Court reporter fined for courting reporting in court reporting.
-
it somehow must be true for any and all kinds of teaching environments.
TDEMSYR, and thanks for proving you are both incapable of reading what I wrote and incapable of admitting you might be wrong in any way.
-
-
Ugh.
Yes, my dear, even when a pupil does something unexpected on his own, as long as he does it in my lab it's exactly the same as "I let them do it". I'm responsible for everything that happens in my lab. I'm even responsible for everything that happens in there while I myself am not in there (that's why I'm locking the doors during recess).
That is the legal framework I have to work under.
-
when a pupil does something on his own
"Let's sue the school because one of rhywden's students did something that didn't hurt anyone or cause any damage!"
Sounds like a reasonable thing to be afraid of in a country that's so afraid of liability they put shutters on electrical outlets.
In case you couldn't tell I was being both sincere and sarcastic.
-
I love it when the free market clashes with the gun rights, it's like two of things a certain group of people have a hard on for suddenly clash. eats popcorn
Clearly we need to regulate the free market! Error does not compute
-
"Let's sue the school because one of rhywden's students did something that didn't hurt anyone or cause any damage!"
Sounds like a reasonable thing to be afraid of in a country that's so afraid of liability they put shutters on electrical outlets.
In case you couldn't tell I was being both sincere and sarcastic.
I'm talking about the hypothetical instance where someone did indeed get hurt. You yourself admitted that you would wear protective glasses while doing your soldering wire experiment - now, why would you do that if that experiment was so harmless?
And "shutters on electrical outlets"? I'm not sure which country you're talking about but ours it certainly ain't.
-
And "shutters on electrical outlets"? I'm not sure which country you're talking about but ours it certainly ain't.
Not sure where you are from, but they are pretty standard in the USA.
-
And "shutters on electrical outlets"? I'm not sure which country you're talking about but ours it certainly ain't.
What country are you in? Because if it's the US, you might want to take another look at the National Electric Code.Obviously that's not adopted in every state... but it is many places, and it's required tamper-resistant outlets in new/renovated installations since the 2008 edition.
-
As the son of a teacher, I can tell you that you really know nothing. Parents only have to think you've hurt their child to put you under pressure. You might be able to brush them off, but they'll escalate up the chain and lie more. In the US, they can sue you for things you'd consider harmless.
Honestly, it's dumb that you have to worry about this kind of thing. It really interferes with any faith you may have had in humanity. But it's true.
-
What country are you in? Because if it's the US, you might want to take another look at the National Electric Code.
Well, that's the sad thing about FrostCat. I provided the answer to this question in this very thread and he still thinks I'm from England.
I'm not. Mainland Europe, specifically Germany. We use the SchuKo and the only time those sport shutters is when we babyproof a house (which is an optional plugin).
-
I'm not sure which country you're talking about but ours it certainly ain't.
Aren't you English?
Maybe I meant on power strips. I know someone posted a "why English outlets are the best" video not too long ago and the guy was talking about how awesome the shutters on the power strip he was demonstrating with were.
I mean, I'm not opposed to the idea, but it seems like overkill.
And again, I've always been talking about an incident where someone DIDN'T get hurt and you seem to fail to acknowledge that.
-
@Intercourse said:
Not sure where you are from, but they are pretty standard in the USA.
Where? I wouldn't agree and I've lived in a number of places, including the city that was panicked by Mooninites.
-
I can tell you that you really know nothing.
It's cute that you think that and that I don't understand and appreciate where Rhywden's right (which I don't 100% agree with).
-
Well, that's the sad thing about FrostCat. I provided the answer to this question in this very thread and he still thinks I'm from England.
Ah, OK. This thread was too long so I just hit end to see if there was anything interesting to say.
-
Well, that's the sad thing about FrostCat. I provided the answer to this question in this very thread and he still thinks I'm from England.
I'm following your strategy of ignoring what the other guy says because it works so well for you.
-
And again, I've always been talking about an incident where someone DIDN'T get hurt and you seem to fail to acknowledge that.
That's nice. And you probably walk on sunshine and barbecued turkeys fly right into your mouth?
By exactly which bizarre logic do you think I worry about stuff being harmless?
Do you do that in your job as well? "Oh, the backup will fail with only a 0.001% chance! Practically impossible!"
And the result is usually a frontpage story on this very page.
I'm following your strategy of ignoring what the other guy says because it works so well for you.
Dude, nice try.
-
That's nice. And you probably walk on sunshine and barbecued turkeys fly right into your mouth?
That's the awesome thing about the US!
By exactly which bizarre logic do you think I worry about stuff being harmless?
By the bizarre logic where I say I don't worry about things that are harmless and you continue to hyperventilate about them.
Here, I brought you a fainting couch
@Rhywden said:FrostCat: I'm following your strategy of ignoring what the other guy says because it works so well for you.
Dude, nice try.
I know, right? I went back and found your post. I guess I got bored reading it because it looked like more whining.
-
I don't wear protective glasses for harmless stuff. Do you?
-
I don't wear protective glasses for harmless stuff. Do you?
Contra your failure to read what I've written, I wear protective glasses for everything.
-
<i>Contra</i> your failure to read what I've written, I wear protective glasses for everything.
Why?
-
Why?
I'm a hipster and I want to be able to say I was wearing them before they were cool.
-
and using the mains line for anything other than to plug in a power supply is definitely non-sanctioned
Would you let your students design and construct a power supply -- with appropriate access to design guidance and materials, of course?
-
Clearly we need to regulate the free market!
Oddly enough, outside the fever swamps of the LP, most conservatives understand there's a time and a place for regulation, and are generally arguing over how much is necessary.
Do you think a formal written disaster plan for your rabbits is necessary if you're a stage magician like the USDA does?
-
I'm a hipster and I want to be able to say I was wearing them before they were cool.
Cop-out. Well, folks, he saw the chackmate in two, that's why he didn't answer.
-
Cop-out. Well, folks, he saw the chackmate in two, that's why he didn't answer.
No, you dumb fuck, it's because I'm nearsighted so I always wear glasses.
Oh yeah, I'm dealing with a German. My prescription is so strong I wear "bulletproof" high-index lenses.
-
Would you let your students design and construct a power supply -- with appropriate access to design guidance and materials, of course?
Most likely not with a class of 23 pupils. If the numbers were greatly reduced and if the course material demanded it, I certainly could imagine that. However, I still wouldn't tolerate horsing around.
I'd probably also need a signed waiver. I mean, from the top off my head I am not too certain as to what a power supply actually needs in all details. But from my experiences with power supplies for desktop computers and CRTs, I think they're quite the opposite of "harmless".
-
No, you dumb fuck, it's because I'm nearsighted so <big><i>I always wear glasses</i></big>.
Oh yeah, I'm dealing with a German. <big><i>My prescription is so strong I wear "bulletproof" high-index lenses.</i></big>
Those are not safety glasses, my dear. Your normal prescription glasses, even if they're of higher strength than normal, usually don't encircle the whole eye area and as such do not count as safety glasses because liquids/splinters/shrapnel could still enter easily from the sides.
-
Oddly enough, outside the fever swamps of the LP, most conservatives understand there's a time and a place for regulation, and are generally arguing over how much is necessary.
Even us little-l libertarians understand that; we just prefer simpler, more flexible regulatory frameworks over stilted, prescriptivist straightjackets.
Do you think a formal written disaster plan for your rabbits is necessary if you're a stage magician like the USDA does?
How formal is 'formal'? I suspect 1-2 pages of basic information (if fire, X; if flooding, Y; if severe storms, Z; if contagious disease, contact the veterinarian at 555-5555) suffices for 99.9% of the stage magicians out there.
-
Those are not safety glasses, my dear.
Speaking of safety glasses: can one get custom prescription lenses in a pair of safety glasses? I have tried wearing safety goggles over my prescription glasses when soldering, but the goggles fog up to the point where the vision impairment becomes problematic in its own right.
-
How formal is 'formal'? I suspect 1-2 pages of basic information (if fire, X; if flooding, Y; if severe storms, Z; if contagious disease, contact the veterinarian at 555-5555) suffices for 99.9% of the stage magicians out there.
I suspect for most stage magicians out there it's "rescue them if it's not too inconvenient."
Jerry Pournelle wrote a lot about this a year or two back. Why would anyone think this is even necessary at all?
-
Speaking of safety glasses: can one get custom prescription lenses in a pair of safety glasses? I have tried wearing safety goggles over my prescription glasses when soldering, but the goggles fog up to the point where the vision impairment becomes problematic in its own right.
Certainly. For example: http://www.rxsg.com.au/
-
-
I knew you'd take the bait.
Now you're openly admitting to trolling. Well done, my dear! Bravo!
-
Speaking of safety glasses: can one get custom prescription lenses in a pair of safety glasses?
A very quick search shows a company that makes, essentially a pair of frames you can clip on their brand of safety glasses, to which you can take to your eye doctor and order a pair of lenses to fit.
Sounds like an awesome idea to a guy with stupidly-expensive lenses.
-
Now you're openly admitting to trolling.
Honestly, it's like you're both new here and don't read what people write.
-
Jerry Pournelle wrote a lot about this a year or two back. Why would anyone think this is even necessary at all?
I would think this plan would cover not only on-stage, but back at home as well.
My question is more 'is the USDA going to grill someone over the contents of this document, or is it just a case of having something written down, make of it what you will?'
-
My question is more 'is the USDA going to grill someone over the contents of this document, or is it just a case of having something written down, make of it what you will?'
Given that they were threatening fines (IIRC) for not having such a plan, being grilled probably wasn't the major concern.
This crap is ridiculous:
http://web.archive.org/web/20140404155736/http://bobmccarty.com/2011/05/25/usda-rabbit-police-stalking-magicians/
Do have a glance at the PDF sent out to people: http://web.archive.org/web/20131226121807/http://bobmccarty.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/USDA-Rabbit-Disaster-Plan.pdf
Particularly pages 5-6, which talk about the 5 basic steps your plan should address, and helpfully lists a couple dozen common potential incident types, but points out the list isn't limited to those actually listed.
-
(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically shot in 24 hours unless fired)
-
@created_just_to_disl said:
Good. I'd have fired at him too.
It would probably have been helpful to indicate to which post you were replying so people know whether and/or how to disagree with you.
-
Particularly pages 5-6, which talk about the 5 basic steps your plan should address, and helpfully lists a couple dozen common potential incident types, but points out the list isn't limited to those actually listed.
I'd say you'd be able to address it in two pages without further ado, considering that not every incident type will be applicable to every locale, and most of the incident types will not need pages upon pages of instruction to handle.
People make the mistake of thinking that a formal plan should be some stuffy, crusty pile of legalese that only gets pulled out to satisfy the auditors; an approach similar to an airliner Quick Reference Handbook (QRH) is going to be much easier for everybody involved to work with, and also much more practical to use when a situation actually comes up!
-
Can we get back to taking the piss out of American football?
-
Honestly, it's like you're both new here and don't read what people write.
Well, here's the thing, though: You're a particularly stupid troll. Because you've done either of two mistakes:
- You lied deliberately or
- You gave definitive proof to abject ignorance
Both of which disqualify you from commenting, in my eyes and will let me easily disregard anything else you have to say in the future.
The lie is easily found: I asked you specifically if you wore safety glasses. You repeatedly stated the affirmative. And later on, when I tried to use your own statement against you, you admitted to wearing only prescription lenses which you then tried to pose as "bait". If you actually lied then you have proven to be an untrustworthy person which means any and all statements from you can be disregarded due to your willingness to falsify stuff just so you can win a "point". Which in turn means that my reasons to distrust your statements as to the "harmless nature" of your experiments are doubly reinforced. Good job right there!
The more probable scenario: You honestly didn't comprehend the difference between safety glasses and your "bulletproof" prescription glasses. And then tried to pass it off as troll bait when caught on this proof of your ignorance. Which means that you haven't even the faintest clue about safety in the lab when you can't even identify basic safety equipment. Which, again, just reinforces my mistrust in your statements.
All in all, well done. You demonstrated succinctly how not to win an argument and also how to demonstrate it to others. Bravo, I say.
I mean, if you tried to convince me that my arguments were absolutely and certainly correct you couldn't have done a better job...
-
I put it to you that the entire concept may well be frivolous and a waste of taxpayer money on a par with the CDC spending money trying to figure out why lesbians get fat[1] and then whining they don't have enough money to fight ebola.
[1] or whatever the exact study was.
-
I mean, if you tried to convince me that my arguments were absolutely and certainly correct you couldn't have done a better job...
You keep talking about all I hear is "Wah! Wah! Wah! My pussy hurts!" [1]
[1] no offense intended to actual women.
-
Can we get back to taking the piss out of American football?
Sorry, crybaby Rhywden's already derailed this one in a different direction.
-
I didn't cry ... I complained.
-
You keep talking about all I hear is "Wah! Wah! Wah! My pussy hurts!" [1]
[1] no offense intended to actual women.
I notice that you're unable to provide any counterarguments of substance, instead resorting to crude insults. That's the exact definition of a "stupid troll", methinks.
-
-
I notice that you're unable to provide any counterarguments of substance, instead resorting to crude insults. That's the exact definition of a "stupid troll", methinks.
No, you're just not worth arguing with because you're such a crybaby.
-
Surely crybaby is accusing one of doing that?