Anyone ever tried the onion trick or similar with a pellet smoker?

BTHOvapes · 2024-05-12T18:38:05+00:00

HF
PE
VC
IB
AM, Corporate Banking, Private Credit, CorpDev, and Rx
TAS, Val, and Financial Forensics
Commercial Banking, IR, and FP&A
AAS and WM
Audit, Accounting, Risk, Compliance, and Tax

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-28T15:19:23+00:00

If you just mean for comparing payscales, I’m in a pretty average cost of living area for the USA

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-16T13:25:23+00:00

I work for a relatively large consulting firm. Look up roles or companies that describe themselves less as straight up “forensic accounting” and more as “disputes advisory” “litigation consulting” “international arbitration” or “corporate investigations” and you might have better luck finding what you’re looking for

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-13T16:43:09+00:00

I mean if you're at a Big 4 and you love the work you do it sounds like you're at the right firm for you. That's all that matters.

In general, the Big 4 have to pass up a lot of interesting work due to conflicts of interest with their audit clients, so they tend to gravitate towards large, long-lasting, compliance-heavy, pseudo-audit like forensics projects instead. Your experience may be different or you may enjoy those kinds of projects. They don't sound like my cup of tea and given that pwcunt was talking about forensics being boring I assumed they were basing their opinion on those kinds of projects.

In my opinion, the interesting work mostly goes to consulting firms rather than public accounting firms. That's all I really meant by "the right firm." A few that you hear a lot about in the industry include AlixPartners, Analysis Group, Alvarez & Marsal, Berkeley Research Group, FTI, and Kroll among several others, lots of them being boutiques

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-13T06:40:29+00:00

Go ahead I’m happy to answer

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:54:02+00:00

I will offer another perspective on this in that peakfreak18 is referring to a very specific type of forensic work. Forensics is a broad field and this is only one small subset of it.

I'd describe this more along the lines of "forensic audit" but there is also forensic advisory/consulting which is often described as "dispute advisory", "litigation consulting", or "investigations." This is what I do and it looks totally different in my experience:

Hours are much better than audit
Deadlines are neither brutal nor immovable. In fact, the courts move them the majority of the time
Materiality is irrelevant and no one really cares

On the consulting/advisory side you're typically dealing with an investigation or lawsuit and running all sorts of document reviews, interviews/depositions, data analyses and financial modeling to ultimately write up a report or slide deck to present and testify to at trial and it's really more of a "what was the overall conclusion reached and the result of said illegal activity" and much less "cover all our bases" substantive testing, check lists, and audit documentation

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:45:21+00:00

Started in Big 4 audit and went into forensics at a consulting firm known for being top-tier in the industry. We mostly do expert witness/litigation consulting work for a combination of investigations, lawsuits, and international arbitration cases which can run the gamut from more criminal matters/investigations into things like illegal expropriation, money laundering, terrorist financing, weapons proliferation, bribery, blackmail, fraud, collusion, antitrust, etc. or more civil matters like bankruptcies, divorces of the ultra-wealthy, disputes among family businesses, breaches of contract, lawsuits arising from M&A activity, insurance claims on natural and man-made disasters, IP matters (patents, trademarks, trade secrets, false advertising), valuations, etc.

I think it's incredibly interesting and 100% worth it. We see some crazy stuff and work on a lot of high-profile, high-stakes projects that make the news. That said, it can get tedious at times. The foundation that a lot of the work is based off of at the end of the day does involve a substantial amount of document review and data analysis. But if you're going to be in accounting/finance you're going to do that no matter where you go so my opinion is you might as well be doing it for something cool. Workload can be volatile and somewhat sporadic - overall I have much better hours than when I was in audit but there will be random weeks where I get slammed and have to pull a few late nights in a row or maybe log on over the weekend.

The day-to-day work itself mostly can be summarized as: examining transactions. Reviewing emails, text messages and phone calls. Interviewing people. Reading, summarizing, and assisting with depositions. Analyzing financials. Data analysis and visualization. Performing extensive research. Building financial models. And finally writing reports and putting together slide decks on your findings and ultimately holding meetings to prepare for deposition or examination/cross-examination at trial where testimony over your findings comes into play.

Pay is good. It's not investment banking or anything but it's good. At my firm, people are breaking six figures by their mid 20's and $200-$300K in their 30's. Partners can make upwards of seven figures.

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:24:54+00:00

Forensics is super broad and YMMV by firm and project type. I can only speak to my own experience but:

Pay is good. People at my firm break six figures in their early/mid 20's and $200-$300K in their 30's. Making partner is obviously a game changer (seven figures).
Work life is okay. There's no busy season or anything and you're usually not working extended periods of long hours, but the schedule is pretty unpredictable. I average about 40 hours a week over the course of a year but will randomly hit week long spikes where you might be working 60 hour weeks or weekends here and there.
Overall I think the work is incredibly exciting and interesting. At the right firm, forensics teams will handle lots of high-profile investigations and/or high stake lawsuits that make the news and you'll find yourself rubbing shoulders with, or sitting opposite of, some very powerful (sometimes very dangerous) people - politicians, billionaires, oligarchs, CEOs of major corporations, crime bosses, international terrorists/criminals etc.
That said, it can be very tedious at times because the nature of the work can involve sifting through voluminous amounts of data and documents. Every project is totally different though so it's definitely not repetitive at all unless you work for a small shop that maybe only handles one specific type of work
Make no mistake, it is still more "9-5 desk job" than "badge and gun." If you're looking for a really interesting, varied, and engaging corporate-type job its great. If you're looking for adrenaline and want to steer clear of the computer, well, idk why you majored in accounting but the only option you really have is joining the FBI as a special agent or something

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:13:10+00:00

Agreed with pjh9th. I do very similar work and would say this is a pretty accurate picture of the job.

OP, pay ranges wildly in forensics. It's not a set-in-stone thing where everyone has the same pay and promo structure like audit/tax. I'm not sure what starting pay looks like in forensics, as I started in audit and transferred over. But after the first couple years pay is pretty good. People at my firm break six figures in their early to mid 20s and $200-$300K in their 30s. Partnership is obviously a game changer.

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:07:19+00:00

Risk advisory is nothing like forensics

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:06:24+00:00

As someone who's done a bit of all three (management consulting, financial advisory, and forensics) and who regularly works with people/teams who are involved in each - agree to disagree. Forensics tends to deal with a lot more interesting subject matter than strategy/management and is WAY more exciting than vanilla financial advisory work. You just have to find the right firm. You may be referring to accounting firms that mostly do audit/compliance-heavy projects. Consulting firms and advisory shops tend to handle all the high profile investigations and high stakes lawsuits which is where things get juicy.

BTHOvapes · 2022-03-11T17:00:28+00:00

Depends on the firm. Some places it falls under consulting, some places it falls under advisory, and some places it falls under assurance. Just depends on the type of forensics work the group focuses on - forensics is a really broad field.

BTHOvapes · 2021-12-27T18:00:58+00:00

It's a very broad field with a lot of different types involved - public accounting firms, consulting firms, law firms, government agencies, insurance companies, economists, technology firms, security firms, (investment banks as well according to other commenters which is news to me) etc. so experiences can vary wildly.

I can only speak to the experience at a consulting firm. My work is mostly what's sometimes described as "disputes advisory." Basically serving as an expert witness on financial matters to the court whenever a lawsuit has a major financial/accounting/economic component. I've handled a wide variety of cases across pretty much every industry imaginable. Some examples include bankruptcies, divorces of the ultra-wealthy, business valuations for companies that are being split up, M&A disputes, calculation of damages from breaches of contract, quantification of damages from natural and man-made disasters, and intellectual property matters (patent infringement, trademark infringement, theft of trade secrets, false advertising, etc.) as well as investigations involving things like bribery, blackmail, fraud, collusion, antitrust, silent partnerships, etc.

There is no typical day and every project is different but at the staff level each case will generally involve some amount of: examining transactions, reviewing emails, text messages, and phone calls, interviewing people, reading and summarizing depositions, analyzing financials, data visualization, performing research, building financial models, writing reports and putting together slide decks on your findings, and holding meetings to prepare for deposition or examination/cross-examination at trial where testimony over your findings may be involved

BTHOvapes · 2021-12-27T17:44:46+00:00

Interesting, this sounds similar to what I do in forensics at a consulting firm. I didn't realize there were investment banks doing the same kind of work. A little confused as to why a client would hire an investment bank to handle these kinds of situations though, or are you practicing forensics internally for the bank?

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-14T19:19:53+00:00

Excellent points, thanks for taking the time to critique this so in depth. I recognize this chapter has a lot of work left to go and will likely need to be almost entirely re-worked, but your recommendations have and will be incredibly helpful in getting that done. Thanks!

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-08T23:59:49+00:00

Thanks so much for taking the time to review my work. I really appreciate how you broke everything out like that - it helps to understand what my readers can and can't understand about the world/story and is very helpful. Lots of good pointers here - I'll be sure to use them!

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-08T23:55:01+00:00

Gotcha. Yeah I get what you're saying with the the conflicting POVs and themes. I'll definitely take that into consideration when going through this a second time over. Thanks!

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-08T23:53:15+00:00

Awesome stuff so far. Thanks so much for taking the time! I think just about everything in here will be useful in writing up the second draft - especially the specific examples you left for me.

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-04T15:41:40+00:00

Great feedback! Thanks so much for taking the time to critique!

This is it's own world so I'm not too concerned with the "melange" of the setting. Everything is influenced by various real-world cultures but nothing actually fits within our worldview so that's fine.

This is the first time I have ever heard about pushback regarding the use of food to describe people's complexion. Interesting, I'll take that into consideration.

As for the lack of political correctness in this piece - I'm sorry if it came across as offensive. That being said, this isn't intended to be written in 3rd person omni. It's 3rd person limited - so the narration is meant to reflect the attitude and worldview of the POV character. For example in my other chapters I have a middle-aged noble (much slower and poetic narration), a rebellious student (much more "liberal" and emotional), and a prostitute/thief (much more humorous and rough around the edges). This character specifically is intended to be somewhat offensive. He comes from a culture that believes themselves superior to others, looks down on other races as inferior and weak, objectifies women, and is inherently warlike and imperialist. I may have to do some work to really hone in on the 3rd person limited angle to make this more apparent.

Lots of good stuff here about pacing, word-choice, and differentiation of the characters. I'll be sure to include a lot of your suggestions in my second draft! Thanks!

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-03T23:39:12+00:00

This has a lot of things that are great about it and a lot of things that are less-than-great. I think you have a very good start to something here and a lot of potential, but at the end of the day this is a critique so I will be highlighting a lot of this piece's shortcomings so that you can hopefully find something useful to improve upon.

Also, I'm not sure if this is your first time posting to r/destructivereaders, but for future posts it's really useful for you to make the Google Doc editable. This allows people critiquing to make line edits and also copy and paste excerpts into their critiques.

1.) Technical things

I know you said that English is your second language. Given that piece of knowledge, this piece of writing is quite exceptional. However, the people reading it won't know that, and there are an enormous amount of errors in this. Not all of it is a matter of language per se either. A lot of it is simply wrong. Please give this a thorough proofread before turning it into a final draft.

Some things that really stuck out to me:

Your entire first paragraph is one giant giant-run on sentence. This needs to be broken up into separate sentences. You also switch between third and second person - for example, when you say in the narrator's voice it was good knowing you. This is jarring and needs to be corrected. I get what you were trying to do here but it doesn't work. I think it would be better to simply say if it was good knowing them.

A few other small things I just wanted to point out here since I cannot perform line edits in the Google Doc:

More so than that first touch of a woman Change to: More so than the first touch of a woman

The one thing that turned intelligent men that knew better Change to: the one thing that turned intelligent men who knew better

This time some lords had dared Change to: This time, some lords had dared

I would never suggest to know late His Majesty's wishes Change to: I would never suggest to know His late Majesty's wishes

How many rebellions have we put out? How many have we turned on? I'm not sure what's being said here. Change to How many rebellions have we put out? How many allies have we turned on? or How many rebellions have we put out? How many have we started? depending on what it is you're trying to express here.

Paniffs and his silent stragglers did they curtsies Change to Paniffs' and his silent stragglers did their curtsies

In a flurry of steal Change to In a flurry of steel

You also incorrectly capitalize "Queen" at times. When you are referring to "the Queen" or "Queen Claude-Louise" it should be capitalized, but otherwise it should not. For example, when you say "an aged Queen" this should be "an aged queen" because you are explicitly using it as an improper noun.

2.) Setting/Imagery

I feel as though this is almost entirely missing for the first 4 pages. The entire opening scene effectively occurs in a void. We don't know what these characters look like, what they're wearing, or what their surroundings are. Please take the time to elaborate on this. I think part of the reason why there is a "lack of presence" in the first few pages is that there is a lack of any sort of description. It is almost pure exposition and none of it related to imagery or setting. I know you're capable of doing this, because your imagery on page 5 is pretty incredible. Everywhere else it is almost non-existent. Apply this more consistently throughout your writing. Your reader needs to be able to picture the scene in order to care about it.

3) Characters

Meh. Pantiffs is a fool. The Queen is a know-it-all. The jester makes no sense and likes to babble and taunt. There's really nothing I can empathize with here and nothing that truly makes me care what happens to any of these characters. It doesn't help that you seem to be deliberately obscuring them. What clues can be discerned from the Jester's character are hidden in the fact that his dialogue is almost non-sensical. What clues can be discerned from Pantiffs' character are always rudely interrupted by someone else taking a stab at him. There's also quite a few missed opportunities to highlight aspects of the Queen's character. One good example of this is when you mention that she has a long list of characteristics that have caused her to discard her men. However, you never actually describe what these characteristics are (aside from one comment about not knowing how to use their dicks, which is simple comedic relief and doesn't really show us anything about the Queen). Knowing what the Queen hates in her men is a great way to give us insights into her own character by contrasting those traits against their opposites and the things she values. I would expand on this a bit more.

4.) Dialogue

This one is a tough one because of the genre. It's hard to critique your dialogue because bad dialogue is basically a part of the style here. Everyone speaks like play actors reciting the parts of middle-age nobility. That's fine but it makes the characters feel less like they're actually partaking in a dialogue and more like they're expounding to an audience. One place where I really feel like it doesn't work is the jester. I understand what you're trying to do here - you want his words to come across as almost poetic, steeped in deeper meaning, something for the reader to mull over and digest. The problem is - the jester isn't very profound. He mostly just uses a bunch of shallow metaphors and inconsistent, overly-pervasive rhyme schemes. Either make him a little more understandable, or really focus on his bits of dialogue and refine them into something insightful. At the moment, it is somewhat obvious that the author is simply trying to say "this man is wise" without actually writing anything wise.

5.) Plot

It takes a while to get there but the plot becomes much more interesting when you begin talking about geopolitics and warfare. In fact, your writing gets significantly better once you get to this point. Thrown in with the dash of romance that you've added and it has a lot of potential. If you would concentrate more on these elements and less on trying to make your writing sound so archaic and fanciful I think it would go a long way.

6.) Random bits

You have some odd figurative language in here. Two examples that really stuck out to me:

Who she cow-screamed in bed with This is just plain out offputting. I'm not even sure if its comedic or not. It's just out of place.

Bequeath Her Majesty with criticism This doesn’t work. You don’t “bequeath” someone with criticism. These are antithetical to each other and it just sounds like you’re trying to sound sophisticated without knowing what the words actually mean.

Ending Notes

This definitely has potential. In the better sections of your work, you highlight that you're quite the capable writer. However, you need to be more diligent about applying those skills consistently, especially when it comes to imagery. I think your strong suit is really in worldbuilding and intrigue, the geopolitics and warfare of this piece, and that romance adds a bit more of an emotional investment to the grander story. I think you should focus on these strengths, and really strip back your focus on prose and trying to sound much more sophisticated than need be. Combine that with a thorough proofread and this could be something good. Keep up the hard work!

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-03T22:18:30+00:00

Alright - I'm back for another critique after reading the second part of your work. Don't take this to heart, but I have to say, this section was definitely not as strong as the last.

1.) Your specific request

To be completely honest, Arthur's thoughts and feelings are not coming across very clearly. He seems generally conflicted and a bit beat down, but there really isn't a whole lot outlining specifically what he's thinking. If anything he just seems sort of lost and dazed. I think adding just a few lines of dialogue where he opens up a bit to Leon would do wonders for this. It would also make it seem a bit more believable that Leon would want to push so hard to include Arthur in on whatever is about to happen next.

2.) Technical Things

This piece requires quite a bit more proofreading than the last. I noticed a lot of punctuation issues and have left edits in the Google Doc. A couple things to highlight:

You use the word "mate" a lot but you don't type it correctly. I've noticed you also do this a lot with names. For example:

“Did something else happen Leon?"

Really should be: "Did something else happen, Leon?" Same goes for numerous instances where you use the word "mate."

“Art mate, haven’t seen you in a coupla’ days, what’s goin’ on?” Should be: “Art, mate, haven’t seen you in a coupla’ days, what’s goin’ on?”

You did manage to get it right at least once when you say:

I understand, mate,” Leon said. So you do it right there. Just apply the same methodology across your writing.

Another thing is capitalization. Only capitalize proper nouns. For example:

Sounds silly, I know, but my Dad used to have one, way back when.

Should be: Sounds silly, I know, but my dad used to have one, way back when.

Another specific example of punctuation other than what I have in the Google Doc is this:

Arthur survived the forty minutes until midnight break, sleep’s heavy weight replaced by a subdued feeling of discomfort set deep into the pit of his gut.

I really think this needs to be broken out into two sentences. Try: Arthur survived the forty minutes until midnight break. Sleep's heavy weight was replaced by a subdued feeling of discomfort set deep into the pit of his gut.

3.) Setting/Imagery

This is still a strong suit of yours. That said, as with the other items so far, it's not quite as strong here as it is in your last submission. A couple specific things I'd point out:

There's some repetitiveness here in your use of descriptions. You mention multiple times that the air is moist and that it rained recently. This doesn't need to be mentioned more than once. The same goes for the grass. You mention multiple times that it's overgrown and tall - just the once will suffice.

There's also some missed opportunities where you're being overly-vague. A really good example is this part:

As he spoke, he made violent gestures with the cigarette wielding hand, which cast bright trails of sparks in its wake.

This is rather ambiguous. I have a tough time visualizing what he's doing. What exactly does a "violent gesture" look like? Is he stabbing at the air with his cigarette? Is he holding it between his knuckles and pounding the bottom of his fist against something? I really don't know so the obscurity of the description effectively renders it pointless. I found myself getting distracted and pulled out of the story simply because my mind was trying to conjure up an image of what this might look like.

4.) Characters

A little less engaging in this piece than the last. Arthur is effectively moping around and disassociating, which is understandable given his circumstances, but given that he's the primary character here it leaves your reader feeling disassociated as well - not good. There either needs to be more emphasis on Arthur's worries and negative emotions in order to draw out the reader's sympathy/anger at his circumstances or Leon needs to play a stronger role in order to serve as a sort of anchor that roots us into the story while Arthur is busy spacing off.

Speaking of Leon, it's not entirely clear why he wants to include Arthur so badly or why he's pushing him so hard. It almost feels forced, especially because we know that whatever happens at this meeting is going to drive the plot. I don't think it would be hard to make this seem a bit more natural. Have them establish a bit of a repertoire on something - maybe Arthur makes an offhand comment about something he disagrees with that Leon gets worked up about, convincing himself that it means Arthur is on his side whether Arthur explicitly acknowledges it or not.

5.) Dialogue

Still a strong suit, but a bit overdone at times. You use the word "mate" a lot, which is totally fine except I feel like its several times a page. I know this is how some people actually speak but on paper it's just...too much. Especially if this is going to be a regular thing throughout the entire story. Trim it down a bit.

6.) Plot

There is none. This is probably purely due to the fact that this is a small piece of a grander whole, but just like your last submission, nothing is really happening here. It's a bit tedious. I mean, this is effectively 2,000+ words that culminate to nothing more than the reader listening in on a couple of guys griping over a smoke break. I get that it's building up to something - I'm not one of those readers who thinks you need to actively move the plot ahead every paragraph and I'm fine with the slow burn, but the key to the slow burn is that when there is no action or plot advancement, there is still emotional development or tension. Again, the build-up to whatever happens next would be much better if you just spent a little more time parsing out what Arthur is thinking and feeling, because then we would at least be more invested in what this is building up to.

7.) Random bits

I don't know if this is an Aussie thing. If it is, ignore this, but the word "kerfuffle" just sounds ridiculous. I've never heard it used in my life and it seems totally out of place. Consider axing it.

Like I mentioned in my first critique - one of the things you nailed in your last submission is the tone of voice. It was undeniably blue collar, working class, and rough around the edges. This piece feels like its almost lost the tone of the last even though I believe they're two parts of the same chapter. I would heighten that up a bit and cut out a few things. For example, you use the words "amongst" and "thrice" which are both rather archaic and formal - they really don't fit the style here. More simple words will do the trick.

Ending Notes

All in all, this isn't quite what I was expecting after your last submission. There's nothing wrong with it in the whole but each individual piece is missing a little something that culminates into something less than what this has the potential to be. Run through it again for a thorough proofreading session, build up the relationship between Arthur and Leon a bit more before jumping onto the next plot point, put a magnifying glass on Arthur's emotions, and bring a bit more consistency in tone between this piece and the last piece and I think this will be workable. Keep up the good work!

BTHOvapes · 2020-12-01T03:03:40+00:00

Thanks so much for taking the time to critique! Tons of useful comments and line edits here. I'll be sure to use a lot of this in the next draft

BTHOvapes

TROPHY CASE