Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > General Actuarial
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Actuarial Jobs by State

New York  New Jersey  Connecticut  Massachusetts 
California  Florida  Texas  Illinois  Colorado


General Actuarial Non-Specific Actuarial Topics - Before posting a thread, please browse over our other sections to see if there is a better fit, such as Careers - Employment, Actuarial Science Universities Forum or any of our other 100+ forums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:14 AM
SirVLCIV's Avatar
SirVLCIV SirVLCIV is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 46,905
Default

Can someone please summarize exactuary's novels for me? Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:15 AM
Shaft's Avatar
Shaft Shaft is offline
Member
CAS SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,594
Default

Stats on the thread so far (excluding this one):

exactuary 7
Interesting Post 4
asdfasdf 3
Actuarialsuck 3
ishamael 2
Not Mike 1
bdschobel 1
The Stoic 1
Bobby 1
Malik Shabazz 1
tommie frazier 1
Roy Hobbs 1
Wigmeister General 1
RichieGB 1
UCSDKID 1
Lucy 1
Amy7 1
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:16 AM
RichieGB RichieGB is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdfasdf View Post
Based on your posting style, in particular in the various deleted threads, where you've sounded like little more than a hyperactive child, I'm much more inclined to feel that you, whomever you may be, are the one with anger issues.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:17 AM
RichieGB RichieGB is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirVLCIV View Post
Can someone please summarize exactuary's novels for me? Thanks!
"You guys don't know Bruce. He gets angry".
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:17 AM
Shaft's Avatar
Shaft Shaft is offline
Member
CAS SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,594
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieGB View Post
Anger? or.........vengeance?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:24 AM
SirVLCIV's Avatar
SirVLCIV SirVLCIV is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 46,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdfasdf View Post
Multi Quote has failed me IP, if you're so sure of everything, why not use a real name?

Maybe Bruce has anger issues, I don't know, what I do know is if the issue was so cut and dry it shouldn't have been hard to get a 2/3rd's vote of directors to out him. If it was so cut and dry, then the counter letter shouldn't have had two past presidents (the most recent one's) sign it.

I noticed you referenced "her" in one of your posts, so you would then purport to know what the expunged offense is? Or are you just BS'ing to try to make your case look better.

Re Bruce's reply to Hartman's email, I am completely on his side, if someone was being drip fed confidential information and trying to railroad me out of my position I would likely respond in kind.

Based on your posting style, in particular in the various deleted threads, where you've sounded like little more than a hyperactive child, I'm much more inclined to feel that you, whomever you may be, are the one with anger issues.
Agreed - I presume I would have responded very similarly to Bruce in this circumstance.

Politics notwithstanding, anyone who knows me can tell you that I have absolutely no anger issues.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:32 AM
Arden Bensenhaver's Avatar
Arden Bensenhaver Arden Bensenhaver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
College: University of East Anglia
Posts: 3,430
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by exactuary View Post
Note the very different tones and cc lists. The first is critical but cordial. And it takes a substantially professional approach to a dispute. It probably took some time to write. Most of us try to spend some time composing things for our customers and colleagues and would probably take an extra effot when asking them to do something they did not want to do.

{I can guess that a phone call or prior e-mails had preceded this. But it is the earliest I have.}



The second is blasted back at Hartman by Bruce 75 minutes later. Bruce has an anger management problem that most AOers never see. What follows is a crack in that smooth veneer.



You will recognize the "foolish" quote from the Times article. You can also see unwarrented sarcasm (Maybe I missed that), borderline rudeness (stay out of it), smartass attitude (the foolish sentence) and a clear threat (in the reference to the Code of Professional Conduct). This is what some call Bruce's style weaknesses. But some AOers may recognize it as barely suppressed rage. It reads like an angry AO post. Maybe that's the problem. Hmmm...

The "you can never see the evidence ... " is a wishful fantasy. It seems that the NY Times just waltzed into the Court House and said "what've you got on Sanford v. Schobel and the SOA. How smart is that? For Bruce to say the arbitrators were wrong and I am right and you'll never see the evidence that the arbitrators ruled against me on. And it turns out that an AOer found the whole docket online in a matter of minutes after AP posted the title of the action. Apparently you can all go into a room in the court house and see all the evidence you like. The old SOA motto suggests substituting facts for impressions (or whatever) which means reading the original rather than a Bakos spin job. Remember that Bruce knows all that evidence and that Bakos is effectively working for Bruce.

As Steven Colbert says "Get to know a district." How about "Get to know Bruce and all the evidence you want."

I can sort of imagine how Bruce felt when he discovered that Cook Fortress was open for business and TRANSPARENT inquiry. Long live transparency. The real stuff.
You make some good points earlier but I don't buy any of this. Hartman's email is not cordial. It is an attack, which if you believe any of the court wording, is inaccurate as far as Bruce being the defamer. Maybe, Maybe not.

A retired guy has taken it upon himself to twist a judgment around and send a snarky little email

Quote:
I am very surprised that you did not immediately resign your position as President-Elect of the AAA.
Sentences like that are designed to piss people off.

My email back to Hartman would not have been so nice. Hartman seems like the one with issues
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-08-2009, 07:45 AM
mlschop's Avatar
mlschop mlschop is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 36,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UCSDKID View Post
I have never met Bruce or have any personal ties to the matter. It may indeed be that Bruce is unfit to be the president of AAA and that the board had just cause to remove him. I don't have a stance on any of that as I do not know all of the underlying details enough to make an informed decision....

HOWEVER... after reading the court transcripts it definitely appears that the board basically threw away the rule book (bylaws and IL law) in order to remove him. The process that was taken, whether justified or not, was unfair and against the law. It is that process that I take issue with. In my opinion the ends don't always justify the means and the board does not have the right to throw out the rule book just to get the end result they so desire. If Bruce was really that unfit, they should have had no problem in removing in a way that was fair and followed the letter of the law.
This is my exact feelings on the situation.

If I were on AAA board, would I want Bruce to step down voluntarily? Maybe. Regardless of what stance Bruce or SOA has on the issue, the fact that Sanford was awarded something makes it seem that the court felt she was defamed. I'm not sure that would make my organization look good - and I understand the desire to want Bruce to resign. The AAA just did not do it in the appropriate way, and now has to pay for that.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-08-2009, 08:21 AM
Keep It Real, Yo's Avatar
Keep It Real, Yo Keep It Real, Yo is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Studying for CAS 9
Favorite beer: Blue Moon and Shock Top
Posts: 15,863
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlschop View Post
This is my exact feelings on the situation.

If I were on AAA board, would I want Bruce to step down voluntarily? Maybe. Regardless of what stance Bruce or SOA has on the issue, the fact that Sanford was awarded something makes it seem that the court felt she was defamed. I'm not sure that would make my organization look good - and I understand the desire to want Bruce to resign. The AAA just did not do it in the appropriate way, and now has to pay for that.


Hey, let's face it, we're not the most lawyerly considerate people when it comes to dealing with drama.
__________________
Vomik: will you... will you be my life coach?
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-08-2009, 08:26 AM
Dumbdumb Dumbdumb is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,817
Default

Quote:
You have to believe that 19 Ex-Prez's were out to get him. That's two decades of the most senior volunteers (your actuarial brethren) at the AAA.
I'm actually quite prepared to believe that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aaa, bruce schobel

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.48914 seconds with 10 queries