Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
That is possible but I doubt it. You often make this claim that people take positions contrary to yours because they have not "read enough" or not “read the right things". What is interesting is that these assertions are not usually backed by specific examples of what you read and what the other person missed. They are just nebulous assertions of if you read blank, you would think different. Instead of telling the other poster to read something (in my experience you are the only poster that uses this tactic) why don't you explain what you have read and how what you read supports your position or does not support the other poster's position. I believe this tactic would be more useful for everyone involved and much less pretentious.
|
The guy who taught me to try cases would explain you have to listen to everything, even stuff you don't want to hear. About lawyers he saw plowing blindly along sticking to some script he would say "he hasn't tried 100 cases, he has tried 1 case 100 times."
That said, I do think it is safe to say Ty has read more than all of us, if you judge solely by total word count, and don't discount for repetition.
