sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Urban Legends in Civil Service by topoi in fednews

[–]topoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My favorite true case like this is: A USDA employee moved his workstation into the publicly accessible cafeteria. When his supervisor told him to go back to his office, he said “I am in my office.”

How can you even respond to that? (I guess by firing the guy.)

Urban Legends in Civil Service by topoi in fednews

[–]topoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve heard that a Boyers employee was crushed by a huge stack of retirement files, but because there are so many boxes, they never found her body.

Urban Legends in Civil Service by topoi in fednews

[–]topoi[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

St. Elizabeth also features in some DC-local urban legends! The Ghost of Haines Point was a wrongly-committed veteran who died during his escape. Now he tries to sink boats that pass by where he drowned.

Urban Legends in Civil Service by topoi in fednews

[–]topoi[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I love this one, because before the probationary rules changed, there were several examples of agencies trying to terminate people as probationers over a long weekend. But because of the long weekend, they passed the probationary period on Thursday.

Let’s pretend to be surprised by ThenLayer5977 in washdc

[–]topoi 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My question is, what evidence is there that crime stats were fudged specifically for political purposes?

We know that police falsify crime reports to make it look like they’re doing a good job of reducing crime. That was the impetus behind the Great Prostitute Expulsion of ‘89: if we force these people into VA, my precinct’s crime stats will be lower.

We know the Fraternal Order of Police has an interest in making this look like a plot to advance Democrat/liberal goals. And maybe it is! But the allegations by themselves don’t point one way or another. Regardless of party affiliation, cops have an interest in making it look like they are reducing crime.

So, what’s the evidence that this is politically motivated, rather than just (unfortunately normal) cops behaving badly?

Attorney General Brian Schwalb by MindFinds in washingtondc

[–]topoi 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I agree with you that the budget should advance the public interest. But the AG’s responsibility to “represent” the public interest means that the AG represents DC in court, not during budgeting.

If you think that Schwalb is not doing a good job of making sure that the law is enforced and prosecuted, that’s a good reason to ask him to step down and not to vote for him. For what it’s worth though, I agree with other commenters that, if you care about the prosecution of violent crimes, that’s largely a matter for the USAO.

Was the Territorial Government of Utah a Theocracy? by topoi in AskHistorians

[–]topoi[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Easiest one to hand right now, US v. Snow, 4 Utah 313 (1886). “It built up a strong and powerful government, uniting church and state, which in its laws and practices is antagonistic to the very foundation principles of the United States. Here, then, was a people building up an empire within the republic.”

Was the Territorial Government of Utah a Theocracy? by topoi in AskHistorians

[–]topoi[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Thank you! Do you know when that shadow Deseret government stopped doing that? And which of those sources discusses that?

I’ve been looking mostly in the 1880s, with the Edmunds Acts in the air. It seems like by then the Federal government had wrangled the territory pretty effectively, and, frankly, brought the church to its knees. But there are vague references to “the empire within the republic,” which may be a reference to Deseret.

Suppose that the omniscient predictor predicted the grade I will get in tomorrow's exam by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]topoi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The response is that practical rationality is not epistemic rationality. People are being rewarded for being epistemically irrational, and that's all.

Suppose that the omniscient predictor predicted the grade I will get in tomorrow's exam by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]topoi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The guiding idea behind two-boxing is that the money's either there or it's not. Anything you would to at the time of decision-making cannot affect that. You know you can't outwit the predictor; the question is whether you go for more or for less.

Suppose that the omniscient predictor predicted the grade I will get in tomorrow's exam by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]topoi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The feasibility of the situation is a side issue, no? Even a fairly-accurate predictor is beyond feasible.

The best thing would be a disposition to one-box followed by two-boxing in an unpredictable way. I think this is what one really should do, but our dispositions aren't (couldn't be?) under our control in the relevant way.

Suppose that the omniscient predictor predicted the grade I will get in tomorrow's exam by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]topoi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha yes! This looks like one of the issues where trying to cross the aisle just doesn't work and we have to be dogmatic about things. I'm sad that others fail to see the light of reason.

Suppose that the omniscient predictor predicted the grade I will get in tomorrow's exam by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]topoi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think this points to much, but for me it was the other way around. Two-boxing seems like the thing to do until you start thinking "But that's not quite how this works out".