[kenberg]

If the bid fits, you must acquit. 4S made. Therefore it was clearly the right bid. NOT GUILTY! Is there a future for me in the Law Biz?

[pdmunro]

kenrexford, on Oct 2 2007, 01:28 PM, said:

irdoz, on Oct 2 2007, 08:15 AM, said:

So this thread is about the 6 essential steps you go through to seek your peers opinions on a ruling in a totally unbiased way...

1. You introduce the subject by an irrelevant question.

2. You don't possibly intend to influence peoples opinions in the slighest possible way by prejudging tyhe outcome by describing the ruling as the worst ever seen.

3. You then outline why this decision is the worst ever.

4. You indicate your impartiality and lack of emotional involvement by describing the opponents as idiots and elderly boneheads as a further indication that you don;t want to countenance different views.

5. You don't appeal what is the 'worst ever decision' by seeking a ruling from your peers because you might lose the appeal.

6. You present all relevant evidence including all of the hands.

And then when comments are given - a number of which seem to be saying that maybe the directors decision was possibly correct - you say thats it unanimous in shock and awe about such a wrong decision. This method seems to have gained an totally accurate and unbiased assessment of peer opinions.

I'm a criminal defense attorney. You just stated my job perfectly.

An absolute classic!

I have long wished that there was some means of keeping a record of my favourite forum posts. Of course, making this less-than-relevant post is one method. Later, I can use "Find all posts by this member" (where "this member" is myself) in order to to find this one again.

However, it has just struck me that maybe I can keep an annotated list of the www link showing at the top of the page. For example,

kenrexford job description:
http://forums.bridge...pic=21454&st=30