"Experts" we no longer like or trust (1 Viewer)

[ghostguy123]

Just make another thread and word it better. Better results. I trust you to be able to do that.

 

[SFBayDuck]

Just make another thread and word it better. Better results. I trust you to be able to do that.

What "experts" do you not most not "trust" while "not" trusting their "expertise"?

 

[bigbottom]

1. Your post at 12:07 MST said I was 0-2.
2. I made statements about public defenders which you went as far as to state were "nonsense" and questioned them.
3. I was a public defender for years. I have been previously offered the position of heading up a public defender's office. I am well abreast of the ethical regulations, limits, etc. concerning public defenders. In short, while I recognize you have attorneys in your family and did some research on public defender workloads (genuine credit for that), I'm literally an expert on the topic.
4. You proved the point of the thread but not trusting any expert's input on an issue and, instead, questioning it and calling it nonsense. Which goes to the whole ultimate point of the thread that society now seems, more than ever, to question experts.


*You have a fair point about my other post seeming confusing about dealing with a self-represented litigant as a criminal defense attorney would being dealing with the State in opposition. My current caseload consists of contentious divorce/family law matters and serious felony criminal defense (rapes, murder, agg assaults, etc.). I'd personally prefer to be a public defender and practice solely criminal defense for the indigent, but 4 kids and a bad golf habit are expensive.

Regarding ...

1. Correct

2. Please direct me to any statements I made regarding your statements on public defenders. If I'm wrong, I'll own it.

3. I appreciate the fact that you are an expert on public defenders. I cannot fathom why you accuse me of questioning your expertise in this field. I believe we are in violent agreement that public defenders are overworked. The only reason I brought it up was as a potential factor in why someone might represent themselves. (There are certainly other factors at play; but I believe reasonable people can accept that it might be one factor.)

4. I've not questioned any expertise you may have on public defenders. I'm not sure why we're talking at cross-purposes, but when you say I'm missing the point of the thread, you're off base. Your assumption that I'm disagreeing with you on public defenders is incorrect. What's more troubling is that you take that assumed disagreement and expand it into a contention that I disagree with all attorneys, or experts, or who knows what else.

* I was just busting your balls on this one.
I hope you win a lot of skins games this summer and can afford to go back to public defending.

You sound like a couple of lawyers.

 

[Zow]

1. Your post at 12:07 MST said I was 0-2.
2. I made statements about public defenders which you went as far as to state were "nonsense" and questioned them.
3. I was a public defender for years. I have been previously offered the position of heading up a public defender's office. I am well abreast of the ethical regulations, limits, etc. concerning public defenders. In short, while I recognize you have attorneys in your family and did some research on public defender workloads (genuine credit for that), I'm literally an expert on the topic.
4. You proved the point of the thread but not trusting any expert's input on an issue and, instead, questioning it and calling it nonsense. Which goes to the whole ultimate point of the thread that society now seems, more than ever, to question experts.


*You have a fair point about my other post seeming confusing about dealing with a self-represented litigant as a criminal defense attorney would being dealing with the State in opposition. My current caseload consists of contentious divorce/family law matters and serious felony criminal defense (rapes, murder, agg assaults, etc.). I'd personally prefer to be a public defender and practice solely criminal defense for the indigent, but 4 kids and a bad golf habit are expensive.

Regarding ...

1. Correct

2. Please direct me to any statements I made regarding your statements on public defenders. If I'm wrong, I'll own it.

3. I appreciate the fact that you are an expert on public defenders. I cannot fathom why you accuse me of questioning your expertise in this field. I believe we are in violent agreement that public defenders are overworked. The only reason I brought it up was as a potential factor in why someone might represent themselves. (There are certainly other factors at play; but I believe reasonable people can accept that it might be one factor.)

4. I've not questioned any expertise you may have on public defenders. I'm not sure why we're talking at cross-purposes, but when you say I'm missing the point of the thread, you're off base. Your assumption that I'm disagreeing with you on public defenders is incorrect. What's more troubling is that you take that assumed disagreement and expand it into a contention that I disagree with all attorneys, or experts, or who knows what else.

* I was just busting your balls on this one.
I hope you win a lot of skins games this summer and can afford to go back to public defending.

You sound like a couple of lawyers.

You mean totally untrustworthy?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

1. Your post at 12:07 MST said I was 0-2.
2. I made statements about public defenders which you went as far as to state were "nonsense" and questioned them.
3. I was a public defender for years. I have been previously offered the position of heading up a public defender's office. I am well abreast of the ethical regulations, limits, etc. concerning public defenders. In short, while I recognize you have attorneys in your family and did some research on public defender workloads (genuine credit for that), I'm literally an expert on the topic.
4. You proved the point of the thread but not trusting any expert's input on an issue and, instead, questioning it and calling it nonsense. Which goes to the whole ultimate point of the thread that society now seems, more than ever, to question experts.


*You have a fair point about my other post seeming confusing about dealing with a self-represented litigant as a criminal defense attorney would being dealing with the State in opposition. My current caseload consists of contentious divorce/family law matters and serious felony criminal defense (rapes, murder, agg assaults, etc.). I'd personally prefer to be a public defender and practice solely criminal defense for the indigent, but 4 kids and a bad golf habit are expensive.

Regarding ...

1. Correct

2. Please direct me to any statements I made regarding your statements on public defenders. If I'm wrong, I'll own it.

3. I appreciate the fact that you are an expert on public defenders. I cannot fathom why you accuse me of questioning your expertise in this field. I believe we are in violent agreement that public defenders are overworked. The only reason I brought it up was as a potential factor in why someone might represent themselves. (There are certainly other factors at play; but I believe reasonable people can accept that it might be one factor.)

4. I've not questioned any expertise you may have on public defenders. I'm not sure why we're talking at cross-purposes, but when you say I'm missing the point of the thread, you're off base. Your assumption that I'm disagreeing with you on public defenders is incorrect. What's more troubling is that you take that assumed disagreement and expand it into a contention that I disagree with all attorneys, or experts, or who knows what else.

* I was just busting your balls on this one.
I hope you win a lot of skins games this summer and can afford to go back to public defending.

You sound like a couple of lawyers.

Somebody should start a thread to keep them from ruining threads like this one.

 

[Tecumseh]

Doctors should be on that list.

I was thinking doctors/nurses. Seems like the opinion of medical professionals has taken a complete 180 since COVID.

Does anyone ever get to see an actual doctor anymore ?

I work in an oncology clinic. We have 2 MDs and 2 NPs. Our less acute patients (usually something like iron deficiency anemia) typically see the NPs for the majority of their visits, but will see the MD if necessary. Our cancer patients see the MDs for treatment planning, image reviews, assessment of tolerance, etc. They’ll see the NPs for more mundane type stuff.

 

[Osaurus]

Kevin Trudeau broke my heart

 

[Zow]

Going back to AI, while my initial responsive post was to poke some fun at it due to a self-represented litigant being vexatious with it, it is a tool that will likely significantly change the practice of law in the next 5-10 years if not sooner. I have already attended multiple seminars (CLEs) on the topic and the sentiment is that if an attorney isn't using AI in the next couple of years to some extent, it's likely malpractice.

While I don't think it can ever replace a lawyer when it comes to arguing in court, I can very much see it changing the way legal documents are drafted in that AI, once perfected (I'm sure Westlaw is currently all over this), will basically be writing briefs, estate plans, contracts, etc. with lawyers maybe overseeing them.

Presently, in my anecdotal experience, AI misses the mark. I've tried it for fun with a couple of briefs and letters and the content is oftentimes nonsensical to downright wrong. I'd note that there was a pretty notable ethical sanction against a lawyer in my jurisdiction who basically had ChatGPT write a complaint (or a brief) and the law cited by AI was literally made up. So, yeah, not quite there yet but it's coming.

 

[bigbottom]

Going back to AI, while my initial responsive post was to poke some fun at it due to a self-represented litigant being vexatious with it, it is a tool that will likely significantly change the practice of law in the next 5-10 years if not sooner. I have already attended multiple seminars (CLEs) on the topic and the sentiment is that if an attorney isn't using AI in the next couple of years to some extent, it's likely malpractice.

While I don't think it can ever replace a lawyer when it comes to arguing in court, I can very much see it changing the way legal documents are drafted in that AI, once perfected (I'm sure Westlaw is currently all over this), will basically be writing briefs, estate plans, contracts, etc. with lawyers maybe overseeing them.

Presently, in my anecdotal experience, AI misses the mark. I've tried it for fun with a couple of briefs and letters and the content is oftentimes nonsensical to downright wrong. I'd note that there was a pretty notable ethical sanction against a lawyer in my jurisdiction who basically had ChatGPT write a complaint (or a brief) and the law cited by AI was literally made up. So, yeah, not quite there yet but it's coming.

I currently use an AI tool to aid in contract review and modification that leverages our in house templates and standard provisions.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Why is scientist in quotes?

The correct term is scientician

 

[Snoopy]

Why is scientist in quotes?

She blinded me with science.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Why is scientist in quotes?

She blinded me with science.

And hit me with technology.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

 

[Terminalxylem]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

Definitely don’t trust people who wear single head phones

 

[DA RAIDERS]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

Definitely don’t trust people who wear single head phones

He’s the one in HI

 

[Jayrod]

As a referee and a parent of athletes, I'm getting to where I trust coaches less and less.

I used to think so highly of them like they were some selfless public servants. But they are just as selfish and self preserving as any other group. In some cases, their ego and ambition makes them worse than the average human, especially at the college level.

They'll mess with the minds and emotions of players and use them to further their careers. Sometimes they are just too lazy or stupid to actually do their job well, to the detrimate of their players' hopes and dreams (especially at the HS level). They'll also lie and attempt to manipulate officials all game long to gain an edge while using a double standard around "professionalism" whereby they show you none while expecting perfection.

There are good ones, of course, but the title of "coach" no longer holds the same immediate level of respect it used to for me.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

I trust no one.

Sadly, neither do I

 

[Terminalxylem]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

Definitely don’t trust people who wear single head phones

He’s the one in HI

With all due respect, neighbor islanders tend to be a little nutty. Kauians are the worst. Buncha displaced hippies up in there.

 

[KarmaPolice]

We should recall the poll I put up probably 15-16 years ago where I asked the board whether they believed they'd be better off representing themselves in a criminal matter versus with the assistance of a public defender. The majority of the board answered with the former, which is just ****ing insane so be prepared for some wild answers and input here that makes the dog v. human poll seem rational.

Did they assume you were going to be their lawyer while answering that poll?

 

[Zow]

We should recall the poll I put up probably 15-16 years ago where I asked the board whether they believed they'd be better off representing themselves in a criminal matter versus with the assistance of a public defender. The majority of the board answered with the former, which is just ****ing insane so be prepared for some wild answers and input here that makes the dog v. human poll seem rational.

Did they assume you were going to be their lawyer while answering that poll?

Haha hope so. Would be the only rational explanation for the poll result.

 

[Gatorade]

As a referee and a parent of athletes, I'm getting to where I trust coaches less and less.

I used to think so highly of them like they were some selfless public servants. But they are just as selfish and self preserving as any other group. In some cases, their ego and ambition makes them worse than the average human, especially at the college level.

They'll mess with the minds and emotions of players and use them to further their careers. Sometimes they are just too lazy or stupid to actually do their job well, to the detrimate of their players' hopes and dreams (especially at the HS level). They'll also lie and attempt to manipulate officials all game long to gain an edge while using a double standard around "professionalism" whereby they show you none while expecting perfection.

There are good ones, of course, but the title of "coach" no longer holds the same immediate level of respect it used to for me.

Especially the ones coaching their own children

 

[parasaurolophus]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

Definitely don’t trust people who wear single head phones

No headphone on solo hikes?

 

[FairWarning]

Any gambling tout show should be added.

 

[Terminalxylem]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

Definitely don’t trust people who wear single head phones

No headphone on solo hikes?

I used to wear headphones when I ran short races, but prefer my thoughts, and the sounds of nature when outdoors. I suppose it may increase safety as well.

 

[SWC]

As a referee and a parent of athletes, I'm getting to where I trust coaches less and less.

I used to think so highly of them like they were some selfless public servants. But they are just as selfish and self preserving as any other group. In some cases, their ego and ambition makes them worse than the average human, especially at the college level.

They'll mess with the minds and emotions of players and use them to further their careers. Sometimes they are just too lazy or stupid to actually do their job well, to the detrimate of their players' hopes and dreams (especially at the HS level). They'll also lie and attempt to manipulate officials all game long to gain an edge while using a double standard around "professionalism" whereby they show you none while expecting perfection.

There are good ones, of course, but the title of "coach" no longer holds the same immediate level of respect it used to for me.

im going to agree with this in large part i have one example in particular a guy who is a hof fame coach that ive gotten to know when you examine what he does he promises kids starting spots on varsity when they are in the 7th grade and then holds to that promise regardless who has developed or should have the spot he schedules ridiculously weak opponents for non conference games and i mean teams down three divisions who rpi out in wisconsin in the high 300s which is really bad and then he leaves his starters in late in those games to run up numbers and will beat those bad teams by 40 50 60 points all while only winning 1 2 or 3 games in his actual conference and the more you get to know him the more you realize it is about his ego and his win total and literally nothing else i went to one of his banquets at the end of the year and he said more about himself than any of the girls actually not saying anything literally not a word about one of his better players while she stood up in front of the crowd trying not to break down i mean guys that like that just show what is wrong with the world not anything good about it take that to the bank bromigos

 

[SWC]

My brother is a podcast/documentary junkie. There’s always a headphone in one ear. He has some interesting takes on the world. Much like the news, careful where you get your info people.

Definitely don’t trust people who wear single head phones

No headphone on solo hikes?

I used to wear headphones when I ran short races, but prefer my thoughts, and the sounds of nature when outdoors. I suppose it may increase safety as well.

i got those bone conducter headphones and i can hear my music and everything else around me it is pretty cool maybe look at those and see what you think take that to the bank bromigo

 

[parasaurolophus]

I used to wear headphones when I ran short races, but prefer my thoughts, and the sounds of nature when outdoors. I suppose it may increase safety as well.

I need to be able to hear rattles. So i just use one headphone on low volume so i can listen to podcasts.