[hijack]
Wring! Hey, girl! 
I don’t have your addy and you don’t list it here. Shoot me a message and we’ll catch up – my addy’s in my profile.
[/hijack]
I didn’t even know Lissa’s husband works in a prison, so she obviously hasn’t mentioned it enough times to bother me, not that she’d be able to. Oh, and it seems perfectly appropriate and on-topic in the linked post. Seriously, what’s your beef?
My mileage varied, obviously.
You’re not getting it - it’s not the mention of her husband that I find repetitive, it’s the “my husband, who works in a prison” formula.
I’ve had a lot worse than friendly advice in the Pit before, believe me. Search on my name and “Iraq”, or “troops”.
Yes, I don’t use my wife’s job as a jump-off point for my opinions. So?
Oooh! Burn!
Me too.
MrDibble
No, I’m pretty sure I get it. Regardless of which you find repetitive – “my husband” or “my husband, who works in a prison” – the fact remains that either or both could easily be overlooked by someone less interested in concocting such a sad little pitting.
Did you seriously miss the point so entirely? I will be more explicit: The take-away here is not that you “don’t use [your] wife’s job as a jump-off point for [your] opinions” – who cares? – but that you apparently are the sort who drags people into the Pit for piddly crap that could more easily and more kindly be overlooked. “So,” the failing on display in this thread isn’t hers, it’s yours.
Brilliant riposte. Please, don’t strain yourself.
Well, gosh . . . seven years and my very first Pitting. I hardly know what to say.
I never noticed I was being gratiuitous about it until I read this, and now I’m mighty embarassed.
Yes, I was mentioning it for newer posters who don’t know me. I’ve always assumed I wasn’t all that memorable, and I knew we get a lot of newbies around here.
I mention it whenever I discuss criminal justice or prisons, because I know as soon as I say something, someone will ask me how I know, and I thought it easiest just to introduce my replies with my “credentials.”
I apologize. Consider me thoroughly chastened.
By the way, he’s not a guard. He’s the deputy warden. Maybe I should add that to my spiel.
I guess I do mention him a lot, but that’s just because he knows a lot of stuff, and has done many interesting jobs. I’ve learned a lot about the world through his experiences, and when I get information, I like to cite it.
He works both jobs. He usually teaches two or three classes a quarter: sociology and criminology.
Again, I apologise. I was guilty of economy of phrasing, but I plead that I never thought anyone paid much attention to what I said, anyway.
I use his jobs as a way of citing some of the opinions I voice. I’m Doper-trained after all these years to expect people to ask where I come up with my pea-brained ideas, so I try to cut them off at the pass, so to speak.
Needless to say, whenever I go to type the words, “My husband works . . .” I will think of you as I reach for my thesaurus.
Damn. Well, if that isn’t the classiest response imaginable to a pitting then I’m not sure what is.
I know. What a buzzkill.
It’s OK to frequently bring up something if it’s topical and interesting. Lissa brings her husband up appropriately. It’s not like she’s constantly starting “Favorite Movies Where Your Husband Works in a Prison?” threads in Cafe Society.
She will now.
Have I ever mentioned that I work in a prison?
“You’re welcome?”
I still don’t think this was serious enough to be considered a proper pitting, but where else was I going to put it?
You’re, as you point out, an old hand at this. I don’t think the onus should be on you to constantly reinforce that. Damn newbies should learn who’s who.
Noted.
I understand, but I don’t agree. I think you should stand by your own ideas - opinions shouldn’t need a cite, only facts. That’s, I think, the root of my complaint, especially in the linked thread.
I’m glad you didn’t freak out over the OP. Thanks for not being too hard on me in return.
But there’s a difference between informed and uninformed opinions. I got lots and lots of opinions about how prisons should be run, but the fact that I’ve never even set foot inside of one means that those opinions are probably not very valuable. Prefacing an opinion by mentioning relevant experience with the subject is always a good idea.
So sad, you have to keep coming back to it…
Yes, i’m “the sort” allright. I chose not to overlook something - so what? I didn’t call Lissa names, suggest she be banned for gratuitus repitition, hell, I was nicer in that OP than I am in real life. Just had an itch, and I scratched. Sorry it didn’t make you great list of pitworthy topics - perhaps you should get the mods to make a sticky called “Jodi’s list of pitworthy topics”
See, the point was that my “dearie” in the OP was not sark at all, but you clearly took it that way. But my “Burn!” was sarcastic. What’s that rushing noise?
I get that (although, like I said, I tend to value second-hand experience a lot less), and that’s fine for threads about prisons. Threads about something else, where the opinion offered is on the socialisation and mental state of prisoners, starts making that experience a bit less relevant. IMO. That’s how I took it in the linked thread, anyway - it came out of left field for that part of the discussion, and was prefaced with the familiar-to-me-by-now “My husband, who works in a prison…”
I just see it as a version of Siege’s “At my really liberal church, that I go to…” or **EC’**s “…and there she was, all tied up”. Not a one-trick pony, but a turn of mind that irritates. Me. Not anyone else, apparently, not that that signifies.
I agree with you about second-hand experience not being as valuable as first-hand experience, but that doesn’t mean it is without value. By letting us know how many degrees of seperation there are between Lissa and the data she’s sharing with us, we know how much weight to give it. I disagree with you that her post came out of left field. It was relevant to the discussion as it had evolved at that time, and while it’s not first-hand expert testimony, it was much more solid than Der Trihs wholly unsubstantiated opinions.
And, in all honesty, that the phrase “My husband, who works in prison…” bothers you enough to post even this tame non-pitting is a little pathetic.
In my defense, I don’t believe I ever used “my husband works in a prison” to back up a statement of pure opinion. I generally use it when I’m giving a list of facts pertinent to the discussion. To put it another way, I might say, “My husband works in a prison which has [this] percentage of [group]”, rather than, “My husband works in a prison, and so I think the death penalty is wrong.”
I try to be clear in my posts when I’m relating facts, and when I switch to my personal analysis of the facts. I can see now that perhaps I did not distinguish that line clearly enough.
Thirdly, I try not to state my opinions openly. In a discussion of an issue, I try to post facts which I believe support my view and let my arguments speak for themselves rather than say bluntly, “I’m for/against [whatever].”
Lastly, I think when people have an insight that others may not, they should reveal the origins of it, because it often leads to a more educational experience for all involved.
In that vein, I now adress questions from Seven that I did not notice until now. (With apologies.)
About seven years. He currently works in medium security, but he also worked in a SuperMax for a while.
He works with all types of inmates, really. He has guys in there for murder as well as guys in there for fraud. Inmates are classified by security risk in the state system, (as opposed to federal) not by their crime. SuperMax is different. You only go to SuperMax if you commit a violent crime while in prison, or are deemed to be a security threat, like a super notorious criminal, or member of a violent, powerful group.
He was the investigator for the prison for a few years, so, yeah, he did check cakes sometimes . . . snack cakes mailed into inmates sometimes contain drugs. He got to do a lot of really cool detective-stuff, go on house raids, be in a high-speed car chase, do interrogations, use lie detectors, as well as examine and gather clues from crime scenes. Man, has he got some awesome stories.
But, no, he wouldn’t eat the cake. He’s described some of the houses he’s busted for trying to smuggle in contraband to inmates. You wouldn’t want to eat stuff that came out of those kitchens.
Well, realize that the average inmate isn’t in there because he’s a genius. Usually, escape plans consist of, “Hey, I bet if I ran right now, I could climb that fence. That razor wire doesn’t look* that* sharp.”
Most of Hubby’s investigations were extremely simple to solve. All he and his partner had to do was outwit someone who wasn’t all that bright.*
But there have been some really clever ideas the inmates have had. It’s not usually to escape-- that’s pretty rare-- but plans to smuggle things in or out, making contraband** and things like that. Some of them are brilliant manipulators.
MrDibble, one more comment of yours I wanted to address and previously forgot:
No, I have his sociology lessons for the analysis of the criminal mind. 
I have to admit to being a tad bit insulted that you think I would parrot his opinions, or that he or I have a bias of some sort that renders the information null. He is the most straight-shooting human being I have ever met (and it’s why he’s been so successful in his career.) He tells you what happened, then what his opinions are on it, but not to exert his stance, instead to get others’ input.
Our dinner table is like a Great Debates thread. We talk for hours about nature vs. nurture, the origins of criminal behaviors, etc. And in some areas, we differ.
If you have issue with the facts I present, please let me know instead of hinting that I might not know what I’m talking about because maybe my husband only tells me half of the story. He’s not like that, and though I couldn’t expect you to know that because you’ve never met him, rest assured that after seven years, if I were known for talking out of my ass, this wouldn’t be my first Pitting.
*They once fooled an inmate into confessing by hooking a pair of headphones to his chest and plugging them into a computer. They already knew the details of what he had done, so when he lied, they’d say things like, “The computer says you’re lying. It says you left the dorm at 11:15. You’d better confess, because this thing records every time you lie and that will go against you when they’re deciding what to do with you.”
** Making “hooch” is the biggest issue, not because the staff is looking to kill their fun, but because it can make someone very sick. Weapons are another issue. Inmates can be goddamed ingenious in making weapons. The warden has a lovely museum case full of them in his office. One of them is a handmade gun which used rubber bands as the firing mechanism and was as powerful as a .22 handgun when tested.
When rule-breaking is harmless, the staff tends to look the other way, and the inmates reciprocate by making sure everyone toes the line so that there’s not a crack-down which would result in the loss of all their little privledges.
Jodi! Sorry to continue the hijack, but welcome back! I don’t think we ever interacted much, but I was sorry to see you go.
Anyway, on topic: I didn’t really know Lissa’s husband works in a prison. Eh.
I knew Lissa’s husband worked in a prison. I also know that she has three dogs, has health issues, works in a museum, and is smart as a whip. Not because she is a one-trick pony on any of these issues, but because she posts in threads that interest me.
IMO, Lissa only posts about her husband working in a prison when it’s germane…including in the linked thread.
Super lame pitting, dude.
Screw that. I’m another one who didn’t know your husband worked in a prison. I find it exceedingly helpful when people provide relevant data from informed sources, and you really can’t do that without identifying the source. I say keep doing exactly what you’re doing – if MrDibble doesn’t like it he can suck it. 