a moral SOLUTION

[lokey]

For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate refund
cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their opinions
on whether or not I should keep it.

[I still haven't cashed it]

Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.

I got telemarketed by the nameless corporation last night. So I thought the
next time it happens - and it happens all too frequently - I will tell the
telemarketer that they are on the clock. I bill my time out at $600/hour [I
am VERY good at what I do] So in 12 minutes I figured to have earned the
refund cheque.

:)

--
'It's not a lie if you believe it.'
-george costanza

[Rich]

lokey wrote:

> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.

This is not legal. You've simply justified your immoral activity.
Congratulations.

Rich

[lokey]

"Rich" > wrote in message
...
> lokey wrote:
>
>> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.
>
> This is not legal.

How so?

--
'We'll be singing, when we're winning:
I get knocked down But I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down.' -chumbawamba

[jj]

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 09:35:52 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:

>
> For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate refund
>cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their opinions
>on whether or not I should keep it.
>
>[I still haven't cashed it]
>
> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.
>
> I got telemarketed by the nameless corporation last night. So I thought the
>next time it happens - and it happens all too frequently - I will tell the
>telemarketer that they are on the clock. I bill my time out at $600/hour [I
>am VERY good at what I do] So in 12 minutes I figured to have earned the
>refund cheque.
>
> :)

Don't be stupid. It's not worth 120 bucks to compromise your integrity, or
to have to deal with the situation should the corporation get wise to you.

Why not frame the check and never cash it. That way you have a cool story.
You've probably spent more than 120 bucks worth of time ruminating about
it.

The money is not yours. It a little thing that can come back to take a big
bite out of your ass.

The dumbass idea you had about billing the telemarketer will not hold up in
court. If you -really- want to know about the legality of doing anything
with the check, consult a lawyer - they often give a free 10 min
consultation. They'll probably scare you straight! ;-)

jj

[rdclark]

lokey wrote:
> For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate refund
> cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their opinions
> on whether or not I should keep it.
>
> [I still haven't cashed it]
>
> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.
>
> I got telemarketed by the nameless corporation last night. So I thought the
> next time it happens - and it happens all too frequently - I will tell the
> telemarketer that they are on the clock. I bill my time out at $600/hour [I
> am VERY good at what I do] So in 12 minutes I figured to have earned the
> refund cheque.

Where should I send the bill for the time it's taken me to read your
message and reply to it?

You have as much of a contract with me to pay me for my time as the
telemarketer has with you.

It's not your money. If you cash the check, it's theft. Watching you
squirm like a bug on a pin trying to find some moral ground to stand on
has been amusing, but is becoming less so.

RichC

[Pat]

"lokey" <: For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate
refund
: cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their
opinions
: on whether or not I should keep it.
:
: [I still haven't cashed it]

You had better look at that check again. Many of these types of checks
automatically become void after 60 days....

Pat in TX

[lokey]

"rdclark" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> lokey wrote:
>> For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate refund
>> cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their
>> opinions
>> on whether or not I should keep it.
>>
>> [I still haven't cashed it]
>>
>> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.
>>
>> I got telemarketed by the nameless corporation last night. So I thought
>> the
>> next time it happens - and it happens all too frequently - I will tell
>> the
>> telemarketer that they are on the clock. I bill my time out at $600/hour
>> [I
>> am VERY good at what I do] So in 12 minutes I figured to have earned the
>> refund cheque.
>
> Where should I send the bill for the time it's taken me to read your
> message and reply to it?

You have not informed me you are on the clock. You are not interrupted to
read my messages. You can killfile by author and thread. I can do none of
these things.

> You have as much of a contract with me to pay me for my time as the
> telemarketer has with you.

> It's not your money. If you cash the check, it's theft. Watching you
> squirm like a bug on a pin trying to find some moral ground to stand on
> has been amusing, but is becoming less so.

I'm not squirming. I'm smiling.

:)

[lokey]

"Pat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "lokey" <: For those not following along: I receive an apparently
> duplicate
> refund
> : cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their
> opinions
> : on whether or not I should keep it.
> :
> : [I still haven't cashed it]
>
> You had better look at that check again. Many of these types of checks
> automatically become void after 60 days....

6 months in this jurisdiction.

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 09:35:52 -0400, "lokey" >
wrote:

>
> For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate refund
>cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their opinions
>on whether or not I should keep it.
>
>[I still haven't cashed it]
>
> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.
>
> I got telemarketed by the nameless corporation last night. So I thought the
>next time it happens - and it happens all too frequently - I will tell the
>telemarketer that they are on the clock. I bill my time out at $600/hour [I
>am VERY good at what I do] So in 12 minutes I figured to have earned the
>refund cheque.
>
> :)

Six-hundred bucks an hour!

The last time I hired a whore it cost that much for the whole night!

Since you've decided to set up in the business of selling your
integrity, you better align yourself with market rates, or you'll be
out of business toute-suite!

[lokey]

> wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 09:35:52 -0400, "lokey" >
> wrote:

>
> Six-hundred bucks an hour!

For listening to a telemarketer? Cheap at the price.

I'm really curious to see how they will respond. This will be fun!

--
'To walk within the lines would make my life so boring
I want to know that I have been to the extreme.'
- avril lavigne

[Pat]

: >
: > You had better look at that check again. Many of these types of checks
: > automatically become void after 60 days....
:
: 6 months in this jurisdiction.

Look at the check itself---the small print. I have received many a
check,i.e., rebates where there is a small line somewhere saying "void if
not cashed within 60 days". It has nothing to do with your jurisdiction.


:
:

[lokey]

"Pat" > wrote in message
...
>
> : >
> : > You had better look at that check again. Many of these types of checks
> : > automatically become void after 60 days....
> :
> : 6 months in this jurisdiction.
>
> Look at the check itself---the small print. I have received many a
> check,i.e., rebates where there is a small line somewhere saying "void if
> not cashed within 60 days". It has nothing to do with your jurisdiction.

Looking.... Nope I still have 3 months to ponder it.

--
'Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky' -john lennon

[Bob]

lokey wrote:
> For those not following along: I receive an apparently duplicate refund
> cheque of about a $120 a couple of months ago. I asked people their opinions
> on whether or not I should keep it.
>
> [I still haven't cashed it]
>
> Anyway I think I've come up with a _legal_ manner to keep it.
>
> I got telemarketed by the nameless corporation last night. So I thought the
> next time it happens - and it happens all too frequently - I will tell the
> telemarketer that they are on the clock. I bill my time out at $600/hour [I
> am VERY good at what I do] So in 12 minutes I figured to have earned the
> refund cheque.
>
> :)
>
> --
> 'It's not a lie if you believe it.'
> -george costanza

In that earlier thread I replied that cashing that check would be theft
and therefore make you a thief. Your response if I recall correctly was
along the lines of, "Oh, but I am asking a *moral* question not a
*legal* one" yet now you want to use a ridiculous 'legal' argument to
justify cashing the check. Two things... first, decide whether you are
pondering the moral or the legal ramifications and then stick with
whichever you choose. Second, if you choose to argue legality you had
better hire a lawyer because your 'legal reasoning' is somewhat less
than stellar.
BTW, the George Costanza character- like all the "Seinfeld" characters-
was amusing because we all knew he was fictional. In real life however
we don't find people like George to be funny. They are just jerks.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

[lokey]

"Bob" > wrote in message
oups.com...

>
> In that earlier thread I replied that cashing that check would be theft
> and therefore make you a thief. Your response if I recall correctly was
> along the lines of, "Oh, but I am asking a *moral* question not a
> *legal* one" yet now you want to use a ridiculous 'legal' argument to
> justify cashing the check.

Actually I said I didn't consider it legal theft. You and others disagreed.
Fair enough. But yes, I was considering the moral aspect.

Just to put the legal point to rest; would you accept the ruling of Judge
Marylin Milian from 'The People's Court'?

> Two things... first, decide whether you are
> pondering the moral or the legal ramifications and then stick with
> whichever you choose.

As I said I thought of it as a moral question. Others raised the legality
whihc I admittedly debated them [you] on.


>Second, if you choose to argue legality you had
> better hire a lawyer because your 'legal reasoning' is somewhat less
> than stellar.

Actually I probably misspoke in my most recent solution. I should have
deemed it my moral and legal way of keeping the money: I inform them that I
am billing them for my time. Onus removed from me.

--
'I've got a bad reputation in this town
It's something I can't live down
I wish I could be what people want me to be
But somehow I can't come around' -david wilcox

[Bill Sornson]

lokey wrote:
> "Bob" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>
>> In that earlier thread I replied that cashing that check would be
>> theft and therefore make you a thief. Your response if I recall
>> correctly was along the lines of, "Oh, but I am asking a *moral*
>> question not a *legal* one" yet now you want to use a ridiculous
>> 'legal' argument to justify cashing the check.
>
> Actually I said I didn't consider it legal theft. You and others
> disagreed. Fair enough. But yes, I was considering the moral aspect.
>
> Just to put the legal point to rest; would you accept the ruling of
> Judge Marylin Milian from 'The People's Court'?
>
>> Two things... first, decide whether you are
>> pondering the moral or the legal ramifications and then stick with
>> whichever you choose.
>
> As I said I thought of it as a moral question. Others raised the
> legality whihc I admittedly debated them [you] on.
>
>
>> Second, if you choose to argue legality you had
>> better hire a lawyer because your 'legal reasoning' is somewhat less
>> than stellar.
>
> Actually I probably misspoke in my most recent solution. I should
> have deemed it my moral and legal way of keeping the money: I inform
> them that I am billing them for my time. Onus removed from me.

Just admit it -- you're trolling us. (Consulting fees, Judge Judy... good
grief.)

Do whatever the hell you want and STHU about it.

BS

[Bob]

lokey wrote:
> "Bob" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
> >
> > In that earlier thread I replied that cashing that check would be theft
> > and therefore make you a thief. Your response if I recall correctly was
> > along the lines of, "Oh, but I am asking a *moral* question not a
> > *legal* one" yet now you want to use a ridiculous 'legal' argument to
> > justify cashing the check.
>
> Actually I said I didn't consider it legal theft. You and others disagreed.
> Fair enough. But yes, I was considering the moral aspect.

What you "consider" to be theft has absolutely no validity in a
discussion of legality.

> Just to put the legal point to rest; would you accept the ruling of Judge
> Marylin Milian from 'The People's Court'?

"The People's Court"? Thank you, no. I'll just stick with all those
boring statutes enacted by the various legislatures and the stuffy old
rulings by *real* courts. BTW, would you consider the writings of Isaac
Asimov to be the definitive works on the science involved in space
travel?

> > Two things... first, decide whether you are
> > pondering the moral or the legal ramifications and then stick with
> > whichever you choose.
>
> As I said I thought of it as a moral question. Others raised the legality
> whihc I admittedly debated them [you] on.

Debates that you lost to everyone that pointed out that the course of
action you were "pondering" was theft.

> >Second, if you choose to argue legality you had
> > better hire a lawyer because your 'legal reasoning' is somewhat less
> > than stellar.
>
> Actually I probably misspoke in my most recent solution. I should have
> deemed it my moral and legal way of keeping the money: I inform them that I
> am billing them for my time. Onus removed from me.

Perhaps in *your* mind the onus has been lifted but cash that check and
you'll still be a thief. All the weaseling and quibbling you can
produce won't change that just as every attempt to point that fact out
to you won't make you admit the basic dishonesty of your proposed
course of action. Why not put your money and your freedom where your
mouth is? Post the name of the corporation, the customer service email
address of that corporation, and the warrant number/date issued printed
on the face of the check. Then go cash it. Six months later you can
either tell us how you repaid the money you stole or let us all know
how your sentencing went. I won't waste any more time on this thread
until then.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

[Bob]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> lokey wrote:
> > "Bob" > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >
> >>
> >> In that earlier thread I replied that cashing that check would be
> >> theft and therefore make you a thief. Your response if I recall
> >> correctly was along the lines of, "Oh, but I am asking a *moral*
> >> question not a *legal* one" yet now you want to use a ridiculous
> >> 'legal' argument to justify cashing the check.
> >
> > Actually I said I didn't consider it legal theft. You and others
> > disagreed. Fair enough. But yes, I was considering the moral aspect.
> >
> > Just to put the legal point to rest; would you accept the ruling of
> > Judge Marylin Milian from 'The People's Court'?
> >
> >> Two things... first, decide whether you are
> >> pondering the moral or the legal ramifications and then stick with
> >> whichever you choose.
> >
> > As I said I thought of it as a moral question. Others raised the
> > legality whihc I admittedly debated them [you] on.
> >
> >
> >> Second, if you choose to argue legality you had
> >> better hire a lawyer because your 'legal reasoning' is somewhat less
> >> than stellar.
> >
> > Actually I probably misspoke in my most recent solution. I should
> > have deemed it my moral and legal way of keeping the money: I inform
> > them that I am billing them for my time. Onus removed from me.
>
> Just admit it -- you're trolling us. (Consulting fees, Judge Judy... good
> grief.)
>
> Do whatever the hell you want and STHU about it.
>
> BS

For my part, I'm STHU about it. <g>

Regards,
Bob Hunt

[lokey]

"Bill Sornson" > wrote in message
...
> lokey wrote:
>> "Bob" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>
>>>
>>> In that earlier thread I replied that cashing that check would be
>>> theft and therefore make you a thief. Your response if I recall
>>> correctly was along the lines of, "Oh, but I am asking a *moral*
>>> question not a *legal* one" yet now you want to use a ridiculous
>>> 'legal' argument to justify cashing the check.
>>
>> Actually I said I didn't consider it legal theft. You and others
>> disagreed. Fair enough. But yes, I was considering the moral aspect.
>>
>> Just to put the legal point to rest; would you accept the ruling of
>> Judge Marylin Milian from 'The People's Court'?
>>
>>> Two things... first, decide whether you are
>>> pondering the moral or the legal ramifications and then stick with
>>> whichever you choose.
>>
>> As I said I thought of it as a moral question. Others raised the
>> legality whihc I admittedly debated them [you] on.
>>
>>
>>> Second, if you choose to argue legality you had
>>> better hire a lawyer because your 'legal reasoning' is somewhat less
>>> than stellar.
>>
>> Actually I probably misspoke in my most recent solution. I should
>> have deemed it my moral and legal way of keeping the money: I inform
>> them that I am billing them for my time. Onus removed from me.
>
> Just admit it -- you're trolling us.

No.


> (Consulting fees,

I never brought up consulting fees per se - just that I would charge for my
time.


> Judge Judy... good grief.)

I never mentioned Judge Judy either.

> Do whatever the hell you want and STHU about it.

Your opinion is duly noted.

--
'Philosophy is the talk on a cereal box
Religion is the smile on a dog
-edie brickell

[lokey]

"Bob" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> lokey wrote:
[...]
>> Actually I said I didn't consider it legal theft. You and others
>> disagreed.
>> Fair enough. But yes, I was considering the moral aspect.
>
> What you "consider" to be theft has absolutely no validity in a
> discussion of legality.

Sure it does. It might not be right. Others might have more knowledge of
such things. But my opinion has some validity.

>> Just to put the legal point to rest; would you accept the ruling of
>> Judge
>> Marylin Milian from 'The People's Court'?
>
> "The People's Court"? Thank you, no. I'll just stick with all those
> boring statutes enacted by the various legislatures and the stuffy old
> rulings by *real* courts.

Too bad. She agreed with you.

>> As I said I thought of it as a moral question. Others raised the
>> legality
>> whihc I admittedly debated them [you] on.
>
> Debates that you lost to everyone that pointed out that the course of
> action you were "pondering" was theft.

How did I 'lose'? Because I failed to convince you? Well, then did you not
'lose' for failing to convince me?

[...]
> Why not put your money and your freedom where your
> mouth is? Post the name of the corporation,

Bell Canada

> the customer service email
> address of that corporation,

I have no idea. I'm sure it can be found on their website.

? and the warrant number/date issued printed
> on the face of the check.

112692

05/03/25


Good enough?

--
'Life is a tragedy for those who feel,
and a comedy for those who think.'
-jean de la bruyere