- @ChristianPF Is Giving Away An iPad! and more! RT to enter to win or click to find out other ways to enter… http://su.pr/1cqxH5 #
- No, I won't ship my china cabinet to Nigeria. Kthxbye. #craigslistscam #
- @LiveRealNow is giving away a copy of Delivering Happiness(@dhbook). Follow and RT to enter. http://bit.ly/czd31X #
- @LiveRealNow is giving away a copy of Delivering Happiness(@dhbook). Follow and RT to enter. http://bit.ly/czd31X #
- @punchdebt I vote for the Fuzzy Bunny Gang. in reply to punchdebt #
- Packing for 36 hours in Chicago. #
- @LiveRealNow is giving away a copy of Delivering Happiness(@dhbook). Follow and RT to enter. http://bit.ly/czd31X #
- In the airport. It's been a while. #
- RT @pogpog 8 Month Old Deaf Baby’s Reaction To Cochlear Implant Being Activated – Pogpog http://bit.ly/cL4XEr #
- @LiveRealNow is giving away a copy of Delivering Happiness(@dhbook). Follow and RT to enter. http://bit.ly/czd31X #
Fighting Fair
This was a guest post on another site early last year.
Everyone, at times, has disagreements. How boring would life be if everyone agreed all of the time? How you handle those disagreements may mean disaster.
This is particularly true when you are arguing with your spouse. You spend most non-working moments with this one person, this wonderful, loving, infuriating person. Your emotions will naturally run high while discussing the things you care most about with the person you care most about. Arguments are not only natural, but inevitable.
How do you have an argument with someone you love without lasting resentment?
You have to argue fairly. There are a few principles to remember during an argument.
- When your partner is talking, your job is to listen with all of your energy. You are not interrupting. Your are not planning your rebuttal while waiting for your turn to talk. Your are listening, nothing else. If you don’t listen, you can’t understand. If you don’t understand, you can’t find a resolution.
- Remember that your partner cares. If she didn’t care, she wouldn’t feel so strongly about the argument. This isn’t a war, just an argument. She still wants to spend the rest of her life with you. Keeping this in mind will change the entire tone of the argument into a positive interaction. You will still disagree, but you will be looking for a solution together, instead of finding a “win” at any cost.
- Search for the best intent. Remember #2? There is an incredibly good chance that, if there are two ways to interpret something your partner has said–a good way and a bad way–your partner probably meant the good way. Even if you are wrong, it is far better to err on the side of resolution than the side of antagonism.
- When your partner has finished speaking, it’s still not your turn to argue. Your job now is to repeat your understanding of the issue, without worrying about problem-solving. Before you can refute the argument–or even establish your disagreement–you have to know that you understand her position and she has to know that you do. Without understanding, there can be no path to resolution that doesn’t cause resentment. If you have too much resentment, you won’t have a marriage.
After all of this, it will finally be your turn to make your point. Hopefully, your partner will be following the same rules so you can solve your problems together, without learning to hate each other.
Arguments in your marriage aren’t–or shouldn’t be–intended to draw blood. Fights happen. If your goal is to win at any cost, you will both lose, possibly everything.
A Look Back
I’m on vacation this week and thought it would be nice to post a look back at some of my early posts. These posts are some of my favorites, but were written when there were only 3 or 4 of you paying attention.
Since I know you don’t want to miss anything, here are 5 of my favorite early posts, in no particular order:
1. Cthulhu’s Guide to Finance. I’m more than a bit of a horror geek. Books, movies, or games; all keep me entertained. Over the weekend, I taught my Mom how to play Zombie Fluxx and Gloom. When Cthulhu approached me about writing a guest post, I couldn’t refuse.
2. Birthday Parties Are Evil. It’s hard to remember to be cheap when your little girl is asking for a bowling party. It can run $200 to get a dozen kids an hour of bowling and a bit of pizza.
3. No Brakes. This is a post about why I had a hard time coming to grips with financial responsibility.
4. 4 Ways to Flog the Inner Impulse Shopper. Who can’t love a BDSM-themed personal finance post? Every blog needs a dominatrix mascot, right?
5. Fighting Evil by Phone. In which I share the method of convincing Big Nasty Telephone Company and their Contracted, Soulless Long Distance Provider to leave me the heck alone and stop demanding $800 they refused to admit was their mistake.
Resolving Legal Disputes
Dispute resolution has to do with the impartial rectification of conflict between individuals or parties. More specifically it is the utilization and execution of methods that are designed to resolve conflicts. In a case in which there is a dispute between people or groups, often times a third, neutral, party is selected to be an impartial representative for the disputing persons. Although dispute resolution can refer to resolutions both in and out of the court, it mainly applies to disputes that are settled outside of the legal framework of the judicial system.
Two of the most common types of dispute resolution are known as adjudicative and consensual. While adjudicative resolution requires a third party to mediate the outcome, such as a judge or jury, and usually involves some form of litigation, consensual resolution is the attempt to solve the issue between the two disputing parties without involving a third party, although at times a neutral arbitrator will be selected to preside over the case, though they will often be there not so much for authoritative purposes but more as a council to keep things fair. There is also a third upcoming type of dispute resolution, online dispute resolution, or ODR, which has become more popular in recent years with the rise of the internet’s prominence in daily life, but it is mainly the application of traditional consensual resolution practices, only adapted to the online environment.
Many disputes can be solved simply through adherence to the law, however, sometimes issues arise that the legal structure isn’t equipped to handle, and so a third party is chosen to resolve the conflict. These types of conflict fall within the jurisdiction of the law and so will be relegated to the political system for arbitration. Judicial resolutions are conflicts that will be, hopefully, settled by the court. In the United States, this is often the case with dispute resolution. This form of resolution usually involves litigation. This is the use of outside individuals to argue for or against the disputing parties. In a courtroom, the lawyers are the litigators, while the judge and jury listen to the arguments in order to come to their decisions.
Extrajudicial resolution is non-court settlement of conflict. Also known as alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, this is what people are usually referring to when discussing dispute resolution. ADR is usually more efficient, cost effective, and less time consuming than judicial resolutions. Extrajudicial resolution concerns various types of ways to settle conflict. These include arbitration and mediation. In arbitration neutral individuals will listen to both sides of an argument and render a decision based on evidence. Unlike the court systems, this proceeding doesn’t necessarily include a binding agreement with the parties.
Mediation is used in extrajudicial resolution as a way to open a dialogue between conflicting parties. The idea is to use a trained neutral third party in order to come up with unique solutions to solve the issue. A mediator is trained to be both an effective negotiator as well as an excellent communicator. A mediator is like a judge in that they cannot take sides, and they do not give legal advice either. Their decisions are not obligatorily followed, though they tend to be followed since the mediators are trained to make decisions that benefit both parties.
The techniques used in dispute resolution can be used both in and outside of the court room. It is often used by individuals who wish to speed up the process by not having to get into the political system. However, they are useful in many cases where individuals wish to come to the most beneficial agreement for all the parties involved.
Oklahoma Tornadoes
My heart goes out to all of the victims of yesterday’s tornado in Moore, Oklahoma.
I couldn’t imagine hearing that my kids’ school was demolished around them. Twenty or more dead children in any community is devastating.
On top of the sheer horror of dead children, the town is nearly wiped off of the map. Will they rebuild or cut their losses?
I hope everyone in the town was well insured, but that’s never the case. There will be many in the town that will have lost everything: their homes, their families, their jobs. Family is irreplaceable, but so is your home, if you don’t have insurance. To lose it all and not even have a place to mourn….
Have you checked your insurance policy to make sure you are covered in the event of whatever natural disaster is common in your area?
To help the victims, text REDCROSS to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It’s the least you can do.
Related articles
PRISM: Did the NSA kill privacy?
Revelations have been continuing to emerge regarding widespread surveillance tactics being internationally deployed by the United States government. PRISM is the codename of the project, which was implemented by the Protect America Act of 2007 that President George W. Bush signed. Their data collection activities remained obscured for years until a contractor employed by the National Security Agency leaked internal documents regarding the invasive system to the public.
The Scope of Surveillance
Because the intrusive monitoring is being conducted under a shroud of secrecy, it is difficult to estimate the magnitude of governmental spying. Federal agents have direct access to any online conversations conducted between Americans and international locations. These authorities have permission to conduct individual surveillance operations on any person for up to seven days before they need to acquire an official warrant. This scenario indicates that the guise of personal privacy has expired.
Logistics Versus Application
The details that have been released about the program illustrate serious setbacks for privacy activists. Fortunately, the public population vastly outnumbers the amount of authorities with access to these surveillance capabilities. Statistically, this means that that are far too many people to be personally tracked. In all likelihood, most people have not been targeted for individual monitoring; however, the story creates an appearance of governmental omnipresence that instills a need for self-censorship. The exposé about wiretapping operations simply confirms the common knowledge that the expression of incendiary rhetoric is dangerous in any arena. It would be naïve to believe that records of online activities were not being stored before the government had access to them. The permanent imprints of internet use were always available; therefore, it was only a matter of time before the legal authorities started accessing the material.
Unequal Privacy
Technically, the surveillance measures have institutionalized extreme privacy for the secret courts that have legalized extensive wiretaps. The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court operates in a completely classified fashion. They issue rulings that have fundamental impacts on American democracy, but they only conduct closed hearings. Additionally, they issue secret rulings that form the basis of laws that citizens do not know about. The court is comprised of heavily partisan members. This is based on the fact they are all appointed by John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Only one appointee was not a Republican, but the FISA Court is so concealed from the general public that conflicts of interest cannot be thoroughly vetted. These judges are privy to unfettered secrecy while they simultaneously deny the public of rights to their own privacy.
Public Backlash
Privacy still exists, but it has been neglected in favor of flashier technologies that are not secure. Fortunately, people have started returning to conventional methods of communication, which cannot be easily traced. Several organizations are developing secure ways to conduct discrete transactions online, and physical cash may now avoid its inevitable obsolescence. Ultimately, these startling announcements about governmental eavesdropping are generating a resurgence of non-digital media to regain privacy in all interactions.
