flyin solo, post: 439462, member: 8089 wrote: this is neither outrageously loud nor antiquated, but i'm about sick of not having enough time for it to be anything other than a commuter or a coffee shop bike.
kinda wish i could just tell the family to jump in the pathfinder and meet me in colorado, but they fly home and i have to bring the car back...
Make the time, you'll thank yourself. 😉
Kent McMillan, post: 439471, member: 3 wrote: Actually, the Supreme Court of Utah read the statement of the Court in Clement v. Packer exactly as I do and took it as a statement of law so general as to also be applicable to Utah in their decision in Washington Rock Co. v. Young et al.
Hey Kent, I included the situation in previous posts where a court in another jurisdiction may find the Clement v. Packer case to be persuasive argument. I'll leave it to Leon, JB or another Utah licensed surveyor to discuss its merits in Washington Rock Co. v. Young, et al.
Also, you may find these companion boundary cases from Pennsylvania informative:
- Clement v. Northumberland Coal Co., 87 Pa. 291, and;
- Northumberland Coal Co. v. Clement, 95 Pa. 126.
It is a simple and quick matter to find court cites online. For example, I would have thought that this low-hanging fruit would have caught your eye well before the Utah case. I mean it is a Texas case, you are licensed in Texas so your opinion may be of value, and the names of at least two of the respondents are most impressive. I look forward to your in depth analysis. The case is fairly short and seems to share a common element of block surveys with Clement v. Packer.
Texas Co. v. McMillan, 13 F. Supp. 407 - Dist. Court, ND Texas 1935
Gene Kooper, post: 439575, member: 9850 wrote: Hey Kent, I included the situation in previous posts where a court in another jurisdiction may find the Clement v. Packer case to be persuasive argument.
I think you're missing the fact that the remark made by the US Supreme Court regarding junior and senior grants was a general statement of the law, something that was obvious. That is exactly how the Utah Supreme Court took it, quoting it as an authoritative statement of a principle that would apply in Utah as well.
The Texas cases citing Clement v. Packer generally deal with systems of blocks of surveys. Such an obvious principle as stated by the US Supreme Court that you dispute as relevant to Colorado was well recognized in Texas law when Clement v. Packer was decided. It may well be, as you suggest, that Colorado is an outlier in the common law of the US.
Kent McMillan, post: 439577, member: 3 wrote: I think you're missing the fact that the remark made by the US Supreme Court regarding junior and senior grants was a general statement of the law, something that was obvious. That is exactly how the Utah Supreme Court took it, quoting it as an authoritative statement of a principle that would apply in Utah as well.
The Texas cases citing Clement v. Packer generally deal with systems of blocks of surveys. Such an obvious principle as stated by the US Supreme Court that you dispute as relevant to Colorado was well recognized in Texas law when Clement v. Packer was decided. It may well be, as you suggest, that Colorado is an outlier in the common law of the US.
Tommy Young, post: 439322, member: 703 wrote: I believe this is all a result of fewer and fewer personal interactions. 2 centuries ago, when most communications were conducted face to face, you didn't insult the person you were talking to because there was always the threat of physical violence being conducted against you. Now it is possible to conduct all your business and all of your personal interactions without another person actually being in front of you. You can sit in your recliner and insult dozens of people all over the world, with little worry of any repercussions.
For some, the knowledge that a rude comment might get one a black eye or bloody nose may have been the primary motivator to remain civil. I think for most, having to look not only the person to whom the comment is directed, but any others present in the eye after having made an unnecessarily rude comment brought an instinctive sense of shame to the person making the comment.
The computer screen and the unlikelihood of ever meeting the person on the other side of the ether has removed that natural, and for most, ingrained verbal regulator. For others, taking away that element of eye contact that was a part of most interpersonal communication up until a couple generations ago, is like removing the governor from a gas motored golf cart and letting a teenager drive it unsupervised. They'll drive it in ways it was never meant to be used and take it to places it's not designed for, and when they crash and damage property, it's someone else's fault.
Looking at this topic from a different perspective though, many of us complain, and on this forum, whether or not the names are mentioned, most everyone understands that it's in reference to one, or a handful of forum participants. We complain, but most of us also read along for the entertainment value. If we try to engage in a reasoned debate, it's an exercise in frustration. We know that, or should know it going in. But those who "go for the popcorn" watch hoping that the arrogant self-styled intellectual bully will get nailed with a good zinger once in awhile.
In every sport, there is almost always that one team that most fans love to hate. They will watch that team's games hoping that they get beat, but also knowing that it will almost always be interesting and entertaining.
Gene, that Dilbert was perfect.
eapls2708, post: 439601, member: 589 wrote: For some, the knowledge that a rude comment might get one a black eye or bloody nose may have been the primary motivator to remain civil.
I'd observe there is a certain vagrant style of discussion that tends to wander into most threads that is both non-germane and annoying. Some of the posters who complain the loudest about the lack of civility in some discussions are the worst offenders. Do we really think that every idea, regardless of how malformed or irrelevant, should be treated seriously in a discussion of some topic of land surveying? I don't and would find a contrary suggestion bizarre.
[GALLERY=media, 44]Float_fishing by eapls2708 posted Aug 1, 2017 at 3:47 PM[/GALLERY]
[GALLERY=media, 43]1R7XXkJ by eapls2708 posted Aug 1, 2017 at 3:45 PM[/GALLERY]
Kent McMillan, post: 439609, member: 3 wrote: there is a certain vagrant style of discussion that tends to wander into most threads that is both non-germane and annoying
I'll be the first to plead guilty. My perspective of human longitivity in our life span, within the grand scheme of things, doesn't qualify as a flash in the pan. Therefore I have learned to enjoy every second. I call it the way I see it. 😎
FL/GA PLS., post: 439616, member: 379 wrote: I'll be the first to plead guilty. My perspective of human longitivity in our life span, within the grand scheme of things, doesn't qualify as a flash in the pan. Therefore I have learned to enjoy every second. I call it the way I see it. 😎
Some actively participate in such things, others of us reach for the popcorn and sit back to enjoy the show. After all, I would not want to be targeted for such vagrancy...... 😮
John, post: 439622, member: 791 wrote: I would not want to be targeted for such vagrancy...... 😮
"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn". 😉
Well, by my finally jumping into the fray and helping to sidetrack the thread says something, doesn't it?
(When someone figures out what it Does mean, please let me know)
Licensed surveyors are too frequently highly insecure people who must hide their self-realized shortfalls from the rest of the world. The manner in which they do this may vary but much of it could be defined as snootiness. They are very content with doing what the job function requires but become agitated knowing that anything they produce will probably be seen as less than perfect by some laymen and nearly all fellow surveyors. That leads them to become distrustful and argumentative. Hence, the question about whether or not the licensing exam requires skills in snootiness.
Holy Cow, post: 439748, member: 50 wrote: Licensed surveyors are too frequently highly insecure people who must hide their self-realized shortfalls from the rest of the world. The manner in which they do this may vary but much of it could be defined as snootiness. They are very content with doing what the job function requires but become agitated knowing that anything they produce will probably be seen as less than perfect by some laymen and nearly all fellow surveyors. That leads them to become distrustful and argumentative. Hence, the question about whether or not the licensing exam requires skills in snootiness.
I have noticed a number of our brethren who get a little ruffled when they are questioned about surveys they've performed. They are usually what I call the "backwoods boys" that live in generally remote and rural areas and enjoy being the only surveyor around for miles. Contacting them for info is a fine art. Some are actually convinced anyone from outside their area simply cannot perform a survey there correctly.
Those of us that also practice in the metropolitan areas are a little thicker skinned when it comes to other surveyors sniffing around our recent work. I will gladly share my notes with any other surveyor...and retain the right to cheerfully (and professionally) tell them to poop and roll in it if they don't like my work. 😉
Knew a now-deceased surveyor who suffered from that very affliction. He didn't want anyone to ever see one of his plats but he would talk with you on the phone. At least half of the time he would sprinkle in some totally incorrect information with a little good information.
Holy Cow, post: 439759, member: 50 wrote: Knew a now-deceased surveyor who suffered from that very affliction. He didn't want anyone to ever see one of his plats but he would talk with you on the phone. At least half of the time he would sprinkle in some totally incorrect information with a little good information.
There are still a few of us around that remember the pre-1978 years before filing corner records became statute. Lots of the backwoods boys kept their corner records field books under lock and key. Obtaining any of that info usually meant an ofference of legal tender, or at least something of value. At my age I enjoy a good relationship with most of them. It helps to keep an office in town with a bathroom, coffee pot and a copy machine with a friendly door mat for those fellas if they ever need to "drop by". 😉
John, post: 439742, member: 791 wrote: (When someone figures out what it Does mean, please let me know)
Around here it means "It depends". 😉
FL/GA PLS., post: 439762, member: 379 wrote: Around here it means "It depends". 😉
Yes, I should have known that. I guess what's left of my "brain" was shut off for a moment or more. o_O
Surveyors tend to view any other surveyor as someone who may steal their future income. Engineers in consulting are far less prone to such fears.
Holy Cow, post: 440257, member: 50 wrote: Surveyors tend to view any other surveyor as someone who may steal their future income. Engineers in consulting are far less prone to such fears.
Here.
Most consulting engineers have to play (and sometimes pay) the schmooze game and dance with politicians and government bodies and various boards etc
Marketing and PR are essential players.
Only a few surveying firms are involved.. mostly larger firms that can contribute $ or some part of a good ole boy network. The latter is fading away.
Kent McMillan, post: 439342, member: 3 wrote: The obvious problem is that the practice of a profession presumes a certain basic knowledge of the activity for which the professional's license was issued. Pretending that any ignorant practice is somehow within the minimum standards of practice is not professional and "collegiality" becomes merely enabling substandard practices contrary to why the profession even exists in the first place.
If a profession were a social club like the Rotary Club, you might have a point, but I don't think that either the engineering or surveying professions are a club in any similar sense.
Unfortunately, I find I agree with the above statement. IF it can be lifted from the context of the general swapping of insults, the grade of which that only can occur at a family re-union, Especially if the family is well inbred, or prone to drink copious amounts of alcohol, while trying to fish with out a hook, or with the little rubber fish which tend to come, attached to the end of a mini, cheap, Chinese pole, specifically marketed for grand pappies, to give a cheap pole, to their little grandies. Especially if in the grandpappies mind, the grandies are brats.
N
