Tom Adams, post: 453873, member: 7285 wrote: Oh you dippy idiot, that was Richard Schaut. He died a couple of years ago (I don't remember when). He loved calling anyone who disagreed with him a dippy idiot...I wasn't really calling you that.
His last post: https://surveyorconnect.com/community/threads/so-i-got-to-thinking.105628/#post-105976
that was 2011, so maybe more than a couple of years ago.
I looked at that thread and was reminded we haven't heard from Perry Williams for a very long time. What became of him?
Bill93, post: 453888, member: 87 wrote: I looked at that thread and was reminded we haven't heard from Perry Williams for a very long time. What became of him?[/QU
Perry is probably busy with his band and harvesting maple syrup...
rberry5886, post: 453894, member: 232 wrote: Perry is probably busy with his band and harvesting maple syrup...
Do you harvest in the Fall or in the Spring? My wife was just asking me if I still was in touch with that survey guy that sold us the maple syrup.
rberry5886, post: 453894, member: 232 wrote: Perry is probably busy with his band and harvesting maple syrup...
[MEDIA=youtube]YrRPEejEdXY[/MEDIA]
David Livingstone, post: 453871, member: 431 wrote: I rememeber when someone got an electronic copy of one of TDD's plat. Of course people picked it apart and TDD went balistic. That was a good one.
Who was the guy from Wisc. He was often accused of being a fence line surveyor. He would often say something like "if the record title doesn't agree with the marks on the ground, who better to fix the problem?". I often think he was maybe smarter and on track more than the rest of us. To many surveyors don't agree with old work because of the math.
That was one of TDD's rivals in the Denver area that posted a link to a recorded ALTA by TDD, anonymous, don't remember his handle.
OMG....Perrys Syrup was by far THE best syrup I have ever tasted!! Yeah, what happened to him? Mrs. Butterworths just isn't cutting it. 😛
Richard Schaut.
I actually called him up.
Not a totally bad fellow.
Imagine this:
Surveys lots 2-4 for a loan survey, in 2001.
Surveys lots 5-7 for loan survey in 2010.
Due to landowners actions, the common line between 4-5 moves 2 ft, now, the bank wants to re-fi. With 2001 survey. Guess what? It's now wrong!
Ha
N
Dave Karoly, post: 453196, member: 94 wrote: uessed one time that he put Ted Dura in the first name box then he encountered the last name box so he put Dura in again but Ted replied that's not what happened, he lost his login password or email for his Ted Dura account so he put in fn:Ted ln: DURA DURA.
It's dumber than that. Ted Dura was banned over one of his racist rants. So he re-registered as Ted DURA. And was banned again shortly thereafter. So he re-registered as Ted DURA DURA. Ted is not a stupid man, but I don't have a lot of good things to say about him beyond that because of his unrepentant racism.
I do not think that Richard Schaut was as clueless as he seemed to be. He just had trouble expressing his thoughts clearly, in writing. And then he'd get frustrated and start spouting poorly remembered quotations from obscure textbooks.
Those were the days, my friends.
[MEDIA=youtube]2O5EeBjxhiY[/MEDIA]
paden cash, post: 453126, member: 20 wrote: We all have folks in our lives that became our "first" something-or-another. MLB occupies such a spot in my heart. Although probably common nowadays with FB and such, MLB was the first person I ever "met" on line and wondered if he was really as obnoxious in person as I perceived..
(maybe it's just me 😉 )
MLB stayed one night at my house many years ago, very pleasant in person, had a good visit.
[QUOTE=Mark Mayer, post: 453919, member: 424And then he'd get frustrated and start spouting poorly remembered quotations from obscure textbooks.
I learned the word "allodial" from him, because he used it in nearly every post.
Richard Schaut, yes thats it. I don't know about other people said his name, but I always pronounced it Richard SHOUT. If you have ever been to a Jeff Lucas class, I'd bet dollars to donuts they would have gotten along well.
David Livingstone, post: 454231, member: 431 wrote: Richard Schaut, yes thats it. I don't know about other people said his name, but I always pronounced it Richard SHOUT. If you have ever been to a Jeff Lucas class, I'd bet dollars to donuts they would have gotten along well.
I was at a Jeff Lucas class, the first thing he said was we were to throw away the manual. He didn't seem to realize he was standing in a state where 77% of the land is at least partially federal. Everyone was polite to him, but I don't think he ever got it.
MightyMoe, post: 454236, member: 700 wrote: I was at a Jeff Lucas class, the first thing he said was we were to throw away the manual. He didn't seem to realize he was standing in a state where 77% of the land is at least partially federal. Everyone was polite to him, but I don't think he ever got it.
I've read a lot of law; it wasn't exactly what I expected but nothing in there said "throw away a major piece of guidance relevant to the survey." Maybe it's a shock and awe thing, not sure. I would probably be a boring conference speaker, nothing controversial to say.
I have come to understand that many people that write books want to rewrite the rules in their own unique language.
Most combative discussions I've heard concerning what is and is not comes from somebody paraphrasing what they heard that a rule means instead of quoting the rule and there being no doubt of the meaning.
Personally, I enjoy to rehear the same wordings over and over until they are etched into my brain.
:8ball:
Andy J, post: 453163, member: 44 wrote: I'm still in touch with Christie O through social media.
I was till I lost track of her a few years back.
A Harris, post: 454242, member: 81 wrote: I have come to understand that many people that write books want to rewrite the rules in their own unique language.
Most combative discussions I've heard concerning what is and is not comes from somebody paraphrasing what they heard that a rule means instead of quoting the rule and there being no doubt of the meaning.
Personally, I enjoy to rehear the same wordings over and over until they are etched into my brain.
:8ball:
The main thing is understanding some rules are not rules, they are presumptions which shift the burden of proof and the other thing is the Law is intertwined with rules and presumptions so that any single rule can be affected by many other rules, then there are the exceptions.
Some of the well known texts have over simplified the rendering of legal rules, in my opinion.
Boundary location is usually treated as a question of fact so that precise rules are not available. The rules seem to be mostly a way to connect reality (where the boundary is located) with the writings and make them one. Doctrines have been developed as a guide to the Court to know if the boundary has been physically established or not.
I've heard Jeff Lucas also say the manual doesn't apply once the land goes to private ownership. In Illinois there is not a lot of Federal land, so his point is probably valid. I'm kind of filling in my view of what Lucas said, but I think his point if that people hold the manual likes its some kind of bible and stop using common sense. Jeff Lucas actually wrote a book for the Illinois Professional Land Surveyors Association called Illinois Boundary Law. I'm glad they got him to write it instead of someone that leaned heavy on the theoritcal side of surveying. Its a good book and has a lot of good case law in it.
