3 ms·
Wow that's fairly insulting and not really an appropriate comparison at all. Peter Keating was anything but an arrogant egoist, and he bent over backwards to pl
by gmu3 14y ago
Wow that's fairly insulting and not really an appropriate comparison at all. Peter Keating was anything but an arrogant egoist, and he bent over backwards to please the people he dealt with (his superiors at least)
- batgaijin 14y agoAt the end of the day what Peter Keating did was because of how people reacted to him. Tell me that using the dealer trick to not have a license plate is somehow not the same childish level of vanity that you would expect of a successful manchild.
- halcyondaze 14y agoEh, what's wrong with the dealer trick? He has the ability to do it, the law is written that way...what does it matter?
- arjie 14y agoIrrespective of whether or not the dealer trick is right, your argument is unconvincing. A non-exhaustive list of things which the law allows for and which many people have the ability to do: * Call you names * Give you projects that are doomed to fail * Place you on a team which will drag you down * Use you as a scapegoat for the failure of a project * Use KLOC as a metric of performance * Show you the finger at a traffic light And yet we don't approve of these things. Something being lawful is the bare minimum, not the gold standard.
- eldude 14y agoNone of those provide value. I think you're confusing a hack that only takes advantage of the government in a context where the government takes advantage of us and that's meant to provide value ultimately to someone else.