Did A. Ready get fired from Brickunderground?

no. i quit.

just answering.

that was quick..

Hey aboutready,

I amone of the experts on Brick, have been almost from day one. Were you a writer?

There's probably more of a story... I've come to expect drama.

Damm the iPad really likes to spell whatever it wants

I tried to write, I am one of the experts on Brick

Hi primer. Yes, I was a writer for six months or so. Absolutely loved working with Teri. but oddly found that I didn't love living and breathing real estate as a career. Also, as funny as this might sound, it really was a stretch in terms of time, despite teri's most accommodating flexibility.

RS, I've come to expect your vapidness. lack of real content. bias. idiocy. intellectual laziness. fascination with that tart Rand. and really poor sources.

Primer, teri's had the site for at least a couple of years. have you really been with the site that long?

I have been on the site for close to 2 years (1 year and close to 50 weeks). I have been an "expert" soon after that

oh, only saw you post a couple of times. and i must of misunderstood a comment teri made.

but i really liked that video that ran a few months ago. and i think you are doing quite well here, which isn't such an easy thing to do. good work.

AR...glad you're back on SE...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVS3WNt7yRU

julia, we'll have to start a raging argument about studios again soon. but if you're willing to relax at least one of your standards (mtc) i think you're not far from a one bedroom, although maybe not in your top three buildings. :)

you and your f'ng youtubes, RS.

way to retreat.

aboutready,

Thank you very much. I have been on Brick Undergroundt for a long time but I only post when a question comes in.

primer, the forum is very quiet there, but there are some renovation/design questions that don't seem to get answered. you might want to take a look once a week and see if something reno related isn't being addressed.

cheers.

Ar...i'm there.

Thanks aboutready. I generally do not look at the board. Teri usually just sends out emails and then I answer them. I will start to look

Primer: I love your posting on SE so pls don't leave us in the lurch when you get involved on the boards at brick.

AR: so now will you have time to do some more comp work on SE. In my opinion, it rates with W81's open houses and W67's obscene rants as the best thing on SE -- though you are w81 provide far more productive info. :)

Apt23

Thank you. I will not leave Street easy. As much as I came on here with the idea of helping people I have met so many very good people and even some clients who I really have enjoyed working with.

It seems that Brick Underground isn't a fan of Brooklyn. Isn't that where she moved?
http://www.brickunderground.com/blog/2015/08/subway_desert_map

Your analytical skills are really poor.

What about reading?

Good point. Maybe you're not being intentionally misleading. Maybe you just don't understand the content.

Bburg - I have begun to genuinely wonder about the point you raise. A recurrent point of feedback that I have received about myself over the years is that I tend to assume greater intelligence/ability in others than is often there. I am perplexed by the troll, because until recently my perception of him was that he generally wanted to maintain the integrity of any discussion related to the mission of the site, but that emotion clouded his judgment with respect to certain posters (infatuation with you, jealousy vis-a-vis Inonada, etc.). He had no credibility with me in discussions related to those posters who elicited an emotional reaction in him for whatever reason (I understood his reactions to you and Inonada, but did not understand his reaction to a number of his other targets - e.g., 300Mercer, Ottawa and more recently Ali). Posts like the one above where he extrapolates from that link that BrickUnderground does not like Brooklyn raise real questions about his analytical skills. So hard to tell, because that post is also one of his desperate attempts to get your attention, so it automatically falls into large category of his posts where any reason he might possess has been overtaken by emotion. All of that aside, that graphic is interesting; I go to one friend's apartment in Brooklyn every once in awhile, and her apartment is a lot closer to the subway than mine is; that graphic is clear that quite a few neighborhods in Manhattan are part of the subway desert.

Does one really have to be desperate to get Bburg's attention? Or yours for that matter? It seems almost automatic, like pressing a button or saying "boo", and there you are. Inoitall?- he hasn't been around forever, why are you obsessed with him? Don't you have real life problems that are still unresolved?

Hi Pouty! I am glad you are still talking to me. I learned a lot from Inonada and miss reading his take on all sorts of subjects. I also miss reading AR's thoughts. I understand SE Discussions are no longer viable forum for their posts, but I still miss them. I would even miss you were you to leave the building.

SE Discussions aren't a viable forum for AR's posts? How about Brick Underground?

Oh wait, nevermind, I see AR (now as Bburg - and to think I thought that was petrfitz!) just posted 17 hours ago - just above.
This must be fun when it happens in court.

AR is gone; Bburg is not the same - not better or worse IMHO, just different. Posters appear to evolve with their usernames, with new names simply reflecting different stages in their lives or NY experience (LucilleBluth was good example of that). With most posters that I have observed to change names, the quality of their posts has remained the same. The quality of your posts, however, has deterioriated since HB retired/was retired, IMHO, of course. I hope you will take this constructive feedback in the manner in which it is intended and not get all nasty. As for real life problems, my computer is telling me that Windows10 has successfully installed, but the computer keeps getting hung up when I try to perform various functions, so yes, I still have a very much unresolved real world problem that I will devote the next hour to resolving before I revert to laptop again and try another day.

Look, on the Bed Stuy thread, I was giving you constructive feedback on your litigation skills and practice - you thought I was being mean. I was just being observant. Not nasty. You aren't that good - it really comes out how bad you are just be reading streeteasy. But you can be better: I'd like to assume that some time ago, at some earlier stage in your life or NY experience, that you were actually at least average among your peers. Of course this is just my honest opinion, and I'm just someone in his mother's basement with hello kitty pajamas, so don't get all upset - everything is good and you and I are friends.

I found Huntersburg: http://streeteasy.com/talk/discussion/28052-huntersburg
And Aboutready: http://streeteasy.com/talk/discussion/29810-case-study-aboutready

How can you give me feedback on my litigation skills when (1) you have never seen me litigate; and (2) even if you had, you are not trained in the field so would not understand the bulk of what was going on. It would be like me trying to critique a professional football player's technique. I like your quote about "You aren't that good - it really comes out how bad you are just be [sic] reading streeteasy." I find it hard to believe you are not a Donald Trump fan given how you mimic his style. Come on, you can do better. Surely you have seen pictures of me - don't you want to make fun of my hair or something? I am really sensitive about that.

Even if he's not a fan they share many of the same character defects.

Uncanny isn't it?

I wasn't mimicking Donald Trump. I was minicking you. But maybe this is a new breakthrough revelation.

Re your litigation skills, how come you don't defend your actual skills? The best you can do is question me and my observations, not support your actual skills and practice. On another topic, I'm beginning to wonder exactly how that border wall will be built.

Hey Bburg, did you see that - she called out my grammatical typo. How pedantic, right??!

Why on earth would I defend skills on this forum or any other? The only opinions of my skills or lack thereof that matter are those of my clients. I trust you were joking on that one. Re the border wall, I cannot believe a guy who claims to have been threatened by El Chapo thinks a wall would be effective. Too funny.

Not just pedantic on my part, but hypocritical given that virtually every post I make is rife with typos and grammatical errors. Okay, now I really have to go.

NYCNovice, you are an adult and a trained professional, you can decide how to manage your career and public life, but don't pretend that you are some one off poster on streeteasy for a couple weeks and off to the next subject altogether as you approach a different stage in your life or NY experience. You should also not forget how you brought real life people and businesses by name onto SE and did so in context of your own statements of litigation against these parties - these are all topics you raised and promoted.

bb, did you see that, pedantic, hypocritical, and rife with typos and grammatical errors. Hey, do you know any people who advise litigators in the background and might be able to help NYCNovice?

@fc - Um, not pretending. I actually am a one-off poster on streeteasy for a couple of weeks and off to the next subject altogether as I approach different stages in my NY experience. Do the math my good man.

And SE Discussions is an appropriate forum for a tenant to provide an accurate account of their experience with their landlord, so not sure what your point is there. It is also an appropriate forum for a prospective buyer to discuss their due diligence on any given building. I know you want to make some "gotcha" post against me, but you've got to try harder because the law, facts and ethics are on my side here.

If you say so.
Didn't you really have to go?

I am trying to create a huge exhibit that requires using Acrobat Pro, which I only have in Windows format on my desktop (my laptop is an Apple), so I have to keep rebooting my desktop. Truly maddening.

In this case it seems appropriate, since you are ridiculing her for your unjustified perception of her skills. How could she prove her ability, a moot court award from law school. And if she were to try you'd only find fault. Hypocrite.

Bburg, you have stated that you provide private counsel and advice on strategy to a litigation partner at a tip law firm - what is your assessment of NYCNovice's skills?

Before NYCNovice pouts, it's top law firm, not tip law firm.

I means pounces, not pouts. So hard to keep this straight.

Were Bburg to ever observe me in a professional context, I would value her feedback.

Sounds like an invitation. Bburg, what do you think? You can sit in the first row, holding up the half law degree that you own.

Get some new material, you're boring. Nobody holds up their credentials in court. Litigators come to court with the case and facts they were given, enhanced or limited by the analytical and research skills they have or have not been able to utilize, and then present them with whatever skill they may or may not possess to juries whose members may or may not have any sense or bias. As such, terrible litigators both win and lose with just about equal frequency. You, with your pedantic, supercilious and deceptive approach might do quite well, although juries tend to dislike obvious snakes, so that would probably not work in your favor. And before you say this isn't relevant here, your entire presence here is like someone working a courtroom, sometimes in the role of a prosecutor, sometimes as plaintiff's attorney, but far most often as a self-appointed judge. Toad.

Amen to Bburg's last post. In my limited experience, the practice of law is most enjoyable when you have a talented and ethical opposing counsel and a really smart judge who has the time and resources to referee the proceedings with the highest level of objectivity and fidelity to the law. I have had the pleasure of experiencing that only a few times, some of which went my way and some of which did not. Sadly that idyllic scenario tends to be the exception rather than the norm in the justice system for a host of reasons, not the least of which is the sheer volume of frivolous litigation that swamps good faith disputes. I do not envy the judges that have to referee all the nonsense on a day-to-day basis.

Bburg, I like how over time the law degree that was awarded to your husband has morphed from being 1/2 your property into being your credentials.

NYCNovice, F me if I ever hire a lawyer to represent me who is more interested in an enjoyable, pleasurable, idyllic experience than in zealously representing my interests and winning.

@fc - Give it a rest already. How could it be more clear that she is just not that into you?

@fc - Hey, on a positive note, I have noticed that you are sharing more; this is great. You have implied that you have some experience as a party with litigation; care to share? How did that work out for you?

I thought the whole thread was on a positive note, no?

No. And I repeat, get some new material. Some with a soupçon of honesty and a dearth of misrepresentations would be welcome.

Bburg, do you still work with your daughter at the soup kitchen?

Are you not happy with the service you've gotten there?

Oh, that was you in front of me. I thought I recognized you from the picture I saw when I googled alanhart. I just wasn't putting it all together, I was so excited just to see Bburg again I missed that you were in line with me.

NYCNovice, could you help me clarify re your legal experience/credentials - do you (1) have a whole law degree as your legal credential, or (2) half of a law degree? If (2) a half degree, did you (2a) earn it by going to law school yourself and then forfeiting it to your spouse in exchange for who knows what, or (2b) the opposite (i.e. your spouse went to law school and you took half of it for whatever justification you have)?
If you are also at (2b: Law Spousemosis) the half level like Bburg, we may be on to something and there might be a fix that could set you on your way to improving your litigation skills and also your opinions whether the courtroom is a place to win a case or a place for a picnic with opposing counsel.

Oh great. Now I have to add myself to that list of posters who elicit an emotional reaction from the troll, causing him to lay awake at night trying to think of some clever nonsense to spew at me. Oh well, at least I am in good company.

You are in great company with Bburg?
You laid awake at night because of Streeteasy's talk forum?

Hey, if you really want to test your mettle as a troll you should join Quora where you are not allowed to be anonymous. There you would be competing against the likes of Yishan Wong. I doubt you will do that because you appear to be rather cowardly and can only play at the bantam level. Carry on.

You are suggesting I deal with someone more challenging than you? I assume Yishan Wong doesn't prioritize a happy picnic and singalong over the merits of an argument like you have stated you do.

Yes, Yishan Wong is exponentially more talented than I, and I think it is fairly clear to the audience that you are too, so why don't you go pick on someone your own size.

The irony here NYCNovice is that you didn't always prioritize the sunny picnic and happy handholding over the argument. Unfortunately though, instead of mounting an aggressive argument on its merits and dealing with your adversary present vs. finding a forum where your adversary wasn't initially present, you created a half dozen names in support against your real world adversary. That's unethical (I know you said just above that the ethics are on your side, but I don't see it that way - does Quora allow multiple fake names by one user to attack someone who isn't even present?). So it seems you either go one extreme or the other, but of course one is when you are representing someone else (rack up those billable hours during the picnic!), and the other is when you yourself are the principal.

Question for you NYCNovice - you compared my style to Donald Trump. Which of the presidential candidates do you believe most represents your style?

Is the troll having a meltdown?

No. Are you unable to defend yourself on the merits?
Maybe there are no merits for you to defend?

The record speaks for itself and all readers are free to draw their own conclusions.

See. There you go again. No effort. That is why you lose in court.
I guess you are off to an early picnic today.

Yes, all of this is why I no longer litigate. When I burned out, I was ready to go flip burgers somewhere, but one of my clients suggested I go to work for them. Best professional move I ever made.

Glad to hear you are happy.

Well thank you. The work I do now is completely removed from the rough and tumble world of trial court level litigation. Re presidential candidates that most represent my style, I would say I range between Donald Trump and Jeb Bush on the Republican side, but tend most towards Barack Obama - he appears to hate politics and appears to get drained by so much of the form over substance that dominates Washington. He has let the communication machines of his opponents shape the narrative over the past few years, refusing to play the game, though I am glad the recent spate of Supreme Court decisions has vindicated him somewhat. Btw - I like how you don't even fight the troll label and even answer to posts directed simply to "the troll." I do think you would have more fun on another site, but I understand your ties to this one.

You can call me whatever you want. Troll. Your Highness. Member of the Ready/Burg family. Doesn't change the merits. But when you use a negative like troll, you shouldn't be so surprised what you get back. You escalated the attacks several days ago including by use of the term troll. And so whereas I don't care what you use, your choice to use it was met by me via response to your substance. Capiche?

That was excellent Trump! I thought it was the Hello Kitty pajama comment that got you all riled up. It was all meant in good fun and I apologize if I offended you.

But I am still confused as to how you interpreted my calling you out on not admitting that you made a mistake in questioning my numbers as an attack. The purchase price is a matter of public record; I guess maybe you think we spent more than $200/square foot on the renovation?

That's rich. The troll can attack ruthlessly and repetitively, disparage, falsely interpret and manipulate statements so that they cast insulting aspersions on people's character, but don't you dare "escalate" your comments to the point of using the term troll or you'll deserve "what you get back." MOMMEEEE!!! The kids aren't playing nice, I want to take their toys away from them and go home. What an immature moral grounding.

Agreed -- the troll should be sent to a 600 school immediately.

Bburg, (any relation to Hburg, by the way?) did you forget to do your yoga this morning?
Also can we get back to the law degree matter now that you claim you don't just own half of your husband's but that this half degree represents your actual credentials. What do you bill an hour? Or do you just co-bill? Or just spent the money that he earns on your frequent vacations (or do you not need to do that because of the Peter Cooper Village windfall you received?)

@Bburg - Don't forget that he also can't admit it when he's made a mistake, and he thinks telling someone that they have no skill is arguing "substance" and "the merits." I do not think any reader takes him seriously. I still can't figure out whether he takes himself seriously, but have just resolved to take him as part of the site. Some of his posts have made me laugh out loud, but most I just ignore, particularly those that are aimed at posters who elicit an emotional reaction in him for whatever reason, you being at the forefront of that group.

You'd think he'd get bored with his narrow-minded reiteration of the same lame comments, but like the simpleton he apparently is it seems to satisfy him. I think he takes himself VERY seriously, which is amusing. I also think he has no generosity of spirit. A defective soul.

Yes clearly NYCNovice you ignore me.
HBburg, do you have any topics you would like to discuss? I thought you were going to discuss yoga but then within 12 hours you dropped it. Maybe something else interests you? Something must occupy your mind, no?

Troll.

Right back atcha.
Maybe time for another vacation, since the yoga seems to not work?

I have added a few more details to my image of the Hello Kitty pajama- clad troll perched in front of the giant monitor in his mother's basement: There is a television, a nice big one, a 60-inch flat screen, against the wall behind the troll, with a sofa facing the TV between the troll and the TV. The TV is always on, day and night, permanently tuned to the Fox News Channel. The troll has his back to the TV; he is facing the monitor. He is wearing wireless earphones such that the room, lit only by the computer and TV screens, is silent, except for the sound of the troll's tiny hands clacking away at the computer keyboard as he makes yet another attempt to engage the object of his affection in conversation . . .

Have you considered starting a career as a fiction writer, since the legal career ended in shambles?

The troll's face registers excitement! The thread where he last heard from his true love is showing some activity! He lunges to open the thread, and alas, the excitement turns to disappointment as the recent activity poster is not SheWhomHeAdores, but rather another, inconsequential blip in his day as he awaits new word from his true love. He lashes out at the inconsequential blip in an attempt to make himself feel better, but alas, the pain and emptiness remain. He sits quietly now. He closes his eyes, hoping that the steady stream of fair and balanced news of the outside world bathing his ears will make it all better.
Okay, this narrative is even too depressing for me; I am actually starting to feel bad for my fictional character.

Maybe reconsider the fiction career.
Readers have to be able to understand what you write (and step 1 with that is you should understand what you yourself write).

I think that is where editors come in.

The troll's face registers excrement! The thread where he last hurled at his true love (his mama) is slowing ... some reactivity, we can expect! He plunges to poop on the thread, and alas, the excrement turns to disanointment ...

Alan, you think BHburg is my mother?

All this time, the women who has been paying my cable bills and purchasing my pajamas is none other than ... aboutready. And it took you all this time despite that she tried to make it obvious with her new posting name.
Joke is on you NYCNovice. AR/HB/BB and I got you!

fieldschester
2 days ago
Posts: 2536
Member since: Jul 2013
ignore this person
report abuse
. . . you created a half dozen names in support against your real world adversary. That's unethical . . .

I have reported the excerpt above as "abuse" to Streeteasy Support. The facts stated therein are false and the conclusion that poster draws based on the false facts is defamatory. I have been identified on this site by my actual name; accordingly, any false factual statements that are made about me hereon are of concern to me, particularly if they bear on my integrity.

Which part is wrong?
Half dozen?
If that is not correct, is the number 3? 4? 5? 7? 8? How many? I notice you only complain about the specific excerpt (and state as such) and didn't chose to complain about the parenthetical where I referenced multiple names. So if the portion of the post referencing multiple names is acknowledged by you and is not in dispute, and only the exact amount not being a half dozen is a false fact, should we conclude that in your opinion ethics and integrity are just a matter of degree, or is there a specific cutoff, e.g. half dozen is unethical, but 5? 4? 3? is not unethical?

Also, when you stated the following subsequent to my post:
NYCNovice
1 day ago
Posts: 966
Member since: Jan 2012
ignore this person
report abuse
@Bburg - Don't forget that he also can't admit it when he's made a mistake, and he thinks telling someone that they have no skill is arguing "substance" and "the merits." I do not think any reader takes him seriously. I still can't figure out whether he takes himself seriously, but have just resolved to take him as part of the site. Some of his posts have made me laugh out loud, but most I just ignore, particularly those that are aimed at posters who elicit an emotional reaction in him for whatever reason, you being at the forefront of that group.

...do you no longer stand by that? You do take what I say seriously now even though you said you didn't before?

FC - It is not a question of what I take seriously; when you make false statements about another to the world about another, the question becomes whether others take you seriously. As for the rest of your post, I am not interested in debating with you what is ethical or not. You are entitled to your opinion and if course are free to express that opinion, but you cannot preface an opinion with false statements of fact. I have acknowledged and explained the three usernames I have had on Streeteasy.

PS - On handheld without reading glasses so typos even worse than normal.

So then to be clear - I don't want to put words in your mouth - you dispute 6 names, but acknowledge 3, and then the rest of the post above remains correct if that substitution is made?

No - the three names that I have had on Streeteasy were not "created in support against [my] real world adversary." MCR started to post about the building to put renters on notice that the prices were absurd and the slanted lease should be read very carefully. MCR was too embarrassed to admit that she had so wildly overpaid and not negotiated/redlined the lease. At that point, MCR had no intention of naming the landlord that was the subject of "ordinary landlord conduct," and in fact, MCR was contemplating purchase of the 1 bedroom that was for sale in the building. Through potential purchase due diligence, MCR learned that landlord was still head of condo board, plus other discussed facts that dissuaded her from purchase. Later still, she finally got security deposit back and the landlord's bogus deductions after she thought boundaries had bern set and would be observed led her to warn other potential renters. She started doing additional factual research in anticipation of taking legal action against her landlord and was further disturbed by what she discovered such that she felt even stronger duty to warn. Foolishrenter was a single issue, low post-count, short user; nycnovice, whom I made very clear was close with foolishrenter would not have been part of the conversation at all but for fact that foolishrenter's posts did actually get posted until many many days after she made them.