|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Like should we consider dumplings noodles? I think these are important questions and I'm here to ask them.
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:23 |
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:I really like sichuan noodles. Thai food is great too. I think when it comes to noodles, the thai have the best. Sure, pho is really good and so is bun. Ramen is delicious and I like yakisoba. Is dum sum "noodles?" Like should we consider dumplings noodles? I think these are important questions and I'm here to ask them. All noodles are a sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Some noodles are dim sum. Not all noodles are dim sum. Not all dim sum are noodles. It’s a typo jerk Sick my duck
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:21
|
|
|
Spaetzel is good. You’re wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:21
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:It’s a typo jerk Duck makes good dim sum.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
Dumplings have filling but sometimes the chow fun noodles at dim sum are filled with shrimp and that makes them dumplings
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
Noodle appraisal is complicated. Not easy like saying which lawyers suck rear end and should be relegated to tonguing satan’s o-ring for all eternity (it’s plaintiff lawyers)
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
GrandmaParty posted:Dumplings have filling but sometimes the chow fun noodles at dim sum are filled with shrimp and that makes them dumplings No. I know the dish of which you speak. It’s shrimp wrapped in a noodle. Arguably a crepe. But not a dumpling. And as it’s listed as a loving noodle on the menu.... who am I to dictate their culture to them? Noodle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:35
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:One of the lawyers around here where I practice, that I really really respect, is a dude who represented pedophiles against like 30 cities; some of whom I represented against him in those cases. He (or more accurately, the organization he represented) challenged the power of municipalities to employ larger residency restrictions than the state-proscribed ones for people already on the sex offender registry. Seems like you were the badguy and he was the good guy even though he represented pedos
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
Kamala bad. Her conduct as prosecutor just one dimension of that badness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
Also that seal who snuffed a wounded prisoner was acquitted on everything but the most obvious and provable count. Lol at how bad crimes have to be for soldiers to be held accountable for them. Apparently worse than killing an injured prisoner in cold blood while he received medical attentionquote:The defense portrayed Gallagher as an "old-school, hard-charging warrior" who was targeted by younger "millennial" SEALs who harbored "personal animosity" toward him. We live in loving hell terrorist ambulance fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Jul 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:All noodles are a sandwich. But are they also tacos?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
Spring rolls are burritos
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 23:53
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:Also that seal who snuffed a wounded prisoner was acquitted on everything but the most obvious and provable count. Lol at how bad crimes have to be for soldiers to be held accountable for them. Apparently worse than killing an injured prisoner in cold blood while he received medical attention Well... When a foreign General with zero stake in the game testifies that it didn’t happen, a marine officer says “I cant stand that rear end in a top hat, but it didn’t happen, and the government’s key witness says “oh. By the way. I have immunity now... I’m actually the one that killed him...” and the allegations were all brought by people with major credibility/bias issues... It’s less a “soldiers not being held accountable” and more a “the prosecution brought a lovely case” (btw. Same prosecution got lead counsel booted from the case for doing email surveillance on defense counsel.) The government tried a lovely case. Don’t put that on the jurors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:JK, you're saying ok this post would have embarrassed vitalsigns. what i'm saying is the post i quoted, not your nonsense interpretation. at the end of the day this is the basic flaw in your logic is that you want a hard and fast rule that gives you absolution. you don't get it. you keep arguing that i must be saying x or must be saying y or a whole lot of nonsense but it just boils down to that i reject your premise that your decisions about who or what to represent as a lawyer are a moral vacuum. that's it. i mean, you get into immense amounts of nonsense about "a list" and demand to know who maintains The List. well, i maintain the list i judge people by. other people maintain the list they judge people by. we are all required, as human beings who function in a society, to make moral decisions about our own actions and judgments about other people's actions. the distinction between something being morally wrong and being legally wrong: we do not all need to agree on what is morally wrong because we don't put people in jail for doing morally wrong (but legal) things. you use your example of someone who people might think did the wrong thing because he represented bad people, but in a situation where you assert he is nonethless doing the right thing. that is a complicated situation where people might disagree; or if there is a right answer some might get it wrong. you don't get to declare you don't like the answers some people might come up with so it's wrong for them to assign moral weight to it. that is...uh, not correct. the world is complicated and you cannot deal with that by declaring people may not engage that complexity. it doesn't work that way. once you agree that yes, there are in fact situations where it's not really complicated, it's just bad, then we are forced to deal with a spectrum from right to wrong, and difficulty in knowing where something lies on that spectrum. that's hard. but that doesn't mean you get to just declare nobody is to consider it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:I really like sichuan noodles. Thai food is great too. I think when it comes to noodles, the thai have the best. Sure, pho is really good and so is bun. Ramen is delicious and I like yakisoba. Is dum sum "noodles?" Like should we consider dumplings noodles? I think these are important questions and I'm here to ask them. Soothing Vapors posted:I asked my wife for chicken noodle soup once and she made chicken soup with these horrid german dumplings called "spaetzle" and I'm not ashamed to say going full Chris Benoit crossed my mind
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:One of the lawyers around here where I practice, that I really really respect, is a dude who represented pedophiles against like 30 cities; some of whom I represented against him in those cases. He (or more accurately, the organization he represented) challenged the power of municipalities to employ larger residency restrictions than the state-proscribed ones for people already on the sex offender registry. Keep in mind that in many cases, the sex offender registry is overused, and there are quite a few people on it who are of minimal risk to reoffend. It's also for life, so you have cases like a 70 year old in a wheelchair who can't move into a nursing home because it is near a school. Also, those laws are often so restrictive that they lead to sex offenders becoming homeless, which is worse then them staying in a fixed place where they can be monitored. If the state believes these people should be in normal society, as opposed to a prison or mental institution, then they should give these people the tools to become contributing members.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
gently caress "The ListTM." Wow, you're against people molesting children? Well congrats for taking such a controversial moral stand. I'm sure they'll build a statue of you next to the guy who said kicking puppies is wrong. Either Constitutional rights means something or they don't. As someone who comes from a state whose courts routinely put an asterisk next to the 4th through 14th Amendments I can easily say most of our awful caselaw comes from courts to chickenshit to risk assigning an actual consequence to the State's abuses because of the nature of the crime. And that bad caselaw ends up limiting everyone's rights. In the criminal justice system, as a practical matter, all accused are guilty unless proven innocent. The prosecutor thinks it. The juries thinks it. The judge definitely thinks it. And there's no surprise given the massive amount of pro police media the public is fed everyday. Once we start pressuring lawyers who represent unpopular clients to think it too because they'd rather be socially accepted than fight for their clients then we might as well have the honestly to do away with the entire court system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 03:53
|
|
|
Media is pretty anti-law enforcement at the moment. But other than that. Yes. Agree. Though is it really a bad thing the prosecution thinks the defendant is guilty? That’s kind of a given or the charges would have been dropped.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 04:45
|
|
|
I mean, yeah, prosecutors should obviously think someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt otherwise why the gently caress are they brining charges?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 05:20
|
|
|
The point isn’t that it’s a bad thing if prosecutors believe an accused is guilty. The point is EVERYONE in the system assumes a defendant is guilty and in most cases the deck is largely stacked against them from the start. If we start cowing defense attorneys to act the same way lest they face public ridicule then we no longer have an adversarial system. The scary thing is how many people these days are okay with that if it’s the “correct” defendant getting railroaded. As that thread in D&D shows, justice for some is apparently an idea that enjoys broad bipartisan support.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 05:44
|
|
|
Pretty sure they were talking about civil representation and the consensus was defense counsel get a pass Bc constitution. And I’m not sure you’re right about judges and jurors assuming guilt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 05:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:There’s also “how” you defend. Yeah and not to mention that would be criminal witness tampering and intimidation as well as an obstruction charge. Well, in Norway. So at that point they aren't even a lawyer anymore. ActusRhesus posted:Pretty sure they were talking about civil representation and the consensus was defense counsel get a pass Bc constitution. Exclusively, yes. And as much as I hate to agree with anyone ever evilweasel posted:ok this post would have embarrassed vitalsigns. what i'm saying is the post i quoted, not your nonsense interpretation. Yeah pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
Although this now is hosed upnm posted:Dim sum are tacos They are clearly sandwiches. nm posted:Spaetzle is awesome. You wife is either a bad cook or you have no taste. Well, we've already established that latter. I have know idea what Spaetzle is, but I still laughed. E: so it's basically macaroni? loving americans with your mac and cheese.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 07:33
|
|
|
El_Elegante posted:Law Megathread: I get around this by being deeply stupid AND hating everyone Speaking of remarkably accurate depictions of the legal system, have I got a game for you!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 07:43
|
|
|
Mistrial. Court is not legally seated, jury only has three members.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 07:47
|
|
|
Why do we scream at each other? This is what it sounds like when doves cry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Although this now is hosed up https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sp%C3%A4tzle
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 16:21
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Well... So let me get this straight, a prisoner was indeed executed but one of the people tried to stick it on a guy he hated and the government's star witness turned out to be the perpetrator and everything is hosed now? What did the foreign general say didn't happen? Is anyone in this entire affair not full of bullshit somehow? Nice piece of fish posted:I have know idea what Spaetzle is, but I still laughed. Spätzle are delicious and not mac & cheese even if they are often served up as another starch, cheese and bacon variant. Munin fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jul 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1146440606413139968 Jesus loving christ....
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
nm posted:Sandwiches are tacos I appreciate your attempt at humor but I have comprehensively addressed the sandwich question in a series of properly cited posts beginning here: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3865334&userid=198104&perpage=40&pagenumber=2#post489345245
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1146440606413139968 No his buddy says HE was the one who actually killed him, so he's totally innocent you see, it's just the millenial frame job causing problems for a good hard charging Troop. What's the issue?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Though is it really a bad thing the prosecution thinks the defendant is guilty? That’s kind of a given or the charges would have been dropped. But if they drop the charges their score goes down!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:But if they drop the charges their score goes down! We drop charges all the time. As for Gallagher case... The prosecution hosed up. Claiming the military is covering up/failing to hold accountable is simply not accurate. The trial team put on a poo poo case. When you put on a poo poo case, and have the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt, you lose. I wouldn’t be shocked if he were guilty as gently caress. But the JAG Corps is loving incompetent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
Juul's wrath descends upon some hapless citizen-peasant: https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/c8pnn4/i_was_served_by_juul/ I love the comments and responses here. Get a lawyer! If you can't afford a lawyer hop in a car and drive to Virginia! Time to take out a few payday loans! Hope you don't lose your lovely job!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Juul's wrath descends upon some hapless citizen-peasant: Wow, time to boycot juul over this outrage. sike *takes massive hit off co-worker's juul to get the stimulant kick required to get legal work done, as well as a 45-second break from the all-consuming depression*
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 22:44
|
|
|
If you haven't yet, go read this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1M3Y6vj3QlQpSdlYcCdq3BkbnnWIrEPlf/view
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
That's a thing of beauty, that is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:If you haven't yet, go read this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1M3Y6vj3QlQpSdlYcCdq3BkbnnWIrEPlf/view Inject that poo poo straight into my veins.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:23 |
|
|
I can't decide whether I like the Zuckerberg analogy or telling the government lawyer to gently caress off about tomorrow being a holiday and get his poo poo together by Friday at 2 better. I mean, I feel for the careerist guy a bit. He was caught off guard as much as anyone. But still loving  at the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 23:30
|
|