GM's thread about nothing (9 Viewers)

[urbanhack]

1,666 posts about a game that hasn't even started? College Football fans dumbfound me.

I'm tempted to jump in that thread with some sort of shtick. Any suggestions?

make something up about un-reported field conditions that might affect the game.

Aren't they playing in a dome? Even better if so.

"there is a large seam in the 20 yard line that had to be redone because of the 4x4 Big Foot event a few nights ago."

 

[Mr. Pickles]

So which Vegas casino had the loosest Craps in town?

There's not much they can do to loosen the base odds, except by limiting the amount of an odds bet you place behind your original bet. E.g., if you be 10 on the pass line and make a number (4,5,6,8,9,10), you are entitled to make an "odds bet" placed behind the Pass Line bet. Some places let you only match the original bet, other may go up to 10x the original. because you are getting true odds with no house juice- you want to always bet the max on this.The higher the better, so try to play where they offer those. 2x-3x is common, 10x is much harder to find. All the other bets on the board are sucker bets.

Ever play craps at a more "urban" establishment? You will hear bets being called out that you never knew existed."Lemme get a horn-high yo!" "Gimme a 'world' bet with a craps check and a scooby-doo" "Gimme a $3 Impala and cover the corners with the vig from my $2.50 Lik-em-Stik"

Horn high yo is pretty common. Those others are made up.

Thanks, Mr. Rothstein.

Now you're going to make me google your obscure witticisms?

-1

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

any chance your "insurance defense" practice can be groomed into something a little more sophisticated (with higher rates) down the road?20 years from now, you aren't going to want to be schlepping around to depositions on insurance defense work at insurance defense rates. (FWIW, I cut my teeth doing the insurance defense stuff 10 years ago)Feel free to PM me.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Booooooooring.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

My GB bet me $50 on O/U 100 yards passing for Tebow. I took the over.

For the record, Dave Chappelle is not on Twitter

So I've worked at the same company for 12 years, since I was 21. I started as a part time dock worker while going to school and now my current title is Corporate Manager of Warehouse Operations. Fancy title, I know. Another manager was my [psycho] sister's best friend. I was hired by our current VP of Operations, whom I played softball with at the time I was hired. I have numerous personal connections within this company. I make decent enough money, but not FBG money. I also have incredible job security. I have been told by the owners that I can/will be corporate president in 25 or so years if I continue on my current track..

That said, I've been unhappy there for quite some time. I want to apply to another company but am hesitant to even submit my resume. It might be a step down, title-wise but I may need the change. How do you folks who change jobs pull the trigger when you're personally invested?

Would you be satisfied if they changed your title to "Jesus Christ of Warehouse Operations"?

Meh, I'm 32. That would mean I would have to die this year right?

You're in AZ, right?PM me

 

[Captain Placeholder]

I just woke up in a strange bed to my phone going off multiple times, coinciding with kickoff. Checked my texts from last night--no help. One from me saying "totally killed a possum" at 2 am, and that's it. Nobody in this house--no clues as to whose it is. Walk outside, get in my car and drive home. People I was with last night say that we closed the bar, we all said goodbye and I got a ride home with a friend.

Jesus.

You should have a stolen a microwave or toaster or something.

i used to steal the shower head at parties in high school.

Why?

because it was funny.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

If I wasn't banned from Facebook

Gonna need more info on why Zuckerberg banned you.

Facebook doesn't approve of my aging process.

Happy birthday?

The first birthday of the year is always the best birthday of the year.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

any chance your "insurance defense" practice can be groomed into something a little more sophisticated (with higher rates) down the road?20 years from now, you aren't going to want to be schlepping around to depositions on insurance defense work at insurance defense rates. (FWIW, I cut my teeth doing the insurance defense stuff 10 years ago)Feel free to PM me.

Spoiler

more on this: down the road, which side of the coin do you think will be easier to sell? you will be an associate for only a small fraction of your career. The rest of it you are going to have to dedicate to selling. Gaining and maintaining clients. Given the fact that there are no trials these days, distinguishing yourself as a litigator is a real #####. And more and more, insurance companies only care who can get the work done at the cheapest rate. Not a great environment for growth.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

It sounds like you are close enough to these people that you could be up front (to a degree) and tell them you think you need a sabbatical. You've been there since HS and just think everyone would be better off if you left for a year or two. Maybe that way the door wouldn't be shut when you return, horrified at what the American workplace has become.

Yes I'm very close to them but a sabbatical is not in the cards. The last manager that put in her two weeks was escorted out the door (in an office of 25 people) because our "higher-ups" didn't want her messing with any accounts. And anyone who quits will not be approved for re-hire. Trust me, I know it is beyond stupid but that's what I've witnessed in the past 12 years.Plus if I were to take an actual sabbatical I couldn't float it. 2 years into our house, new car, baby on the way....It's either all-in or fold

It would be pretty low but you could always fake cancer.

 

[Thorn]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Booooooooring.

 

[Thorn]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

any chance your "insurance defense" practice can be groomed into something a little more sophisticated (with higher rates) down the road?20 years from now, you aren't going to want to be schlepping around to depositions on insurance defense work at insurance defense rates. (FWIW, I cut my teeth doing the insurance defense stuff 10 years ago)Feel free to PM me.

Spoiler

more on this: down the road, which side of the coin do you think will be easier to sell? you will be an associate for only a small fraction of your career. The rest of it you are going to have to dedicate to selling. Gaining and maintaining clients. Given the fact that there are no trials these days, distinguishing yourself as a litigator is a real #####. And more and more, insurance companies only care who can get the work done at the cheapest rate. Not a great environment for growth.

Agreed. The future of insurance defense does not look especially bright, if I had to guess.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

any chance your "insurance defense" practice can be groomed into something a little more sophisticated (with higher rates) down the road?20 years from now, you aren't going to want to be schlepping around to depositions on insurance defense work at insurance defense rates. (FWIW, I cut my teeth doing the insurance defense stuff 10 years ago)Feel free to PM me.

Spoiler

more on this: down the road, which side of the coin do you think will be easier to sell? you will be an associate for only a small fraction of your career. The rest of it you are going to have to dedicate to selling. Gaining and maintaining clients. Given the fact that there are no trials these days, distinguishing yourself as a litigator is a real #####. And more and more, insurance companies only care who can get the work done at the cheapest rate. Not a great environment for growth.

Agreed. The future of insurance defense does not look especially bright, if I had to guess.stepping stone. Doors will open.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

penis

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

sorry, had to be done. too much serious talk.

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Booooooooring.I totally read that in Homer Simpson's voice.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

Booooooooring.

I totally read that in Homer Simpson's voice.I totally wrote it that way!

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

Booooooooring.

Spoiler

I totally read that in Homer Simpson's voice.

I totally wrote it that way! No I mean in the same voice from the videos I got on my phone "So, here I am about to close down my bar mother[jumpers]. Sorry, I call everyone mother[jumpers] :doesshot:"That voice.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

So which Vegas casino had the loosest Craps in town?

There's not much they can do to loosen the base odds, except by limiting the amount of an odds bet you place behind your original bet. E.g., if you be 10 on the pass line and make a number (4,5,6,8,9,10), you are entitled to make an "odds bet" placed behind the Pass Line bet. Some places let you only match the original bet, other may go up to 10x the original. because you are getting true odds with no house juice- you want to always bet the max on this.The higher the better, so try to play where they offer those. 2x-3x is common, 10x is much harder to find. All the other bets on the board are sucker bets.

Ever play craps at a more "urban" establishment? You will hear bets being called out that you never knew existed."Lemme get a horn-high yo!" "Gimme a 'world' bet with a craps check and a scooby-doo" "Gimme a $3 Impala and cover the corners with the vig from my $2.50 Lik-em-Stik"

Horn high yo is pretty common. Those others are made up.

Thanks, Mr. Rothstein.

Now you're going to make me google your obscure witticisms?

Not a Boardwalk Empire, Black Sox Scandal or history of organized crime fan?

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

Booooooooring.

Spoiler

I totally read that in Homer Simpson's voice.

Spoiler

I totally wrote it that way!

No I mean in the same voice from the videos I got on my phone "So, here I am about to close down my bar mother[jumpers]. Sorry, I call everyone mother[jumpers] :doesshot:"That voice.Yeah, that's the one.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years. But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.Pros/ConsReal Estate ProI have the experience alreadyI can bill at a higher rateI am already good at itI have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harderPayment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")Real Estate ConIt's a lot of just reviewing documentsNever go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"Never do any research or writing, which I enjoyLitigation ProThe work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediationsIncludes research and writingIf a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme courtLitigation ConInsurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of workWork is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going onThe overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse. I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

Quit and join the circus, imo

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Fairly serious and lengthy work/career related question

Spoiler

So the partners are meeting today off-site. This is their traditional year-end, split up the profits and discuss the future meeting. This calendar year, they fired the only associate with more experience than me. Couple that with the fact that I had an A+ year, I know I'm on track for partnership. This is only the end of year 3 for me, so I know they won't be offering it to me for another few years.

But I am hearing that they want me to decide which direction I want my practice to go. The firm basically has two arms. One is a litigation practice that gets 90% of its business as insurance defense. The other is transactional practice that does commercial and a little residential real estate work.

All along, I have bounced back and forth between the two arms. This started when I was low man on the totem pole, because I had existing real estate experience, but the need was more towards litigation. So I did both. I was worth more to the real estate side because I needed less instruction to be up to speed, but I was needed more on the litigation side. That has pretty much remained the case. The downside, of course, is that it's tough to be a true rainmaker when you don't have a very good familiarity with your clients and your area of expertise. Basically most of the big clients see me as the "fill-in guy." So they're not sending me any work directly. Also, I don't feel like an expert in either field, because I'm always splitting time.

So I know the question is coming, "which way do you want to go?" And I don't know the answer.

Pros/Cons

Real Estate Pro

I have the experience already

I can bill at a higher rate

I am already good at it

I have a fair amount of contacts that I could start working harder

Payment usually occurs at the closing, and in full (clients are typically banks or corporations, and they don't generally question bills)

Work is generally more steady (no "OMG I have a trial next week and have to dedicate all time and effort to it!")

Real Estate Con

It's a lot of just reviewing documents

Never go to court/trial, aka what's considered "real lawyering"

Never do any research or writing, which I enjoy

Litigation Pro

The work is more exciting with court, trials, hearings, mediations

Includes research and writing

If a case ever got appealed, my firm would let me argue it before the state supreme court

Litigation Con

Insurance defense work = always fighting to get paid (ins companies significantly limit amount you can bill per hour, for what items, etc. etc.)

Much tougher to make my goal/quota/nut with this type of work

Work is much streakier, when a trial approaches, everything else gets dropped, other times there just isn't much going on

The overlay of this whole dilemma is that in 2008, I got laid off. That totally changed my point of view. Up until then I thought my job was 99% secure. Luckily, I was able to immediately find a new job (this one). But it was a fair amount of luck. These days, luck might be different, AND, the legal job market is even worse.

I know that if I had never been laid off, I'd say litigation, knowing I'd just have to hustle as much as need be. But reality hits you hard, bro. Knowing what a lay off would mean makes me really hesitant to make any move that puts me the tiniest bit closer to expendable. And I don't know if I'll ever feel that confident about job security ever again, even if/when I make partner.

Thanks for reading, GMTAN.

Spoiler

Booooooooring.

I totally read that in Homer Simpson's voice.me too

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

So which Vegas casino had the loosest Craps in town?

There's not much they can do to loosen the base odds, except by limiting the amount of an odds bet you place behind your original bet. E.g., if you be 10 on the pass line and make a number (4,5,6,8,9,10), you are entitled to make an "odds bet" placed behind the Pass Line bet. Some places let you only match the original bet, other may go up to 10x the original. because you are getting true odds with no house juice- you want to always bet the max on this.The higher the better, so try to play where they offer those. 2x-3x is common, 10x is much harder to find. All the other bets on the board are sucker bets.

Ever play craps at a more "urban" establishment? You will hear bets being called out that you never knew existed."Lemme get a horn-high yo!" "Gimme a 'world' bet with a craps check and a scooby-doo" "Gimme a $3 Impala and cover the corners with the vig from my $2.50 Lik-em-Stik"

Horn high yo is pretty common. Those others are made up.

Thanks, Mr. Rothstein.

Now you're going to make me google your obscure witticisms?

Not a Boardwalk Empire, Black Sox Scandal or history of organized crime fan?

I would have also accepted Ace Rothstein from "Casino".

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB on how much my cousin looks like your GF. Kind of eery really.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB on how much my cousin looks like your GF. Kind of eery really.

Hi. She single? Low self-esteem? Penchant for buggery?

 

[Zow]

Thorn, since each track seems to be similar for the whole job security issue I think the question to ask yourself is: do I like being in court? If that answer is yes, I think going litigation is the no-brainer here. Yeah it's more up and down, but it'll never be boring and the chance of getting burned out when you're closer to your financial goals will be much less.

 

[GroveDiesel]

1,666 posts about a game that hasn't even started? College Football fans dumbfound me.

I'm tempted to jump in that thread with some sort of shtick. Any suggestions?

make something up about un-reported field conditions that might affect the game.

Aren't they playing in a dome? Even better if so.

"there is a large seam in the 20 yard line that had to be redone because of the 4x4 Big Foot event a few nights ago."

The major concern is that the glue manufacturer that made the glue used to hold the turf down, called Grassy Glue, went out of business last summer. So they've made the repair, but there are serious fears that the section of turf affected could slide around, bunch up, or even start to come up entirely.Bet the under.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Thorn, since each track seems to be similar for the whole job security issue I think the question to ask yourself is: do I like being in court? If that answer is yes, I think going litigation is the no-brainer here. Yeah it's more up and down, but it'll never be boring and the chance of getting burned out when you're closer to your financial goals will be much less.

oof. I don't think you could be more wrong.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB on how much my cousin looks like your GF. Kind of eery really.

Hi. She single? Low self-esteem? Penchant for buggery?

I would say she is younger the Stu GF, 29 I think. Graduating from nursing school this spring and getting married in July. However she was engaged to this guy and broke it off a few years back so you may have a chance. Pretty sure the "little talk" I had with him on keeping his temper in check helped. ETAGM, you never answered last night. You have a baby on the way?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Grassy Glue =

 

[HighBeams]

Thanks, guy. :Zzz:

 

[Thorn]

Thanks, guy. :Zzz:

Happy birthday you little imp.

 

[Zow]

Thorn, since each track seems to be similar for the whole job security issue I think the question to ask yourself is: do I like being in court? If that answer is yes, I think going litigation is the no-brainer here. Yeah it's more up and down, but it'll never be boring and the chance of getting burned out when you're closer to your financial goals will be much less.

oof. I don't think you could be more wrong.

Even if the answer to the court question is "yes"? Granted, I don't do much civil litigation, but for me personally I get the most excitement out of going to trial/being in court and think I'd get more worn down by something like real estate.

 

[HighBeams]

Thanks, guy. :Zzz:

Happy birthday you little imp.

Thank you, sir.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Good, we were wondering.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

If I wasn't banned from Facebook

Gonna need more info on why Zuckerberg banned you.

Facebook doesn't approve of my aging process.

Happy birthday?

The first birthday of the year is always the best birthday of the year.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY DOUG~!

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Tecumseh, the head massager has been a smash hit. The boys do use it on every person that enters the house and the dog.

 

[HighBeams]

If I wasn't banned from Facebook

Gonna need more info on why Zuckerberg banned you.

Facebook doesn't approve of my aging process.

Happy birthday?

The first birthday of the year is always the best birthday of the year.

Try telling Facebook that.

 

[HighBeams]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY DOUG~!

Thanks, man.

 

[Tecumseh]

Tecumseh, the head massager has been a smash hit. The boys do use it on every person that enters the house and the dog.

Awesome.

 

[McBokonon]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB really.

GM, you never answered last night.

Dial it back a little, Glenn Close.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Epic naptime forthcoming.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

[Idiot Boxer]

If I wasn't banned from Facebook

Gonna need more info on why Zuckerberg banned you.

Facebook doesn't approve of my aging process.

Happy birthday?

The first birthday of the year is always the best birthday of the year.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY DOUG~!

My birthday isn't until Wednesday. Oh. Not talking to me. Got it. I'll be over there if you need me.

 

[Drifter]

I am about as loyal as can be to employers and NOTHING good has ever come from it. My experience has been that when the #### hits the fan, they will not feel the same way about you, that you do about them. That doesn't mean you should change jobs willy nilly, but if an opportunity ever comes up that sounds like it will benefit me more than my current position in terms of my long term career and well being, than I will always at least explore the opportunity.

are you getting ####ed??

Me? Now? No.I've been ####ed in the past though - hard. Promises made and not kept, "loyalty" thrown out the window, etc. There's only so many times I'll be taught that lesson before I finally pay attention.

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB really.

GM, you never answered last night.

Dial it back a little, Glenn Close.

My link

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB really.

GM, you never answered last night.

Dial it back a little, Glenn Close.

Sorry, I've been away for a while.

 

[Disco Stu]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB on how much my cousin looks like your GF. Kind of eery really.

Hi. She single? Low self-esteem? Penchant for buggery?

I would say she is younger the Stu GF, 29 I think. Graduating from nursing school this spring and getting married in July. However she was engaged to this guy and broke it off a few years back so you may have a chance. Pretty sure the "little talk" I had with him on keeping his temper in check helped.

She's hot but considerably less Asian. Are you saying she has been engaged twice to the same guy? Can't fail.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB on how much my cousin looks like your GF. Kind of eery really.

Hi. She single? Low self-esteem? Penchant for buggery?

I would say she is younger the Stu GF, 29 I think. Graduating from nursing school this spring and getting married in July. However she was engaged to this guy and broke it off a few years back so you may have a chance. Pretty sure the "little talk" I had with him on keeping his temper in check helped.

She's hot but considerably less Asian.

Are you saying she has been engaged twice to the same guy? Can't fail.

Seriously. She calls off the engagement, then bangs around for a few years, then gets engaged again. I can't understand that guy. McBokonon, I'm particularly on edge today from having a massive work load thanks to being sick last week which also has kept me aware from here. Oh yeah, Mrs. SLB (riddled with ADD) forgot to give Cal his medicine yesterday afternoon so he was up all night long. I mean wide ####### awake at 2:30 this morning asking why night time had to be so long. Which means I've been up for a long time too. So there are some answers to questions that may or may not have been answered.

All I really want to know now is if there is a baby on the way. Other than that, I feel like choking a penguin.

P&S

Hey Sthick! Pretty funny how my kid fakes this stuff huh? I guess I should have asked him nicer the 400 hundred times I tried to get him back to sleep. lol

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

Stu, surprised you didn't reply to my comment on the FB on how much my cousin looks like your GF. Kind of eery really.

Hi. She single? Low self-esteem? Penchant for buggery?

I would say she is younger the Stu GF, 29 I think. Graduating from nursing school this spring and getting married in July. However she was engaged to this guy and broke it off a few years back so you may have a chance. Pretty sure the "little talk" I had with him on keeping his temper in check helped.

She's hot but considerably less Asian.

Are you saying she has been engaged twice to the same guy? Can't fail.

Seriously. She calls off the engagement, then bangs around for a few years, then gets engaged again. I can't understand that guy. McBokonon, I'm particularly on edge today from having a massive work load thanks to being sick last week which also has kept me aware from here. Oh yeah, Mrs. SLB (riddled with ADD) forgot to give Cal his medicine yesterday afternoon so he was up all night long. I mean wide ####### awake at 2:30 this morning asking why night time had to be so long. Which means I've been up for a long time too. So there are some answers to questions that may or may not have been answered.

All I really want to know now is if there is a baby on the way. Other than that, I feel like choking a penguin.

P&S

Hey Sthick! Pretty funny how my kid fakes this stuff huh? I guess I should have asked him nicer the 400 hundred times I tried to get him back to sleep. lol

Hey man, sorry to hear about all your aquatic, flightless bird problems.

 

[Disco Stu]

Seriously. She calls off the engagement, then bangs around for a few years, then gets engaged again. I can't understand that guy.

This would have been the ideal time to introduce her to your ifriends.

 

[General Malaise]

Anybody else watch Charles Barkley on SNL this week?

White People Problems

"That problem is so white, it should go snow boarding."