Forgeries

I had a bit of fun investigating the mystery of the Portland Vase and its imitations. But then it struck me. Accountant I really admired once told me that my problem was believing that life should be fair. Usually it isn't it just is what it is. Sometimes things work out justly, usually people are rude and unkind but no one makes them pay, thieves become rich, honest men die poor. If you keep struggling to manufacture a belief in a world incompatible with how it really is then you will go insane.

Let's say I could proove that TVU had constructed a forgery. It's a minor point. Begs the question why, first rule of emendation the hesitant excision does the most damage. If you need to cut words cut the whole line. It's less messy.

A high court might have got upset, Perry Mason made his name on things like this. But this is a tribunal of second instance re-examining whether policies and procedures limited to the five expressed at the start were or were not adhered to. They will rule to uphold the complaint in full in part or not at all for each of the five allegations. Then they will make recommendations. And that will be that.

It's fun to investigate the mystery of the portland vase in the same way as solving a problem of Syriac Grammar. The real world was not meant for me. I do enjoy Canon Law because it has no repercussions. You get a bunch of corporate lawyers together and you tell them first none of you will make money any more. Then you tell the remainder none of what you determine will have any legal effect in the real world. What you have left is a canonist. No point getting annoyed with them. I understand the joy of pure academic problem mulling.

The journeying is pleasurable marked by landmarks but it's a pilgrimage, we aren't (until the edit I had written are going to oops) going to do anything when we get there because we never get there until we die. Oh the good news is I will probably succeed in maybe three or four of the points and one is substantive. Is that good doctor?