Jump to content

Today 3


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, LonelyHiker said:

Severe depression/dysthymia has unfortunately  ultimately erased the line between these....

Resulting in a protracted stall, stagnation, inertia, whatever you want to call it.

Wish I had a better answer..

But in my case, I am marking time until I die .

I'm going to post this out on the depression central forum and see if I get back any feedback that helps with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank god it's Friday.  I wish my weekend was a little less busy, but at least it's here.
I'm emotionally wrung out as often is the case.

I worked late last night on one case, and have 4-5 others where I have to get things out today.

I just got a $50,000 settlement for one client I thought was a long shot, with the Dept. of Veterans Affairs, which I supposedly just obtained my certification in, although I (still) know nothing about it.  I know I say this a lot, but it's true, I don't know the first thing, other than what I've tried to pick up stumbling through this and one other case.  My boss wants me to market and network for these cases.  I like helping veterans, although I generally think it is a difficult area from which to make a living.  Anyway, my boss knows I am sort of looking to hopefully leave.  He is generally indifferent, talks about it openly.

I'm emotionally wrung out because I worked late last night.  Home situation is just still stressful and intermittently joyful, but unpleasant.  And today, boss called me in to the awful paralegal's office, and gave a spiel about status here, and what I should do to win back the 2 paralegals, etc., after which the battle axe sat there and told me why she doesn't like me and why she's never going to like me, and exaggerated or made up several lies.  And I just sat there, held my tongue, and then--because it's me--added to a letter I have going to the boss for when I leave.  Don't know if I'll end up giving it to him or not, but it's part therapy anyway.

Anyway, the last 3 briefs I've turned in to him, all in the last week, he's really been happy with and praised all around - so of course I was improving one of them last night and still today....in fairness (to me) because it still has very little chance of winning...that's what happens when you're wrong on the law and the facts, and trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

But anyway, kind of amazing and maybe disordered how much gratification I get out of a preeminent attorney saying I'm a great writer.  Like, what is that worth?  I'm tempted to say 'nothing,' but then again, it is a main reason he's keeping me employed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm.  My wife just lost her job; they said the cut it due to budget.  It's a podiatrist's office, and they've run tons of people through there because they pay little and demand much.

It's probably okay, we pay most of it to our son's daycare, and to our girls' after school program.  We won't need the after school now, so won't lose too much $.  It'll lower stress of the work week, and give me some more flexibility again to get in early, work out, see some friends, etc.

And she has started into this Primerica MLM financial advising part time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gandolfication said:

Hm.  My wife just lost her job; they said the cut it due to budget.  It's a podiatrist's office, and they've run tons of people through there because they pay little and demand much.

It's probably okay, we pay most of it to our son's daycare, and to our girls' after school program.  We won't need the after school now, so won't lose too much $.  It'll lower stress of the work week, and give me some more flexibility again to get in early, work out, see some friends, etc.

And she has started into this Primerica MLM financial advising part time.

Oh wow. I'm sorry that she lost the job...but it sounds like there is plenty of silver lining in that particular cloud.

My ex may be losing her job as well, because of health issues. That does not bode well because I am technically still paying on the mortgage from hell. If she loses that job, the risk of default looms large. I just may find myself living back in the house where I built up decades of PTSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, JD4010 said:

Oh wow. I'm sorry that she lost the job...but it sounds like there is plenty of silver lining in that particular cloud.

My ex may be losing her job as well, because of health issues. That does not bode well because I am technically still paying on the mortgage from hell. If she loses that job, the risk of default looms large. I just may find myself living back in the house where I built up decades of PTSD.

oh god, man, I hope you don't have to do that.  Has she had any change in her prognosis?

I'm sorry.  

I always have this sort of anti-Ayn-Rand (Atlas Shrugged) impulse to want to burn all the money in the world, so we all would have to just start over at some sort of parity, mostly apart from the strictures of money and property ownership.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so there's a real domestic relations case in Dayton called Kramer v. Kramer (which unhelpfully says that our civil stalking protection order statute wasn't passed to alleviate merely uncomfortable situations).  Kramer v. Kramer, 2002 Ohio 4383.
 
Kramer vs. Kramer is the name of a well-known movie about a nasty domestic relations dispute between Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep.  
I may find a way to mention this when I cite it in my brief to the court.  It will amuse me, even if not the court.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you ever have not feeling at the end of the day that even though you did about as well as you could at most of the things you did, it's never good enough, for you?

Even when I do my best, it's never good enough for me.

Why am I built this way?  Why can I not seem to learn to accept, to want what I have, just to let good enough be good enough?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yah. Perfectionism should be a listed disorder in the DSM, I reckon.

People totally understimate how bad it is and how it can totally ruin your life. It can be like a cancer, that eats away at everything.

Perfect is the enemy of good and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My answer to perfectionism ... I don't even try anymore. Which may be part of my problems. I was always told if you can't do something right (aka perfect), then don't bother doing it. And the right way was mother's way and I heard repeatedly what I did wrong. 

@gandolfication, I got a good laugh about your statement.  Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, gandolfication said:

Do you ever have not feeling at the end of the day that even though you did about as well as you could at most of the things you did, it's never good enough, for you?

Even when I do my best, it's never good enough for me.

Why am I built this way?  Why can I not seem to learn to accept, to want what I have, just to let good enough be good enough?

 

 

I have felt that way quite often.  I fight on because it is what I have been taught. 

There are a lot of things that I do that are not good enough for me.  I met with my therapist yesterday and he said that I was kicking myself in the butt a lot. 

For your last question I would politely assume that you have some desire to push beyond your current abilities and become "The strongest!" 

Best wishes and congratulations on winning that VA case. 

And foxtrot that coital court dude.  If they do not like the references they are well a word that starts with P that refers to cowards.  Sadly I do not believe it is legal to female dog slap the judge or opposing attorney. 

Hope your are winning your battles good sir!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nojoy said:

My answer to perfectionism ... I don't even try anymore. Which may be part of my problems. I was always told if you can't do something right (aka perfect), then don't bother doing it. And the right way was mother's way and I heard repeatedly what I did wrong. 

@gandolfication, I got a good laugh about your statement.  Thanks!

The mom-perfetion thing sounds awful....most of us have some variation on that we receive from out parents, and most of us parents will give it as well.

How about the statement, "if it's not worth trying and failing at, then it's probably not worth doing"?  Growth mindset.

(I'm not saying i have it nearly enough;  I aspire to)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rattler6 said:

And foxtrot that coital court dude.  If they do not like the references they are well a word that starts with P that refers to cowards.  Sadly I do not believe it is legal to female dog slap the judge or opposing attorney

Thanks.

Some day I want to get permission to do a linguistic study on depression writing here...the words, patterns, tone, self talk, interaction, compliments, discounting, repetition, vocabulary, etc., etc.

This isn't directed at you...I just saw something reflected (about myself) in our exchange.

I don't know if the pen is mightier than the sword any more, but there is still power of life and death in the tongue.  As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.  And, nothing is, but thinking makes it so. (The Bible and Shakespeare, respectively, ennunciating cognitive behavioral therapy a few years before its time).

Also, "coital," thanks for that, I am definitely going to use that in a brief sometime. In my Christian college class on human sexuality which I thought was good (and convinced my then girlfriend to take the course), but had the enduring legacy of remembering the great term, "coitus interruptus," for a bad method of birth control.

Edited by gandolfication
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the best things about attorneys (some would say the only one, though I would say there are many), is that the good ones are good communicators, and the best ones, tell great stories.

In Dayton, the patriarch of the bar and of story telling is David Greer, who wrote the wonderful book, The Sluff of History's Bootsouls: An Anecdotal History of the Dayton Bar.  It has a wildly colorful passage on my boss that manages to perfectly capture his manic, madcap genius.  



But today, I relay the story of Clement Vallandigham, erstwhile politician, lawyer, member of Beezer Greer and Landis, a venerable founded in the 1800's that I have had the pleasure of opposing (in fact am right now today) and served as co-counsel with many times.

Vallandigham had been imprisoned during the civil war (when Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus) for being a Copperhead anti-war Democrat and all-around rabble-rouser.  For example, Vallandigham was essentially expelled by his college president and so never received his degree.  In those days, those with extraordinary gumption could try to teach themselves the law (which there was considerably less of), or apprentice, or take law courses.  His friend Edwin M. Stanton, future Secretary of War for Lincoln, lent Vallandigham $500 for a law course and so he began his own practice.

It seems that Mr. Vallandigham was trying a M***** case in Warren County and so staying at the the Lebanon House, a restaurant and Inn where many U.S. Presidents have dined and lodged, and still a destination serving patrons today as the Golden Lamb.  He was representing a defendant, Thomas McGehean, in the case for ******* a man in a barroom brawl.  Vallandigham's defense in the case was that the victim, while in the process of pulling his gun out of his pocket,  had in fact accidentally shot himself while drawing his pistol from a pocket while rising from a kneeling position. Consider that for a moment.  

As Vallandigham conferred with fellow defense attorneys in his hotel room at the Lebanon House he showed them how he would demonstrate this to the jury.  Selecting a pistol he believed to be unloaded, he put it in his pocket and enacted the events as they might have happened, snagging the loaded gun on his clothing and unintentionally causing it to discharge into his abdomen.   Although he was fatally wounded, Vallandigham's demonstration proved his point, and the defendant, Thomas McGehean, was acquitted and released from custody (only to be shot to death four years later in his saloon).

Surgeons probed for the pistol ball, thought to have lodged in the vicinity of Vallandigham's bladder, but were unable to locate it, and Vallandigham died the next day of peritonitis. His last words expressed his faith in "that good old Presbyterian doctrine of predestination.  

This is all on wikipedia, btw, and I'm sure in David Greer's book.  No one can tell this or any other story quite like David Greer though, and although he's a soft-spoken, modest-seeming man (and Harvard-educated scion of the region's legal stewards), he can be found holding court at the local Inn of Court (which is a consortium of the leading litigators in the city who come together once a month at the two main universities to have dinner followed by a continuing legal education seminar...they dare not do both simultaneously as this is prohibited by the Ohio Supreme Court's cannons of ethics).  He also can be found at real bars playing the banjo for his band, the Jazz Stompers.

This kind of collegial networking is why I think I'm going to rejoin the Inn of Court.  They put on high quality legal education seminars for litigators usually, and it is easily the best forum for getting to talk informally to the area's leading judges and litigators (most of the judges regularly attend and are quite sociable).

 

Legal disclaimer: not to take the fun out of it, but whenever I share something like this, it is all public and usually publicized information, although nothing in here would be confidential in any wise.

Edited by gandolfication
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, nojoy said:

I was always told if you can't do something right (aka perfect), then don't bother doing it

Then how the **** do you learn from mistakes/failures to grow better if you don't even try?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you. Do you know how long it has taken me to realize that I missed out on a lot  from not trying or trying to be what my mother and other family members thought I should be.  And I am still missing out on things and  still am overcoming the belief that things have to be perfect to try.  there are  family members and friends that have never seen the real me because the real me is not perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nojoy said:

Thank you. Do you know how long it has taken me to realize that I missed out on a lot  from not trying or trying to be what my mother and other family members thought I should be.  And I am still missing out on things and  still am overcoming the belief that things have to be perfect to try.  there are  family members and friends that have never seen the real me because the real me is not perfect.

We all are nojoy.

I've known this for years, but consider the subtitle of a book I am having to read just now:

The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are.

 

@sophy and others say it is the most daunting but rewarding journey you will ever go on.  So press on.  One small erffort of acceptance and awareness at a time

 

 

Edited by gandolfication
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, nojoy said:

Thank you. Do you know how long it has taken me to realize that I missed out on a lot  from not trying or trying to be what my mother and other family members thought I should be.  And I am still missing out on things and  still am overcoming the belief that things have to be perfect to try.  there are  family members and friends that have never seen the real me because the real me is not perfect.

One of the related areas I have a lot to learn and practice, is called growth mindset.  There's a professor/researcher who writes about it, I think she's credited with coming up with the term of art.  I won't discuss it now; others here know it better than me.

A lot of me thinks that perfectionism and its underpinnings are about as close to the root of depression as I can get (from it flows self-rejection and also self-absorption). 

An old English poem, Maude Muller has this line that has chased me down since I first read it in grammar school:

Of all the words of tongue or pen,

the saddest of these, is 'what might have been.'

Regret.  I posit that we almost never (or rarely) ultimately regret things we have done.  It is opportunities not taken that we regret.

Growth mindset says, welcome failure as the stepping stone to progress.

Edited by gandolfication
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've won a few small cases lately, and we won this bigger one if we can keep it from being overturned on appeal.  This is a really big if.  We shouldn't have won it, but the judge thought our brief was persuasive.  Same hard core Republican judge with whom I lost the criminal trial on another case.

The statue, just passed in march was intended to preclude litigants and courts from using the affordable care act/medicaid/insurance policy language from being used to establish a standard of care for medical negligence.  But the language can be seen--and we successfully argued and won in the state trial court that it does mean--that insurance companies and health care providers can't pollute a jury's mind with cost write-down/reimbursement amounts driving down verdict and settlement amounts for injured plaintiffs.  So I'm deep in the the cannons of statutory construction from 1L year of law school and even English linguistics.  I'm nerding out.  This is my favorite section so far:

 

In their Response, Defendants correctly emphasize that R.C. § 2317.45 “states reimbursement determinations ‘are not admissible as evidence for or against any party in the action and may not be used to establish a standard of care or breach of that standard of care in the action.’”  Def.’s Response In Opp., at 3 (quoting R.C. § 2317.45; emphasis in Def.’s Response).  Remarkably, Defendants highlight the word “and” as the “coordinating conjunction,” but fail to realize or acknowledge that the use of such a conjunction necessarily connects two separate and distinct clauses and thoughts in the sentence.  For this is what coordinating conjunctions do in English.[1]  Defendants go on to argue for an inverted version of the rule against surplusage of language:

Revised Code section 2317.45(B) goes on to state that such evidence “may not be used to establish a standard of care or breach of that standard of care in the action.” The broad wording of the first phrase renders the second phrase completely pointless, superfluous, and conflicting. As such, the statute is ambiguous.

 

Id.  This, however, is actually the direct opposite of what the cannon against surplusage holds.  As the cases from Ohio to the U.S. Supreme Court above show, the rule against surplusage of language is that words are not to be read as superfluous.  Contrary to what Defendants argue, there is no rule, that “broad wording of the first phrase renders the second phrase completely pointless, superfluous, and conflicting.”  This is not a thing.  This is undoubtedly why Defendants can cite no authority whatsoever for this inventive proposition.  The rule against surplusage states exactly the opposite of what Defendants contend, and so does the statute.  Accordingly, the Court should grant Plaintiffs’ requested order in limine to exclude “any…reimbursement determination,” defined as “an insurer’s determination of whether the insurer will reimburse a health care provider for health care services and the amount of that reimbursement,” in R.C. § 2317.45(A)(4) (emphasis added), because the plain text of R.C. § 2317.45(A) states that these “reimbursement determinations…are not admissible as evidence for or against any party in the action and may not be used to establish a standard of care…”  Defendants are correct that this language is board, and it should therefore be broadly applied to the mass of patients, rather than narrowly interpreted to suit the health care lobby’s interests.

 

In my reverie, I like to imagine judges reading, "This is not a thing," and at first being at least mildly annoyed--maybe taken aback--that an officer of the court would have the temerity (or audacity as of course I'd like to see it), to write such a casual remark in a brief.  Perhaps they could think it flippant.  And then afterward, whether they realize it or not, the phrase--which even they will have heard from kids, on TV, etc.--will stick in their brain like an ear worm, and cause them later, when discussing with clerks or peers, to say to themselves, yah, this really is not a thing that exists.  It is not right.   Because if they make their decision on the ground upon which I wish to fight, we have already won.

 


The on-line Mirriam-Webster Dictionary defines “coordinating conjunction” as “a conjunction (such as and or or) that joins together words or word groups of equal grammatical rank [or] of equal importance.  <[citation removed so post will show up : ( > (May 22, 2019) (emphasis added).

Edited by gandolfication
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've won a few small cases lately, and we won this bigger one if we can keep it from being overturned on appeal.  This is a really big if.  We should not have won it, but the judge thought our brief was persuasive.  Same hard core Republican judge with whom I lost the criminal trial on another case.

The statue, just passed in march was intended to preclude litigants and courts from using the affordable care act/medicaid/insurance policy language from being used to establish a standard of care for medical negligence.  But the language can be seen--and we successfully argued and won in the state trial court that it does mean--that insurance companies and health care providers can't pollute a jury's mind with cost write-down/reimbursement amounts driving down verdict and settlement amounts for injured plaintiffs.  So I'm deep in the the cannons of statutory construction from 1L year of law school and even English linguistics.  I'm nerding out.  This is my favorite section so far:

 

In their Response, Defendants correctly emphasize that R.C. § 2317.45 “states reimbursement determinations ‘are not admissible as evidence for or against any party in the action and may not be used to establish a standard of care or breach of that standard of care in the action.’” Def.’s Response In Opp., at 3 (quoting R.C. § 2317.45; emphasis in Def.’s Response). Remarkably, Defendants highlight the word “and” as the “coordinating conjunction,” but fail to realize or acknowledge that the use of such a conjunction necessarily connects two separate and distinct clauses and thoughts in the sentence.  For this is what coordinating conjunctions do in English.1  Defendants go on to argue for an inverted version of the rule against surplusage of language:

Revised Code section 2317.45(B) goes on to state that such evidence “may not be used to establish a standard of care or breach of that standard of care in the action.” The broad wording of the first phrase renders the second phrase completely pointless, superfluous, and conflicting. As such, the statute is ambiguous.

 

Id.  This, however, is actually the direct opposite of what the cannon against surplusage holds. As the cases from Ohio to the U.S. Supreme Court above show, the rule against surplusage of language is that words are not to be read as superfluous.  Contrary to what Defendants argue, there is no rule, that “broad wording of the first phrase renders the second phrase completely pointless, superfluous, and conflicting.”  This is not a thing.  This is undoubtedly why Defendants can cite no authority whatsoever for this inventive proposition.  The rule against surplusage states exactly the opposite of what Defendants contend, and so does the statute. Accordingly, the Court should grant Plaintiffs’ requested order in limine to exclude “any…reimbursement determination,” defined as “an insurer’s determination of whether the insurer will reimburse a health care provider for health care services and the amount of that reimbursement,” in R.C. § 2317.45(A)(4) (emphasis added), because the plain text of R.C. § 2317.45(A) states that these “reimbursement determinations…are not admissible as evidence for or against any party in the action and may not be used to establish a standard of care…” Defendants are correct that this language is board, and it should therefore be broadly applied to the mass of patients, rather than narrowly interpreted to suit the health care lobby’s interests.

 

In my reverie, I like to imagine judges reading, "This is not a thing," and at first being at least mildly annoyed--maybe taken aback--that an officer of the court would have the temerity (or audacity as of course I'd like to see it), to write such a casual remark in a brief.  Perhaps they could think it flippant.  And then afterward, whether they realize it or not, the phrase--which even they will have heard from kids, on TV, etc.--will stick in their brain like an ear worm, and cause them later, when discussing with clerks or peers, to say to themselves, yah, this really is not a thing that exists.  It is not right.   Because if they make their decision on the ground upon which I wish to fight, we have already won.

 


The on-line Mirriam-Webster Dictionary defines “coordinating conjunction” as “a conjunction (such as and or or) that joins together words or word groups of equal grammatical rank [or] of equal importance.  <[citation removed so post will show up : ( > (May 22, 2019) (emphasis added).

Edited by gandolfication
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, gandolfication said:

One of the best things about attorneys (some would say the only one, though I would say there are many), is that the good ones are good communicators, and the best ones, tell great stories.

In Dayton, the patriarch of the bar and of story telling is David Greer, who wrote the wonderful book, The Sluff of History's Bootsouls: An Anecdotal History of the Dayton Bar.  It has a wildly colorful passage on my boss that manages to perfectly capture his manic, madcap genius.  



But today, I relay the story of Clement Vallandigham, erstwhile politician, lawyer, member of Beezer Greer and Landis, a venerable founded in the 1800's that I have had the pleasure of opposing (in fact am right now today) and served as co-counsel with many times.

Vallandigham had been imprisoned during the civil war (when Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus) for being a Copperhead anti-war Democrat and all-around rabble-rouser.  For example, Vallandigham was essentially expelled by his college president and so never received his degree.  In those days, those with extraordinary gumption could try to teach themselves the law (which there was considerably less of), or apprentice, or take law courses.  His friend Edwin M. Stanton, future Secretary of War for Lincoln, lent Vallandigham $500 for a law course and so he began his own practice.

It seems that Mr. Vallandigham was trying a M***** case in Warren County and so staying at the the Lebanon House, a restaurant and Inn where many U.S. Presidents have dined and lodged, and still a destination serving patrons today as the Golden Lamb.  He was representing a defendant, Thomas McGehean, in the case for ******* a man in a barroom brawl.  Vallandigham's defense in the case was that the victim, while in the process of pulling his gun out of his pocket,  had in fact accidentally shot himself while drawing his pistol from a pocket while rising from a kneeling position. Consider that for a moment.  

As Vallandigham conferred with fellow defense attorneys in his hotel room at the Lebanon House he showed them how he would demonstrate this to the jury.  Selecting a pistol he believed to be unloaded, he put it in his pocket and enacted the events as they might have happened, snagging the loaded gun on his clothing and unintentionally causing it to discharge into his abdomen.   Although he was fatally wounded, Vallandigham's demonstration proved his point, and the defendant, Thomas McGehean, was acquitted and released from custody (only to be shot to death four years later in his saloon).

Surgeons probed for the pistol ball, thought to have lodged in the vicinity of Vallandigham's bladder, but were unable to locate it, and Vallandigham died the next day of peritonitis. His last words expressed his faith in "that good old Presbyterian doctrine of predestination. 

Legal disclaimer: not to take the fun out of it, but whenever I share something like this, it is all public and usually publicized information, although nothing in here would be confidential in any wise.

Victory is life!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Rattler6 said:

Victory is life!

That sounds "Dominion-y". 🙂 I just finished watching the entire series of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, a show that didn't interest me much when it first aired. I gave it another chance and really enjoyed it.

 

2 hours ago, gandolfication said:

An old English poem, Maude Muller has this line that has chased me down since I first read it in grammar school:

Of all the words of tongue or pen,

the saddest of these, is 'what might have been.'

Regret.  I posit that we almost never (or rarely) ultimately regret things we have done.  It is opportunities not taken that we regret.

Growth mindset says, welcome failure as the stepping stone to progress.

That's a great line. I'm going to imbed that in my memory banks.

In my case, I'm full of regret. I've done so many stoopid things in my life. I think my motto should be "coulda, woulda, shoulda".  My mind constantly reminds me of my past stupidity and that translates into immobilization and inaction when I think about doing something now.

If failure is a stepping stone to progress, I should be the most progressed person alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JD4010 said:

That sounds "Dominion-y". 🙂 I just finished watching the entire series of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, a show that didn't interest me much when it first aired. I gave it another chance and really enjoyed it.

Funny that you mention that. I've always been a TNG fan and didn't really like DS9 at first so I never watched it until I gave it another chance last month and now I really got into the characters and plot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, lonelyforeigner said:

Funny that you mention that. I've always been a TNG fan and didn't really like DS9 at first so I never watched it until I gave it another chance last month and now I really got into the characters and plot. 

Yes! Same here. The show keeps getting better as the series progresses.

I just watched the first season of ST Discovery on DVD. I enjoyed the heck out of it. "Spore drive" and some indirect references to "shroom tripping". Hahaha.

Last night, I started on TNG again. I watched "Incident at Farpoint". I forgot how much I loved this show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...