I’ve been wondering where you were. Welcome to the party, knock yourself out. I’m going to bed.
I suppose that if you do not get it from that, then nothing I can say now will make it any more clear to you.
On second thought, if you’re back on your shtick about how most Pit threads belong in MPSIMS, then my post was irrelevant, and never mind.
No, post it reaaally slowly, using small words. Promise I’ll try to understand you.
You’re a lawyer?
Your point?
Piss off, Carol, I’ve not been that way with you. Unless you’re a sock of somebody I have been that way with.
You’re either not a lawyer, or you’re an incompetent one. Differences are what keep lawyers able to send their kids to Harvard and Yale.
It’s not the case that I don’t understand the differences or can’t spot them, I just contend that for present purposes the differences don’t matter.
Frank, I honestly didn’t understand your post #322. Can you clarify what you mean?
I wasn’t trying to “be that way” with you. 
For what it’s worth, Shodan, I disagree with almost every political position you hold, you phrase your posts in GD to slime liberals whenever you can, and you engage in tu quoqueing far, far too much, but I don’t think you’re a troll. I doubt Rand Rover is a troll either, though he might be.
Never mind, forget it, I’m tired and wired tonight and I apologize for snapping at you.
Accepted. No harm, no foul. Good night.
I haven’t seen anything from RR that I would call unethical per the ABA rules. I am utterly unfamiliar with the NY rules, but I will tell you that the NY lawyers I have dealt with were complete and obnoxious far beyond anything RR has done here at the SDMB. FWIW he seems educated and intelligent in my opinion. But that does not stop him from generally making a fool of himself on a regular basis. But reducing foolishness requires broad experience and compassion. Is it really a surprise? He is trying to espouse what he thinks is a philosophy that will better humankind. Good for him.
There’s fear in there. See, if he can convince himself that bad things only happen to bad/stupid/lazy people, that there’s never any element of chance, then he doesn’t need to be afraid of The Dark Things that he can’t control. Anything that’s good in his life must have been because of his hard work and intelligence; anything bad that happened was because he hadn’t become perfect yet.
If that is the case, then boy is he in for a rude surprise at the end. We are all truly equal in the end.
No, but I am not going to bother anymore. You have expressed that you have no sympathy or compassion for the woman in the article re her home loss, but you would have sympathy for some others whose situations in principle do not differ from hers. To most people, that makes you a dick; I contend that you probably are a dick, but that something might be wrong with your brain. You deny any mental illness; I correct you that I didn’t not claim that for you.
You contend that being without compassion is the same as not liking chocolate. It is not. I tried to demonstrate to you that conventional human behavior supports expressing compassion(we’ll start slow and not have you actually feel it for a while), but you are one of the stalwart and courageous, following Ms Rand’s teaching that being a dick is much better than being a person. I pointed out (again) that there may well be something wrong with your brain*. You disagree. We have reached an impasse. Since I don’t make a habit of talking to walls, not even ones made out of Rearden Metal, I am moving on.
*IANAD, I am not diagnosing etc. How else to explain your lack of basic humanity over time?
This is tangentially related to this thread, but I wish the other Rand thread was still active. Steve Benen at the Washington Monthly passes the following along as his quote of the day:
?? I admit that I haven’t followed this thread all that closely, but I’ve seen Rand Rover in quite a few other threads, and I haven’t seen him do or say anything that would touch on his fitness to practice law. He seems to have a personal philosophy that most people fight repugnant and which I don’t agree with, but then again, who cares.
One of the roles that an attorney takes is that of counselor. He or she is there to advise the client as to the most prudent course of action. While hand holding is nice, it shouldn’t get in the way of telling the client what their options are and what the best course of action is. My personal view is that at times, you want an attorney who won’t sugarcoat things to the point where they are meaningless. You want someone who will say, your case is crap, and here is why, so you don’t waste time and money litigating a dog. Often times, you need to be blunt with someone so that it really sinks in.
Psst. Post 136.
Oh, poop. Sorry.