4 ms·

1) The case in question is about "engineer", not "professional engineer". The legal system agreed with him, so I'm not sure what your complaint is? 2) That's v

1) The case in question is about "engineer", not "professional engineer". The legal system agreed with him, so I'm not sure what your complaint is? 2) That's very vague. Can you elaborate?

bsder 5y ago
Take a look at who bankrolled him through the legal case.
- kazoomonger 5y ago
  Sorry if I'm being dense, but can you be more clear? I looked at the ij.org link as well as the linked case document, and don't see anything nefarious?
  - cratermoon 5y ago
    Institute for Justice: "a non-profit libertarian public interest law firm"[1] "William H. "Chip" Mellor and Clint Bolick co-founded the organization in 1990 with seed money from libertarian philanthropist Charles Koch"[2] Mellor served as president of the free-market think tank Pacific Research Institute. 1. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1025471447963533520 https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1025471447963533520 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/magazine/the-unregulated-offensive.html https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/magazine/the-unregulated-...
    - kazoomonger 5y ago
      Thanks, that's helpful. I have no love for the Koch brothers or libertarians in general, but TBH I think this is a "broken clock is right twice a day" scenario. After reading the case PDF, I'd have to agree with the decision that "engineer" is such a vague term that it shouldn't be restricted like that. It's like trying to limit calling yourself a "thinker" or something. I can see how the radical anti-government folks picked up on that case. FWIW, if he had tried claiming he was a "licensed professional engineer", I would definitely see that as a false/fraudulent claim that the state absolutely has the right to disallow. Regardless, thanks for actually listing names of who's involved. No offense intended to the GP, it just annoys me when people use terms like "heavily suspect people", as that casts aspersions without actually saying who or what. Your links were much more helpful.

1) The case in question is about "engineer", not "professional engineer". The legal system agreed with him, so I'm not sure what your complaint is? 2) That's very vague. Can you elaborate?

bsder 5y ago

Take a look at who bankrolled him through the legal case.

kazoomonger 5y ago
Sorry if I'm being dense, but can you be more clear? I looked at the ij.org link as well as the linked case document, and don't see anything nefarious?
- cratermoon 5y ago
  Institute for Justice: "a non-profit libertarian public interest law firm"[1] "William H. "Chip" Mellor and Clint Bolick co-founded the organization in 1990 with seed money from libertarian philanthropist Charles Koch"[2] Mellor served as president of the free-market think tank Pacific Research Institute. 1. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1025471447963533520 https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1025471447963533520 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/magazine/the-unregulated-offensive.html https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/magazine/the-unregulated-...
  - kazoomonger 5y ago
    Thanks, that's helpful. I have no love for the Koch brothers or libertarians in general, but TBH I think this is a "broken clock is right twice a day" scenario. After reading the case PDF, I'd have to agree with the decision that "engineer" is such a vague term that it shouldn't be restricted like that. It's like trying to limit calling yourself a "thinker" or something. I can see how the radical anti-government folks picked up on that case. FWIW, if he had tried claiming he was a "licensed professional engineer", I would definitely see that as a false/fraudulent claim that the state absolutely has the right to disallow. Regardless, thanks for actually listing names of who's involved. No offense intended to the GP, it just annoys me when people use terms like "heavily suspect people", as that casts aspersions without actually saying who or what. Your links were much more helpful.