and it wasn't even Rontele to the rescue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

MTM is eating you guys for breakfast.

---

Spoken like a true Internet Expert -- what matters most is saying it with conviction, not what you can back up with knowledge, experience, or facts!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abraham

Hey breakfast is for progressive flatlanders who like to eat bagels

---

We definitely know that bagels and sophisticated urbanization aren't allowed in Palestine -- until the locals are displaced and their structures razed and their land stolen and resettled by modern sophisticates who know an upscale lifestyle when they see one! Of course, by that point it's no longer Palestine and now is part of the New Valhalla that was promised in some religious scripture written by a god that only a small segment of humans on earth accept as their deity -- but no matter. It's New Valhalla!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

You mean like ski area operators having failed to properly control/prevent inbounds avalanches?

---

IMO no-one can eliminate all risk involved with skiing so I don't expect 100% avalanche free conditions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

MTM is eating you guys for breakfast.

---

you & MTM are giggling like schoolgirls?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaky fossil

Krugman! Friedman! Economics! Smugness!

don't forget to entertain the chance you're mistaken. it will help mitigate feelings of failure when you ultimately realize how wrong you are.

pretty sure you're not the professor of jurisprudence at the rideit online law school or the kidwoo online LLM academy, so I don't really feel compelled to believe your booly scheisse regarding what is "economics"

principles of liability arose independent of principles of what we now call "economics," but these real historical truths probably do not apply in your little fantasy bubble you're writing from

you're backpedaling with grace, Moonwalking MTM, but you're still backpedaling

---

You're an idiot. The course and development of modern tort law is highly influenced by the judiciary's (and legislature's) acceptance of imposing liability on a person or entity who profits from an activity which causes injury, reasoning that person or entity must sometimes bear the burden of the loss because the economic benefit it derives from the activity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

MTM is eating you guys for breakfast.

---

Yep, he is. I especially like the part where creaky ridicules him for playing an e-lawyer when he's been practicing law in a ski resort community for over 10 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamesp

IMO no-one can eliminate all risk involved with skiing so I don't expect 100% avalanche free conditions.

---

That's not what I said.

So let's just say there's this little ski area called Shitstone it's in CO. They've had a tough few years with the poor snow and have been losing money hand over fist. Staff, including patrol have been laid off and the place is being run on a shoestring, bankruptcy appears to be just around the corner (unless the unicorns at MRA mange to turn it into an ecco co-op powered my micro hydro) Now under such circumstances it's entirely possible to imagine that after a big dump they may have been told to go easy on the ampho but get stuff open quick so they can sell passes, or the patrol director maybe ill-qualified/underpaid and be making bad choices.

So what you're suggesting with your "I accept avalanches can happen and people shouldn't be able to sue ski areas when they do happen inbounds" = give ski areas a blanket immunity.... even in my scenario of clear negligence, and with evidence of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaky fossil

Spoken like a true Internet Expert -- what matters most is saying it with conviction, not what you can back up with knowledge, experience, or facts!



We definitely know that bagels and sophisticated urbanization aren't allowed in Palestine -- until the locals are displaced and their structures razed and their land stolen and resettled by modern sophisticates who know an upscale lifestyle when they see one! Of course, by that point it's no longer Palestine and now is part of the New Valhalla that was promised in some religious scripture written by a god that only a small segment of humans on earth accept as their deity -- but no matter. It's New Valhalla!

---

You talking about Montana or Israel? And either way are there good bagels there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

That's not what I said.

So let's just say there's this little ski area called Shitstone it's in CO. They've had a tough few years with the poor snow and have been losing money hand over fist. Staff, including patrol have been laid off and the place is being run on a shoestring, bankruptcy appears to be just around the corner (unless the unicorns at MRA mange to turn it into an ecco co-op powered my micro hydro) Now under such circumstances it's entirely possible to imagine that after a big dump they may have been told to go easy on the ampho but get stuff open quick so they can sell passes, or the patrol director maybe ill-qualified/underpaid and be making bad choices.

So what you're suggesting with your "I accept avalanches can happen and people shouldn't be able to sue ski areas when they do happen inbounds" = give ski areas a blanket immunity.... even in my scenario of clear negligence, and with evidence of it.

---

is that what happened in this case? The ruling seemed to be talking about interpretation of the act & not much about the actual circumstances (other than there was an avalanche on a 30+ deg north slope).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abraham

You talking about Montana or Israel? And either way are there good bagels there?

---

Learned something new:

Quote:

---

When Dunkin' Donuts opened in Tel Aviv in 1996 it broke its own records, selling 3 million doughnuts in eight months.

"Israelis do not stop eating doughnuts," the manager told the New York Times back then. But they did, and five years later the chain closed. Starbucks and Wendy's also tried Israel and left.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamesp

is that what happened in this case?

---

Nope.

But the morons saying they accept avalanches can just happen so you shouldn't be able sue anyone should stop and think about what the full implications of what they're saying actually mean.

Life isn't as simple as "people who sue ski areas should be shot".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

Learned something new:

---

Wait so Wendys can't live in Israel maybe creaky should go there

Tough to get good bacon there

Well they should be able to get away with turkey bacon since no one there knows what the real stuff tastes like.

True story...I was on a cross country bus once when I was like, 13 or so with Wendy Thomas. She wasn't particularly cute, but nice enough. This was from Colorado to Connecticut, perfect!
I have nearly died inbounds before, but wouldn't think of suing anybody.
So there's your troll food, Creaky!
Are you suffering hard this season?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abraham

Well they should be able to get away with turkey bacon since no one there knows what the real stuff tastes like.

---

Turkey may or may not be kosher depending on which jew you ask.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Turkey may or may not be kosher depending on which jew you ask.

---

pm rontele for a verdict.

Just cook it in grease. It'll taste better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Nope.

But the morons saying they accept avalanches can just happen so you shouldn't be able sue anyone should stop and think about what the full implications of what they're saying actually mean.

---

ah well guess I'm just a simple moron who thinks people shouldn't sue ski areas for avalanche accidents

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamesp

ah well guess I'm just a simple moron

---

I don't really think there's much need for any guess work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irul&ublo

You're an idiot. The course and development of modern tort law is highly influenced by the judiciary's (and legislature's) acceptance of imposing liability on a person or entity who profits from an activity which causes injury, reasoning that person or entity must sometimes bear the burden of the loss because the economic benefit it derives from the activity.

---

ruler, it's been a long time since you arrogantly assumed you know more than I do in a subject where you know relatively nothing. thanks for the laugh.

"economic reality" hah hah hah hah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abraham

You talking about Montana or Israel? And either way are there good bagels there?

---

why are you trolling on anti-semitic grounds, David Rontal?

or should that be, Binny rather than DR?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

True story...I was on a cross country bus once when I was like, 13 or so with Wendy Thomas. She wasn't particularly cute, but nice enough. This was from Colorado to Connecticut, perfect!
I have nearly died inbounds before, but wouldn't think of suing anybody.
So there's your troll food, Creaky!
Are you suffering hard this season?

---

I'm not suffering half as much as you are -- as usual. You keep that projector running, though! Should be sweet images you cast upon others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

Yep, he is. I especially like the part where creaky ridicules him for playing an e-lawyer when he's been practicing law in a ski resort community for over 10 years.

---

Say it often enough it might become true. The butthurt, the hurt, the pain... go take an oxycontin, Limbaugh!

Here's a tissue for your tears. Maybe you can get released from your cubicle with all this "stoke" and +++++++++vibes++++++++++ I'm giving you.

"BUT IT'S A ONE WAY STREET!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamesp

ah well guess I'm just a simple moron who thinks people shouldn't sue ski areas for avalanche accidents

---

Hypothetical question for you: would your position change if the ski area falsified its actual control work, meaning said it did its best to control the area but didn't do a thing?

shock collars and dye packs for everyone. And does every lift in CO have safety bars yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

Your missing a nuanced piece of logic I'm afraid.

---

Please enlighten me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

Hypothetical question for you: would your position change if the ski area falsified its actual control work, meaning said it did its best to control the area but didn't do a thing?

---

From this http://avalanche.state.co.us/caic/ac...=433&accfm=inv
Patrol skied that run early in day and (presumably) evaluated & deemed it safe. Slide was relatively small and Norris just happened to be in wrong place/time - move 10' and he likely wouldn't have been caught, let alone be terrain trapped.

Sounds to me like the resort took reasonable care to evaluate potential hazards. Unless of course patrol lied thru their teeth about evaluating the run...do you have additional facts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

The hypocrisy lies in that I would guess 90% of the Scott Schmidt's of this country also are adamant proponents of strict construction.

---

I wonder how many % Scot Schmidt would be a proponant of?