I'm oppressed by your failure to recognise the deep meaning of the comment by Sir Laurence.
It wasn't a comment, it was a question. And the answer in a general context is no. If he was asking about statutory interpretation, then it's the policy of our drafting office to follow the Macquarie. I can't speak for other drafting offices.
NEXT!
It may look like a question, but it was really a demand - cite me something on which I can rely.
"@Gee D is a pompous douche who couldn't internalize logic even with modus ponens shoved up his ass."
I'm oppressed by your failure to recognise the deep meaning of the comment by Sir Laurence.
It wasn't a comment, it was a question. And the answer in a general context is no. If he was asking about statutory interpretation, then it's the policy of our drafting office to follow the Macquarie. I can't speak for other drafting offices.
NEXT!
It may look like a question, but it was really a demand - cite me something on which I can rely.
Depends entirely in what way Sir Laurence was trying to rely on something.
Look, you seem to be attempting to get into an argument with a legislative drafter about how language is used in a legal setting. Have you got some kind of death wish?
Sir Laurence was not attempting to rely on anything. He was trying to get counsel to say why he should rely upon the Macquarie. If you, as a drafter, choose to rely upon a particular source, that's ok for you, but you can't expect that everyone to agree that the source is good. FWIW, in the 70's, I would not have referred to the Macquarie; well before I retired, I would have in preference to the OED.
As to why Sir Laurence should rely on the Macquarie... Oh God, I'm beginning to fear I have to use small words.
If he was interpreting legislation, then he should rely on it because that's what drafters of legislation rely on.
If.
Fuck me, it's like playing the worst game of 20 questions ever. You basically drip out the tiniest pieces of information about the context that this exchange occurred in, because you don't WANT me to have an answer do you? No. You're trying to make A Point though I don't know exactly what the point is.
I think it started with you being the world expert on how to spell "judgment" or something, but basically it's becoming some sort of secret anecdote about how you were in a courtroom once but you're not going to tell me what actually happened, and being terribly proud that you know how the world worked nearly 50 fucking years ago and therefore that's how everything must stay forever. None of these new-fangled 21st century innovations like putting an extra letter in.
This is truly one of the most idiotic conversations you and I have ever been involved in.
The Macquarie records Australian usage. Over the course of several editions it shifted to saying that most people spell "judgement" with an 'e' in Australia because that's what fucking happened. Just deal with it instead of pretending that we all have to speak legalese because that's what people spoke in the late 19th century. That's half the fucking problem with the legal profession, people learn precedents from when the senior partner was a boy and recite them like magical incantations. Grow up. You're clearly old enough.
And to add to that, Sir Laurence retired as a judge in 1988. What the fuck would he know about modern spelling? Why am I supposed to care about an anecdote that must be over 30 years old?
I am very saddened that Orfeo took my post in a manner in which it was not intended. My original post was the sort of anecdote that a colleague would have told then or now at Friday night's drinks. Orfeo seems to have taken it as a slur on his professionalism, which it certainly was not meant to be. So I withdraw my post.
My original post was the sort of anecdote that a colleague would have told then or now at Friday night's drinks.
Your original post was actually about how to spell "judg(e)ment".
Your anecdote was your attempt to pooh-pooh the idea that the Macquarie Dictionary might have anything useful to say on the subject.
EDIT: Oh, and I'm not taking any of it a slur on my professionalism. I'm just using my professionalism as part of the basis for conveying why I think you're being a bit of an idiot.
And I did prefer it. But that does not denigrate the Macquarie now, nor does it cast any adverse comment on the professionalism of your office.
Where I did make a mistake was in assuming that your life in the law had been similar to mine. It obviously was not, but that does not say that it was better or worse than mine - just different.
@orfeo might be an oppression-seeking individual, but only if that's his kink. Meanwhile, @Gee D is only oppressed to the degree that he has had a mild decline in privilege to be only a couple standard deviations better off than most.
I'm oppressed because everytime I see Orfeo's name, my grey matter changes it to Oreo. I like Oreos in my ice cream and feel more oppressed at the thought that Orfeo might not even like Oreos.
I'm oppressed because everytime I see Orfeo's name, my grey matter changes it to Oreo. I like Oreos in my ice cream and feel more oppressed at the thought that Orfeo might not even like Oreos.
I've been oppressed for nearly 20 years by people mistaking the name of the world's first opera for some "cookie" from America.
The truly sad part is, on some large websites where the name "orfeo" was already taken, I resorted to "orfeocookie" as an alternative. That's right, I ended up taking on board what the Yanks were doing to my name. Monteverdi would've been appalled.
I've never had one, and I don't think they exist in the UK.
Bloody hell, you've really not be paying attention. Even our small co-op has oreos, oreo thins, oreo double creams, oreo minis, oreo dairy milk, oreo easter eggs, oreo mini eggs and oreo ice cream. The damn things are everywhere.
I've never had one, and I don't think they exist in the UK.
Bloody hell, you've really not be paying attention. Even our small co-op has oreos, oreo thins, oreo double creams, oreo minis, oreo dairy milk, oreo easter eggs, oreo mini eggs and oreo ice cream. The damn things are everywhere.
Even bourbons are nowhere near as good as I thought they were when I was their age.
Not if you are drinking those sissy 80 proof bourbons. Now some of the 90 and 100 proof ones are quite tasty....oh, wait. Is this a Pond difference on what the word "bourbon" means???
I've never had one, and I don't think they exist in the UK.
Bloody hell, you've really not be paying attention. Even our small co-op has oreos, oreo thins, oreo double creams, oreo minis, oreo dairy milk, oreo easter eggs, oreo mini eggs and oreo ice cream. The damn things are everywhere.
And all sickly and vile.
I am convinced that much American "food" in fact consists of oil refinery by-products, canned, processed and sweetened until unfit for human consumption.
(There was possibly one of the worst American films of all time, "Putney Swope" (which I enjoyed a lot at the time). The token white man was seated between two black men at a boardroom table and uttered the line, "I feel like an Oreo!" You really can't repeat that these days).
I've never had one, and I don't think they exist in the UK.
Bloody hell, you've really not be paying attention. Even our small co-op has oreos, oreo thins, oreo double creams, oreo minis, oreo dairy milk, oreo easter eggs, oreo mini eggs and oreo ice cream. The damn things are everywhere.
And all sickly and vile.
The thins aren't bad, actually. There are worse things, like creme eggs.
Comments
"@Gee D is a pompous douche who couldn't internalize logic even with modus ponens shoved up his ass."
-everybody
Player of top tunes in ours. Both work.
A good point. Even if not with correct spelling.
Depends entirely in what way Sir Laurence was trying to rely on something.
Look, you seem to be attempting to get into an argument with a legislative drafter about how language is used in a legal setting. Have you got some kind of death wish?
Everybody has their of dei.
For what it's worth, the Macquarie wasn't published until 1981 so I'd be damned impressed if you had referred to it in the 70's.
If he was interpreting legislation, then he should rely on it because that's what drafters of legislation rely on.
If.
Fuck me, it's like playing the worst game of 20 questions ever. You basically drip out the tiniest pieces of information about the context that this exchange occurred in, because you don't WANT me to have an answer do you? No. You're trying to make A Point though I don't know exactly what the point is.
I think it started with you being the world expert on how to spell "judgment" or something, but basically it's becoming some sort of secret anecdote about how you were in a courtroom once but you're not going to tell me what actually happened, and being terribly proud that you know how the world worked nearly 50 fucking years ago and therefore that's how everything must stay forever. None of these new-fangled 21st century innovations like putting an extra letter in.
This is truly one of the most idiotic conversations you and I have ever been involved in.
The Macquarie records Australian usage. Over the course of several editions it shifted to saying that most people spell "judgement" with an 'e' in Australia because that's what fucking happened. Just deal with it instead of pretending that we all have to speak legalese because that's what people spoke in the late 19th century. That's half the fucking problem with the legal profession, people learn precedents from when the senior partner was a boy and recite them like magical incantations. Grow up. You're clearly old enough.
Your original post was actually about how to spell "judg(e)ment".
Your anecdote was your attempt to pooh-pooh the idea that the Macquarie Dictionary might have anything useful to say on the subject.
EDIT: Oh, and I'm not taking any of it a slur on my professionalism. I'm just using my professionalism as part of the basis for conveying why I think you're being a bit of an idiot.
Where I did make a mistake was in assuming that your life in the law had been similar to mine. It obviously was not, but that does not say that it was better or worse than mine - just different.
There's something vaguely oppressive about that remark.
I'm a poor old retired man.
We'll need you to teach us.
#idoubtit
I've never had one, and I don't think they exist in the UK. However, Captain Marvel likes them, and he has the wisdom of Solomon!
I've been oppressed for nearly 20 years by people mistaking the name of the world's first opera for some "cookie" from America.
The truly sad part is, on some large websites where the name "orfeo" was already taken, I resorted to "orfeocookie" as an alternative. That's right, I ended up taking on board what the Yanks were doing to my name. Monteverdi would've been appalled.
Bloody hell, you've really not be paying attention. Even our small co-op has oreos, oreo thins, oreo double creams, oreo minis, oreo dairy milk, oreo easter eggs, oreo mini eggs and oreo ice cream. The damn things are everywhere.
They're widely available but nothing to write home about.
And all sickly and vile.
I am convinced that much American "food" in fact consists of oil refinery by-products, canned, processed and sweetened until unfit for human consumption.
(There was possibly one of the worst American films of all time, "Putney Swope" (which I enjoyed a lot at the time). The token white man was seated between two black men at a boardroom table and uttered the line, "I feel like an Oreo!" You really can't repeat that these days).
The thins aren't bad, actually. There are worse things, like creme eggs.