Quatloos!

This came up recently in two different thread, what is a "Crawford?" Would that make ??? a Rekha?" Does the measure boil down to a money figure or a percentage of stupididty? It got confusing, and thought it needed to be clarified so I posted this some time ago....

Gregg wrote:As the longstanding, if admittedly self appointed, Parliamentarian Of Quatloos, I am currently pondering the official definition of the term "Full Crawford" which does have historical precedence on the forum. The other, sub-units, deriving as they do from the proper term, are at this time informal and non-official denominations and any usage of them is done at your own risk and are not endorsed by anyone who matters at this time.

I will announce my decisions in regards to Full Crawford upon the completion of my exhaustive research and after deliberations with the Wiener Counsel's Command of the 699th Airborne Assault Dachshund Regiment, which serves in the instant matter as the de facto Sergeants At Arms.

Nunc de Dunc pro pop tart Pizza Pizza,*

etc....

* Official Sovereign Article 61 Magnum Carter majik words UK Edition

As such ponderings were recently completed during my recent journey to Canada, I have completed my studies and come to the following conclusions. These findings are fully official and binding upon absolutely no-one, but failure to comply might result in your imminent arrest under Article 61, Magnum Carter Opus 1215....

Full Crawford A Full Crawford is a real estate transaction in which the owner, through stupidity and persistent legal woo above and beyond the call or duty, disposes of equity in a home exceeding the value of said home, without regards to the amount of that value. It means you pissed away every penny you had in a house. It does not require you piss away the actual value of a home, Casa Crawford the residence on which this unit is based, was probably worth upwards of £140,000 and Poor Tom only lost £90,000 give or take. But the important thing is Tom had something approaching that much in equity after taking into account what he owed. So he achieved "Full Crawford" when he got to the point when he would not get a bent penny from the eventual sale of the property. Though figures are not known in exactitude, Clan Stupid owed expenses relating to agents, bailiffs, security and legal costs of almost £90,000 after the home was sold. This means that Crawford might have in fact done an extremely rare Double Full Crawford, pissing away his equity and as much again after. A truly memorable own goal, the likes we rarely see.

Rekha A Rekha is a slightly different measure and one that as of yet, officially, the person for whom it is named may not actually achieve. It is in fact a purely theoretical unit at this time, experts think it does exist but have yet to demonstrate an actual Rekha in nature or in the laboratory. For a Rekha to be achieved, a person or family that owns a home free and clear of any mortgage must run up legal and other costs in pointless and frivolous legal actions that result in the loss of the home, without leaving anything for the protagonist. Rekha Patel has indeed lost her little cottage, and she has done so through court ordered legal costs of her neighbor, the underling damage charge having been paid fairly early in the attempt. No, Rekha has given to date £90,000 of her equity to the lawyers for the insurance company that paid to defend her neighbor from her pointless and vindictive lawsuits. Cottage Patel has been ordered sold for no less than £225,000 so Rekha has quite a ways to go to earn a title named after her. (where else but in Sov-Cit stupid could this happen) But we are optimistic for a few reasons. First, charges relating to the final eviction, full time security, eventual boarding up of the home have yet to be tolled, as have almost certainly more legal fees. Second, though the court ordered the property sold for no less than £225,000 Rekha's actions and the condition of the property may require that order to be revised and the price reduced. It seems the market value of what now looks like one of the Fuhrer's Bunkers which the past owner is likely to re-occupy as soon as she thinks no one is looking, along with the near certainty that she will start in filing costly lawsuits against anyone who buys it in the future is somewhat depressed in this market. Who knew?
So, to sum up, a Full Rekha requires a house fully paid for, with every £ of equity extracted by lawyers, agents, movers and security, among other costs in inadvisable legal proceedings. It is important to know when to cut the bitch free and just pay the phuckers....

SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE HEARD!

NOTICE TO WAITER IS NOTICE TO DINER : NOTICE TO DINER IS NOTICE TO WAITER


Nunc de Dunc pro pop tart Pizza Pizza,*

etc....

* Official Sovereign Article 61 Magnum Carter majik words UK Edition

Gregg wrote:SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE HEARD!

NOTICE TO WAITER IS NOTICE TO DINER : NOTICE TO DINER IS NOTICE TO WAITER

can I give NOTICE to the waiter that I want a nice bottle of Vino Rosso (Primitivo is a favourite ) with my pizza ??

Excellent work.
This thread should be made a sticky.

katiHWB wrote:

Gregg wrote:SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE HEARD!

NOTICE TO WAITER IS NOTICE TO DINER : NOTICE TO DINER IS NOTICE TO WAITER

can I give NOTICE to the waiter that I want a nice bottle of Vino Rosso (Primitivo is a favourite ) with my pizza ??

Try the Negroamaro, the other Puglia grape also.

Gregg wrote:As the longstanding, if admittedly self appointed, Parliamentarian Of Quatloos, I am currently pondering the official definition of the term "Full Crawford" which does have historical precedence on the forum.

< ... >

SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE HEARD!

I only recently discovered on Wikipedia the term 'Parliamentarian' which is unknown in this country, just as I only just learned from Burnaby that Canadians use "imperial ounces, not litres" whereas I always assumed Canadian liquor was measured in U.S. fluid ounces, pints etc if not litres.

Coming to the point, is this definitional decree valid only on the UK forum or should it be promoted for use across Q as a whole?

Like much British law and to a lesser extent the laws of other nations in the United States, it may be referred to in other forums as an example of a workable theory without being prima facie binding.

obadiah wrote:

katiHWB wrote:

Gregg wrote:SO LET IT BE WRITTEN, SO LET IT BE HEARD!

NOTICE TO WAITER IS NOTICE TO DINER : NOTICE TO DINER IS NOTICE TO WAITER

can I give NOTICE to the waiter that I want a nice bottle of Vino Rosso (Primitivo is a favourite ) with my pizza ??

Try the Negroamaro, the other Puglia grape also.

I'll have to look that one up (thanks) xx

While this was scholarly, Greg's measurements do not account for all sovrun/FOTLer' successful attempts at losing their abodes. Greg has fully overlooked the US masterpiece, Ed and Elaine Brown. Not only did the Browns lose their home and business properties, but managed to do it after being jailed, not before being jailed. Other considerations that have to be taken into account was the freakish, tasteless and senseless overbuilding that the Browns abused their residence with, as well as the sabotaging of the property to make it almost unmarketable at a distress sale. Neither a Rehka or a Full Crawford can account for these factors fully so it is obvious we need to calculate what will meet the measurement that I propose we name as a Boobhead Brown.

That's gonna take some thinking. I'll go back to "Deep Thought Mode" and try to get back to you in the next seven and a half million years. Until then...

42?

I only recently discovered on Wikipedia the term 'Parliamentarian' which is unknown in this country, just as I only just learned from Burnaby that Canadians use "imperial ounces, not litres" whereas I always assumed Canadian liquor was measured in U.S. fluid ounces, pints etc if not litres.

Not quite true. Officially and legally we are now on the metric system and have been since the 1970s. But the imperial systyem still lingers on here and there in a form of compromise;

Metrication in Canada began in 1970 and while Canada has converted to the metric system for many purposes, there is still significant use of non-metric units and standards in many sectors of the Canadian economy. This is mainly due to historical ties with the United Kingdom (before metrication), the traditional use of the imperial system of measurement in Canada, proximity to the United States, and to public opposition to metrication during the transition period.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_Canada

It gets complicated and is very inconsistent. Pre-packaged goods such as bottled or canned drinks, Kraft Dinners (225 grams), paint thinner, corn flakes, gas at the pump etc are always measured in metric. This is a legal requirement. However the law doesn't say that you can't also use imperial measure so many products are dual measured. For example I have a package of Italissima Porcini Mushroom Tortellini manufactured in Italy in front of me that stipulates it is '250g (8.8 oz)'. Grocery stores sometimes do both by giving prices for meat or vegetables in imperial or metric. But, as a very general rule, at least here in Vancouver, the large grocery stores like Safeway use only metric but smaller local stores generally use both. Makes life tricky for me because I've never been able to mentally change over and am always dividing the metric price of meat by 2,2 to get the price per pound.

Returning to HardyW's comment about the measurement of liquor Vancouver bars and restaurants, for reasons unknown to me, always use the imperial system for served drinks. So all served drinks are measured in liquid ounces while, as required by law, bottled drinks are metric. So if you order a beer on tap you might get 12 ounces while your friend who bought that vile bottle of Labatts Blue will get 355 ml. If a pub says that it serves a pint this generally means a 20 oz imperial pint not the 16 oz American pint but some try to serve 16 oz drinks they call a pint. I don't frequent those establishments. As an example Callisters, my favorite pub, does not use metric at all. Their price list gives serving sized at 2 ounce, 4 ounce, 12 ounce, 16 ounce, 32 ounce and 64 ounce. The first two are for sampler trays and the last two are take-out growler sizes. I'm not offended by Callistrs serving a 16 ounce beer because they don't claim that it's a pint. As an example of an oddity in measuring the Fish Tail Brewery in Olympia Washington serves a 20 ounce imperial pint. I only found that out a few weeks back when I was served one and asked why my Spire Dark and Dry Cider seemed so large. Not that I was complaining, it's an excellent summer patio drink.

Before we converted to metric Americans always used to complain how expensive our gasoline was because a Canadian gallon of gas was 80 ounces while an American gallon was 64 ounce and they didn't realize they were getting 25% more gas in a Canadian gallon. Now Americans have no clue as to the actual cost of our gas because they have no clue about metric. But, by instinct, they are right. Our gas is expensive. Note that a liquid ounce is exactly the same measure in both systems.

Like the United States we've always used the decimal system for currency. One hundred cents to the dollar although we no longer have the actual physical penny. Speed limits are always metric which confuses me going to the states and confuses Americans coming here. We're changing slowly. Until 1922 people in Vancouver drove on the left side of the road.

Many people don't realize it, but the metric system has been the official standard of weights and measures since 1893.

The US was one of seventeen nations that entered into the "Treaty of the Meter", in 1875, to spur the development of the metric system.

Back in the 1970's, there was a movement to actually begin using the metric system in everyday life. Road signs on the interstate highway system began appearing, showing distances in both miles and kilometers. For example, a sign would say that New York was 600 miles distant, and, in smaller lettering, say it was 900 kilometers.

Someone pointed out to me that one of the biggest impediments to conversion at that time were all the little English-metric conversion charts that many businesses gave away. This gave many people the impression that one must be able to do the math to convert from English to metric. In reality, you just need to learn a few new reference points: comfortable room temperature is 20 degress celsius, rather than 72 degrees fahrenheit. A liter of gasoline costs about 60 cents, rather than a gallon for $2.20. You don't buy a quart of milk, you buy a liter. You don't buy two pounds of hamburger, you buy one kilogram.

It didn't help that Senator Strom Thurmond, of South Carolina, managed to get an amendment to a highway appropriation bull that would deny federal funds to any state that posted metric information on any interstate highway.

There are some places were the metric system has caught on. I drive a Chevrolet, made in the US. All the bolts on it are metric. Wine and spirits have been sold in metric units for as long as I can remember, and I'm almost 66. You can't buy a fifth of whiskey. You buy 750 milliliters. No one seems to notice, yet if you ask many people, they will insist that the metric system is incomprehensible.

noblepa wrote: It didn't help that Senator Strom Thurmond, of South Carolina, managed to get an amendment to a highway appropriation bull that would deny federal funds to any state that posted metric information on any interstate highway.

Interesting. As early as 1998, "mile" markers on I-19 in Arizona (not known for supporting unAmerican activities such as the metric system or Spanish) in kilometers. The fact that the markers weren't explained may have gotten around the Thurmond amendment.

Burnaby49 wrote:

Metrication in Canada began in 1970 and while Canada has converted to the metric system for many purposes, there is still significant use of non-metric units and standards in many sectors of the Canadian economy.

many areas....

in canada you buy a half ounce of weed and not a decagram.

(this is in fact a sov cit currency)
ninj

Burnaby 49 wrote:

"Speed limits are always metric which confuses me going to the states and confuses Americans coming here."

I've taken groups of Boy Scouts up to a Scout camp, north of Montreal, on several occasions. I always have to point out that:

1) the speed limit, just past the border, is 100 kilometers per hour, not 100 miles per hour.

2) the thermometers are not all broken. That bank sign, which tells us that the temperature is "30", is using Celsius, and not Fahrenheit; so the bank in Vermont, which said that the temperature was "86", and the bank in Quebec, agree on the temperature.

3) gasoline is not suddenly much cheaper. First of all, the prices are in Canadian dollars; and the price is per liter, not per gallon.Once you are done converting Canadian dollars to US dollars, and liters to gallons, you find that the gas is much more expensive in Quebec, which is why we all filled our gas tanks in St. Albans, and I filled a 5 gallon gas can besides.

As I said;

Now Americans have no clue as to the actual cost of our gas because they have no clue about metric. But, by instinct, they are right. Our gas is expensive.

Apart from California Canadian gas is more expensive than anywhere in the states. Canadians driving down to the states routinely fill up there.

Excellent work Gregg, worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize - probably the first Parliamentarian of Quatloosia ever to be awarded one.
I was a bit confused, however, about the term Double Full Crawford and I accept that it must be me being a bit thick, rather than your excellent in-depth research. Please would you kindly elucidate: when you say

This means that Crawford might have in fact done an extremely rare Double Full Crawford, pissing away his equity and as much again after. A truly memorable own goal, the likes we rarely see.

does this mean Crawford has actually pissed away £180k? (£90k + £90k).
I am finding this level of stupidity quite hard to comprehend.

He Who Knows wrote:Excellent work Gregg, worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize - probably the first Parliamentarian of Quatloosia ever to be awarded one.
I was a bit confused, however, about the term Double Full Crawford and I accept that it must be me being a bit thick, rather than your excellent in-depth research. Please would you kindly elucidate: when you say

This means that Crawford might have in fact done an extremely rare Double Full Crawford, pissing away his equity and as much again after. A truly memorable own goal, the likes we rarely see.

does this mean Crawford has actually pissed away £180k? (£90k + £90k).
I am finding this level of stupidity quite hard to comprehend.

Actually you're not alone. I didn't understand that either. But, unlike you, I couldn't be bothered to ask for an explanation. At my age if I pursued every moment of confusion and lack of understanding for clarity I'd do little else.

Burnaby49 wrote: Actually you're not alone. I didn't understand that either. But, unlike you, I couldn't be bothered to ask for an explanation. At my age if I pursued every moment of confusion and lack of understanding for clarity I'd do little else.

I take your point, Burnaby, but it's imperative that we get a handle on the proper terminology for a unit of measurement given that there are so many evictions popping up like woo 'Whack-a-Mole'. I mean, I've only just come across yet another evictee, one Robert 'Crab-bait' White who looks like an extra from a Guy Ritchie film, and has mere hours left before his £300,000 home is taken away by the OR. How are we to measure his stupidity; three Full Crawfords or a Double Crawford?
It's important to get the basics ironed out I'm afraid

Now it's long since defunct as a currency (Yes... I know was never really funct in the first place) might I suggest the adoption of the 'Re' as a standard woo unit defined as any number which when multiplied by, divided by, added to or subtracted from any ordinary number will yield a result of precisely zero.

That is totally brilliant and has stimulated me to consider an entirely new branch of mathematics where such a number can exist. Imaginary numbers were clever enough, and curved space did for Pythagorean geometry and its restrictive axioms.

any number which when multiplied by, divided by, added to or subtracted from any ordinary number will yield a result of precisely zero.

This will challenge conventional mathematics beyond existing bounds and the expression of Re may require pursuit through the Riemann hypothesis and Poincare's conjecture.
I may have to postulate an n dimensiional j-space solution using a Runge-Kutta methedology to reconcile and iterate functions that seem superfically irreconcilable. Apparent absurdity has never deterred higher mathematics.

Certainly a three-pipe problem, I'll get onto it right after lunch.