People who ask for advice then blame you when they take it

:banghead: :nuke: :banghead: :grr: :banghead: :nuke: :banghead:

help them decide on their own course of action

:shrug:

It's still my fault. Inevitable - one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't types of things. :hi:

Oh God, a paradox. Now my head is starting to hurt.

:rofl:

Now I need a drink.

;)

:rofl:

:P

okay give advice don't give advice, what do you think you should do ????

That's a tough one. By not giving advice, am I implicitly giving it? Is there any way not to give advice when even silence can be taken as a point of view? Maybe the only way to be safe is to give mutually conflicting advice, so that no matter what happens, you're right (and wrong, of course, but let's gloss over that). Hey, it's worked for astrology for a few millenia.

:)

:rofl:

perhaps for even as long? :shrug:


rain tomorrow details at 10, then 10 o'clock rolls around and "sunny skies and a slight chance of rain tomorrow", then tomorrow becomes today and "deluge hits the state, floodwaters rising".

all without blinkin an eye :P

There'd be a diagonal line carefully drawn across the map, with "Sunny, followed by showers" on one side and "Rainy, brightening later" on the other. What the hell is the difference between those two forecasts?!? And of course, forecasting both sun and rain pretty much covers it all.

yeah, and never have to say they are sorry like "oops, didn't see that tornado coming" no, it's like they knew it was coming all along.

...the BBC got it spectacularly wrong. The head TV meteorologist said "we've just had a phonecall from a lady in France who says there's a hurricane on the way. Don't worry, there's no hurricane coming." That night, the biggest hurricane to hit Britain since records began ripped the country apart, causing enormous damage.

But you're right, even then, the Beeb spent far more time trying to explain why their forecast was correct (in spite of the evidence lying all over the place) than apologizing for being wrong.

most of the time with tornadoes here in the mid south they are pretty darned alert to the possibility at least.

when they don't come only a few people complain that the tv was interrupted or something like that.

when they do come, those same people are espousing the virtues of good forecasting.

nevertheless one can forecast the conditions being likely to be capable of producing tornadoes. However the pinpoint finding of tornadoes is still far from perfect. Better with doppler and all the computerized extrapolations of doppler, but still the only real way to find a tornado is someone on the ground witnessing it.

so still, no apologies usually, although the national weather service had some splainin' to do after a large tornado hit the city i live in during the mid 1990's and they had not even alerted the local authorities to sound the alarms. The radar at that time was in Tulsa, a good 110 miles from here.

they got some hide burned over that one.

:smugsmilie:

She is a trial attorney (I know, the cause of all evil in society today) and she gets a lot of people calling with a "quick question" which actually means that they know if they come in the will actually have to pay for the services of an attorney but they hope to get free legal advice over the phone. Then, when my wife tries to answer their question and tell them what their legal situation is, they argue with her and tell her she is wrong.

Yeah, I know that one. And I have no problems with lawyers - I'm studying to be a paralegal right now. :hi:

I know I don't want to be a lawyer. Just not interesting enough for me. I was getting my communication masters at the same time. I worked as an investigator for her firm for a couple years part time while I took time off teaching to raise my son and that was enjoyable, but I have always enjoyed research and that kind of stuff.

That "quick question" assumes it's simple of course, and it is intended to make the lawyer responsible for the person's choice. These are the people with no respect for others' time or knowledge. They arrogantly presume it is always a simple and quick question that can be answered for free over the phone because that's the way they want it to be.

I tell them I don't give free advice over the phone. Usually that gets them to back off.

We've gotten in regarding: appliance repairs. Home remodeling. Physician. Car dealership. Car repair. Computer choice. DSL provider.

We no longer do any endorsements. Wife says to them "I'm not recommending anything anymore because you won't like it."

,

that's what i would do!

..."People don't want advice; they want corroboration."

They're hard-core Volvo drivers. He asks me how our own volvo is running, says they're considering getting something different, what do I think of that? So I tell him I'd actually prefer a different car right now, that the Volvo was nice, but I wanted something else, I explained my reasons...

Then he went into a rant about how Volvos Are Better Than Anything Else On The Road - then looked at me as if waiting my rebuttal.

I just patted him on the arm and said, "It sounds like you know what you want, Jack."



Some people just want to be right, and they will ask for "advice" when all they want is to argue.

Good for you, good for them