I can’t believe how long some of these threads can go on. Whenever Stoid says something, I wonder if it’s purpose is to argue a point, or keep the attention, (be it negative or other) on her.
Oy… you don’t know the half of it!
If Stoid and curlcoat got into an argument, I think the thread length would approach infinity. It would be the immovable object meeting the unstoppable force.
Yeah, that comment from the judge sounds very similar to what everybody with a shred of legal knowledge was telling Stoid in her last couple of threads or so. “Yes, you’ve read a lot. Yes, you’re well-versed in terminology. But you still don’t really know what you’re doing and that’s going to be obvious in the courtroom.” Yep, it was obvious in the courtroom. Surprise.
When I believe I’m right, A leads to B. Which makes perfect sense, since the endless threads of late have been about me and my life. I used to take it to the mat on pretty much any subject that interested me if I remained convinced my point of view was correct, but I finally tired of that awhile back. (8 years of Bush exhausted my public outrage reserves completely, and my powerlessness became too painful.)
But I’m not arguing with myself in these threads. Why do my opponents feel the need?* Again…my dog, my fight. What’s theirs? I know…entertainment value. But the very fact that a person finds entertainment in making it viciously personal makes their opinion worthless to begin with.
One of the most important gifts I’ve received through the pain and struggle I’ve been through has been the bone-deep understanding of something I’ve always known intellectually: that everything we do is ultimately about ourselves, both good and bad, so there’s no point in taking any of it too personally. And the more intense something is, the more internal its genesis.
Fortunately that bone-deep knowledge first came through on the positive side, in connection with the love in my life. The idea was beautifully portrayed in the movie Marvin’s Room by Diane Keaton’s character Bessie, who is facing death after spending her life caring for her invalid father and dotty aunt, while her sister, played by Meryl Streep, had fled to have her own life 20 years earlier and is now back to help out. At one point Bessie says:
This applies to everything, very much including my whole legal situation: from my ex, to the judge, the attorneys, the receiver, to me - whatever it may look like at first glance, none of it is personal. If I love you, it’s about me, if I hate you, it’s about me. We’re all just working out our shit with ourselves. Understanding this is incredibly freeing, it takes away about 95% of life’s angst.
And on that note… an appeal brief is a damned serious undertaking, and I need to get back to mine.
Oh, except someone was snarking and was a bit confused regarding my interaction with the judge, getting it exactly backwards - the issue was the structure of my documents, the format details that need to be dealt with but which have zero to do with the content and purpose of the documents. On “the merits”, the law of the issue, I was 100% right. (I re-wrote my papers to better conform to standards that night and came back the following day, whereupon she told the receiver to back the fuck off, but did not rule regarding the legality of his actions - that’s what came months later in her single sentence.)
*Let us not forget, my OP was not in any way provocative, it was just a perfectly average little rant about my annoyance at the way a clerk responded to a question about a policy. If my name hadn’t been on it, it would have died after a page or two of people talking about dumbass customer service experiences.
I didn’t read your last post, and I’m not interested about what happens in this thread after I cut myself off from it. 
Stoid, you’re doing this a bit backwards. Instead of burying that compliment from the judge on the seventh page of an unrelated thread, why don’t you open another thread and start off with it? That way everyone knows what has happened with your case.
It’s certainly clear to me: Stoid is right – and everyone else is wrong. Duh. Don’t you get it by now?
A late breaking update: Stoid is still fucking crazy.
Pop quiz - which part of the above post did Stoid actually read? Show your work for full credit.
Regards,
Shodan
whoooosh
Well, for one of us…
Regards,
Shodan
I’m too lazy to look back, but I’ve come around to agreeing with the posters who said that Stoid is being treated unfairly in this thread, that people are carrying over grudges/preconceptions from other threads.
I’m especially looking at you, **Michael Ellis **-- exactly what was the point of your post today? Nobody had posted to this thread for nearly a full week, so, you decided it was time to poke the caged cat to see if you could make it roar?
And promptly a couple of others join in the prodding? What, are you all bored with your life otherwise? Because it’s not like any of you had anything new to add, or respond to. You’re acting (at least, ISTM) like my cat going back to a mouse she’s already killed, and giving it a few more whacks: maybe it’s just faking and she’ll be able to ‘play’ with it some more?
C’mon.
Could it be possible that the clerk didn’t want to hurt your feelings about the real reason for the policy? Supervisors were fielding complaints from other library users about the sweaty, dancing lady that hogs the computers all the time? Maybe they made this specific “policy” as a way of asking you to make your stays shorter?
I don’t get it, you are provided with a computer and free internet access daily in a quiet, safe, and clean environment all funded by the taxpayers, yet you consider a 2-hour time limit unreasonable? Get over yourself!
If you can’t deduce the various reasons why such a policy would exist, why would the clerk expect you to understand his explanation?
I’m getting freaking tired of these people who go through life with the impression that the rules don’t apply to them because they should be an exception.
Stoid is asking the wrong question. She doesn’t want to know why there is a 2-hour limit, she wants to know why the 2-hour limit should apply to her because she’s special.
Stoid isn’t a taxpayer? She probably is in one form or another.
Look, if you don’t question nameless bureaucrats you end up doing ridiculous things like having to put your already sealed liquids into plastic baggies at the airport, or computers sitting empty waiting for some anticipated mad rush that may never happen.
Who cares?? The computers are there, for everyone to share equally and the 2-hour time limit applies to all. Why should she be an exception?
No, you don’t … but thanks, I now know who made the plastic baggie rule necessary.
If you don’t care why did you bring it up?
You really aren’t very smart, are you, Sparky? Differences of opinion, yeah, I can see it. But people defending arbitrary policies that make little sense are another thing entirely.
You changed my quote. Only quote me if you have something substantive to offer. Clearly, you don’t.
Stoid,
The quote tags are for actual quotations only. Please do not do this again. No warning issued.
Gfactor
Pit Moderator
Pointless…