he might

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Tim Howard will probably equal Torres tally for this season

I gave 2 stars just to be awkward. Sorry.

i changed from a 5 to 3 to not be awkward. sorry.

Who are Henry and Torres?

I changed from a 1 to a 5 to a 3. I'm changeable like that.

I didn't change, I just stayed on 3

What do I vote if I know one of them but not the other?

I would play it safe and go for 3 star- it says 'I don't know who Henry OR Torres are'

I hope you don't write too much critical software Inactive User.

I don't know what critical software is but I do lots of law...

I gave this five just because I could. Also I've just had a fish finger sandwich for lunch and now feel good about the return of TH14 - as was.

Figures, you don't use much logic when you're "doing lots of law", I guess.

In what way is my focus on 'or' not logical? Ticking 3* if you don't know either one or the other of the two players mentioned is simple application of the English language and logic.

Maybe you should work on your English comprehension as well then - it's the difference between;
NOT (A OR B)
as written by OP and
(NOT A) OR (NOT B)
as read by you. Which may look similar, but are by no means are the same thing. Better punctuation in the first place would have helped, but let's not go down that road so early in the week.

It was just a crap joke, kinda wished I hadn't bothered now. I apologise, I'm jaded, it's Monday.

There you go - you should become a lawyer. Don't you know that we make all our money by arguing over things like that?!

Who?

"you should become a lawyer"

While I do struggle with my conscience at times over the nature of my work, I console myself that while the existence of Lawyers and Politicians continues, I can assume a certain moral and ethical superiority.

I'm cheerfully blunt about my career. It's not about saving dolphins, the environment or people - it's about money.

That being said, I assume intellectual superiority over pretty much everyone.

Ahh, but based on your own statement, my assumption is clearly accurate.

"While I do struggle with my conscience at times over the nature of my work, I console myself that while the existence of Lawyers and Politicians continues, I can assume a certain moral and ethical superiority."

Don't put yourself down, HenrysCat. The world will always need pimps.

Unless you are a banker, yes, your statement is probably accurate.

That being said, there are certain lawyers who other lawyers presume ethical and moral superiority over. Tort lawyers (the ambulance-chasing variety) are universally scorned; some family barristers (only certain ones) and the American-style 'loophole-specialists' to name a few.

Commercial lawyers aren't really present on the moral compass.

"The world will always need pimps."

Pimp? I wish. At least there'd be a little fresh air and travel involved.

"Commercial lawyers aren't really present on the moral compass"

What? Not at all? <eek>

And by <eek>, I meant