A little post turned autobiographical, heh, it's not lack)) 1.Kogda I worked for one organization working to sales of oil products, even as a private lawyer, I was shoved solution to the conflict with the old client – so old that he shipped volumes of parole, and documents and pay the price – and then, in retrospect. And in one of the most beautiful days it happened that any discrepancies on the debt and the volume of shipment. A Document sobssno virtually none. How I solved the problem? I wrote a letter. Steve Geppi insists that this is the case. 11 pages. Came to visit.

The table. The sale, assaults, foam at the mouth … not even close to Concord … "Let's hear from our lawyers." On the one hand, I still Green this, on the other – twice my age, red, fat guy with a brazen face and just Pruszcz ambition, they say, you wait, jerk, finished. I've done is simple: to build a logical chain from one fact to another, from argument to argument. The result was a perfectly harmonious system. In this sense this method – _zakonchit_ its logical chain.

If it is closed, it's hard to beat. As a system of judgments Sophists – the principle is the same. I still remember, as they finished: "Do you argue with the Civil Code?". And that red? Ginger just opened his mouth. He did (!) Did not say in opposition, something mumbled, and all. They say he then took a long time. And I … I never even heard of gratitude.