always legal to kill here. Fuck sparrows. I’d swipe right.

Edit thanks to extra info from replies.

That might be a limited (sealed/draft) tournament, where you have to build your deck out of cards you get from packs at the start of the tournament. To this day, those tournaments have 40 card deck minimums and no 4 card limits.

Oh zombie hunt. That was the first deck I ever built on mtgo. And then in my first game trying it some guy ragequit because I wasn’t playing a meta deck but was still winning. Sorry you can’t beat a meme bro, I have no regrets.

Interesting. Hilarious. And annoying. Thanks for the info, that analogy helped a lot. I don’t think TCG players will ever cease to amaze me with some of the shit they pull, I love it.

I guess I don’t really understand Yu-Gi-Oh all that well. I know in Magic there’s a bit of a meme deck based around the card Battle of Wits, which basically says if you have over 200 cards in your library at the start of your turn you win the game. But it was never truly competitive because other decks would run it over before they could find and play one of those 4 cards in their 300 card deck or whatever. The synergies in other decks were just too strong for it to survive long enough. People occasionally got lucky enough to place well in a tourney here and there, but it was never a meta deck in competitive play.

Kinda figured that same problem would exist in Yu-Gi-Oh but yeah, I don’t really know enough to say.

I see what you’re saying about the shuffling, that would be annoying as hell. Do Yu-Gi-Oh rounds not have time limits?

It doesn’t apply to just basic lands, yeah. But any special lands you can only have 4. It’s been a rule for as long as I’ve played (since 2017), but I do know it wasn’t a rule at the start of the game. I think they added it pretty early on though, as a response to people making decks out of just channel and fireball for instant wins.

And, sure, you could keep the ratio of card types the same, but while I don’t play Yu-Gi-Oh, I have to imagine there are some cards better than other cards. So to make a deck that big, you’d have to include cards that just aren’t as good. Playable, sure, but I can’t imagine it finding its best cards consistently enough to be competitive.

According to a quick google, you can only have up to three of the same cards in a Yu-Gi-Oh deck. So you can’t keep the ratios the same.

I don’t play Yu-Gi-Oh, but I play Magic, and it’s similar there, but you can have up to four of any card.

I imagine most trading card games are like this, otherwise you could just make a deck of only the most OP card or something. Not exactly fun to build, or play, or play against.

But also:

Most veterinarians doubt the existence of a syndrome known as “whisker fatigue”, but it is important that pet owners understand the structure and function of cat whiskers, and that they treat their cats’ whiskers with respect. And, yes, it is possible that some cats have particularly sensitive whiskers.

It makes sense that good cat care includes observing cats’ eating habits carefully, and if they seem to be averse to eating from narrow, high-sided food bowls, perhaps owners should consider offering food in a different type of receptacle such as a “bowl for whisker relief”, and allowing them to drink from a water fountain, even if the theory behind this is highly debatable.

https://cats.com/whisker-fatigue

Seems while there may not be hard evidence, it can still be a preference for cats to have wider bowls.