On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:21:55 -0700, johac
<jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote:

In article <BK6dnZ1o1sKLf1PbnZ2dnUVZ_ubinZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Mark K. Bilbo" <gmail@com.mkbilbo> wrote:

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:47:12 -0700, johac wrote:

In article <13csi31gq1cj2c6@corp.supernews.com>,
"ike milligan" <accordiondoc@mindspring.com> wrote:

"johac" <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:jhachmann-C72B90.16172223082007@news.giganews.com...

In article <1187904109.319712.252940@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:

PZ Myers at www.scienceblogs.com/pharyngula is being sued by a guy
Stuart Pivar, who asked him to review his book: LifeCode: The Theory
of Biological Self Organization, and apparently didn't like the
negative review:
http://tinyurl.com/2m462z
There's more info at Panda's Thumb:
http://tinyurl.com/yuofc4

Budikka

That's crazy. Pivar asked him to review the book and Meyers did.
Review doesn't mean promote. Pivar should have found another
reviewer.

He should have asked the reviewer before he read the book, if he was
going to like it.

Yeah. "Sir. Would you please write a nice review for my book? What? Why
do you need a copy?"

<snirkle>

Why do I foresee a very irritated judge in someone's future?

I wonder how some of these judges put up with some of these cases. Once
I sat on jury selection for a case where a tenant was suing his
landlord. It seems that the tenant didn't like his rug, so he demanded
that the landlord replace it. The landlord said no, so a few weeks later
the tenant claimed he "tripped" over a tear in the rug, hurt his back
and was suing the landlord. In the courtroom the tenant appeared to be
moving around just fine. I wasn't chosen for the jury, but I don't know
if I could have served on it with a straight face.

Judge Judy?

On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:21:55 -0700, johac wrote:

In article <BK6dnZ1o1sKLf1PbnZ2dnUVZ_ubinZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Mark K. Bilbo" <gmail@com.mkbilbo> wrote:

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:47:12 -0700, johac wrote:

In article <13csi31gq1cj2c6@corp.supernews.com>,
"ike milligan" <accordiondoc@mindspring.com> wrote:

"johac" <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:jhachmann-C72B90.16172223082007@news.giganews.com...

In article
<1187904109.319712.252940@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:

PZ Myers at www.scienceblogs.com/pharyngula is being sued by a
guy Stuart Pivar, who asked him to review his book: LifeCode: The
Theory of Biological Self Organization, and apparently didn't
like the negative review:
http://tinyurl.com/2m462z
There's more info at Panda's Thumb:
http://tinyurl.com/yuofc4

Budikka

That's crazy. Pivar asked him to review the book and Meyers did.
Review doesn't mean promote. Pivar should have found another
reviewer.

He should have asked the reviewer before he read the book, if he was
going to like it.

Yeah. "Sir. Would you please write a nice review for my book? What?
Why do you need a copy?"

<snirkle>

Why do I foresee a very irritated judge in someone's future?

I wonder how some of these judges put up with some of these cases. Once
I sat on jury selection for a case where a tenant was suing his
landlord. It seems that the tenant didn't like his rug, so he demanded
that the landlord replace it. The landlord said no, so a few weeks later
the tenant claimed he "tripped" over a tear in the rug, hurt his back
and was suing the landlord. In the courtroom the tenant appeared to be
moving around just fine. I wasn't chosen for the jury, but I don't know
if I could have served on it with a straight face.

I saw one like that once. Guy was suing a woman for damages because she
rear ended him. She was driving some ordinary, medium sized car, *he* had
a big--like Dodge Ram size--pickup with a trailer. On which trailer he
was carrying various and sundry welding equipment.

Now, that she rear ended him was not in dispute. That he had *some*
damages (but couldn't be much in a minor collision between an ordinary
car and a pickup with a trailer) was not in dispute.

What he wanted was compensation for the money he *would* have earned in
his "business" he'd was allegedly just now starting but which had never
done a single job.

I had to bite my tongue to keep from laughing right then and there. When
it came to "do you have any objections" time, I told them straight up I'd
already made up my mind (not specifying which way as they were adamant
you not get into details for fear of prejudicing the other prospective
jurors).

I was being honest too, not just trying to get out of jury duty. There
was no way in hell I could have played the "objective" game. I wanted to
berate his lawyer for even taking the case!

It was in East Texas where I'd grown up and I had seen billions of his
type. The trailer trash hick who was agonna start a bidness, be all
ontreepeenoor like, and make a bundle (a "bundle" being defined as
monthly payments on a double wide as that would be real movin' up fine to
get outta the single wide).

She was some unremarkable, middle aged, middle class, looked like you'd
expect a middle manager at a medium sized regional bank to look. Probably
had some rather boring, mediocre job but had a real job. Which in his
trailer trash world made her Monty Burns rich and he'd found a jackpot!

Whole thing made me wish I was the judge so I could tell his lawyer to
come up to the bench and put his balls on them so I could beat them with
the gavel.

Anyway, I was dismissed. Weird eh? <g>