Friday, January 11, 2008

Scheduling conflicts, college-style

Sometimes it feels like every term I'm juggling the scheduling of 3-5 intense, nearly-overlapping part-time jobs. Except the managers of these jobs don't talk to each other very much, or accommodate each other very well.

I've changed my school schedule 3 times already this week. Each time fearing that I'll do some slip up that will extend my graduation date beyond June. The pieces have to fit together juuuust right or I have another 3 -6 months before graduating.

And the counselors are all experts in damage and liability mitigation. You are informed, over and over again, before most any session starts that they don't do this, don't do that, can't help you with this, you'll have to go elsewhere for that.

It's a little stressful.

I look forward to not changing jobs every 3 months. Even though many of the jobs themselves are quite interesting lately (Ornithology, as an example).

Enjoy your steady employ,



Stu Farnham said...

With the full intention of offending any that may read this blog, there are too many fucking lawyers in this world.

Have you bought ant electronic device lately? Looked at the manual? The front section is all warnings and disclaimers, often more pages of these than of actual instructions.

Bought a bucket lately? If it is 5 gallons or more it carries a wanring that babies can drown in it (with a descriptive illustration of a child so doing in case the child cannot read).

The all time case of too many lawyers that I have seen was a warning sticker on a fly tying vise. Mind you, a fly tying vise is a large object, when compared with the size of the human mouth.

This particular vise had a sticker on it, mandated by California law, saying that it contained brass and that brass is toxic if ingested. No picture this time, which is unfortunate, because I don't think the literate are at much risk of ingesting said vise.

Enjoy your overlitigious and excessively lawyered (cause or effect?) society.

Kate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kate said...

I know fully understand the need for comment editing >.<

Anyway, in response to stu....

Kate said...

now damnit, not know!

I'm going back to bed.

Stu Farnham said...

OK, that's it.

Kate, you have finally topped the story of the woman who sued McDOnalds because the hot cup of coffe she purchased there, which she was holding between her knees with lid removed while driving her car scalded her when it spilled.

Apparently litigation is an appropriate substitute for stupidity.

BTW, don't sweat the typos... I have a bad case of fat fingers (no comments from the LandMax peanut gallery, please)and have given up ... if the reader can't figure it out, they don't deserve to know! For example, what is a wanring (as in my inital response to this post)? Some sort of pale, circular object? How about "ant electronic devices"? Blue Ray DVD players for Formicidae (Latin provided for the enjoyment of BP. Do ants have toes?).

Enjoy my wry sense of humor.

Stu Farnham said...

Oh, yeah, one more thing:

Bentley, I hope Kate's link takes your Canuckistani smugness down a notch or two.

Enjoy jingoism in all its rich variety

LOL too much coffeee this morning, time for another double espresso...

Stu Farnham said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bpaul said...

No more caffienne for you sir, no more.

Kate, I was privy to your deleted post... I don't know, it seemed appropriate LOL!

(pictue of a cat in a medical collar with glowing green eyes)

Stu Farnham said...


Just goes to show that you can't leave me alone in here for a minute without me getting into something.

Enjoy your unexpected digressions into the interstices of my brain.

Kate said...

the cat picture was left over from me pasting it into an email to you last night B! I could have sworn I hit copy on the news article url, but meh....hadn't had caffeine yet.

and I was a teensy bit surprised to see that the story was Canadian. In our defence, it *was* from Saskatchewan. Not much to do there aside from watching the wheat grow.... ;)

msherm said...

Ok, the Mcdonalds thing must end!

Mcdonalds was sued because they INTENTIONALLY made the coffee hotter than it could be consumed at so people couldn't drink enough to get a refill before they left. It was a corporate policy from the top down. That was why they were sued. If it was just regular coffee and she spilled it she was on her own.

Also she was not driving, she was a passenger, the car was not moving it was stopped. The cup was between her legs in an attempt to get the lid OFF to add cream when it spilled.

So while lawsuits are often unnecesary, this one was not. It is always used as an example and it's a poor one that stems from repeating something they heard from someone with an agenda.

Lawsuits are often an individuals only recourse against a corporate controlled government and culture. Bad lawsuits? Sure. Blatant disregard for individual rights and safety? I'll pass.

msherm said...

Not my original source for this info (my fiance, an attorney) but a quick google search provides a nice summary of the truth.

Stu Farnham said...

Thanks for the correction, msherm. I'll file the McD's story under "urban legends".

Nonetheless, my original assertion stands -- as do all the other examples of excess litigiousness.