|
You can quote somebody who’s being informative and still think they’re a big piece of poo poo 
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 13:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:12 |
|
|
Covok posted:Can we stop citing an rear end in a top hat with an avatar opposing the removal of confederate statues? The cartoon is mocking the UNC board of governors. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article240276886.html Dark477 fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Feb 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 13:49
|
|
|
Covok posted:Can we stop citing an rear end in a top hat with an avatar opposing the removal of confederate statues? The comic seems to show the board of governors trying to remove a statute of Lady Justice or maybe Columbia. So probably the comic is not supporting their actions vis a vis not removing Confederate statues. Combined with his role in the Silent Sham thing I think it's unlikely he's generally opposed to removing Confederate statues.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 13:52
|
|
|
Covok posted:Can we stop citing an rear end in a top hat with an avatar opposing the removal of confederate statues? lmao Read this before you get incorrectly outraged again: https://indyweek.com/news/voices/how-i-became-part-of-the-silent-sam-story/
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 14:09
|
|
|
Covok posted:Can we stop citing an rear end in a top hat with an avatar opposing the removal of confederate statues? he uh actually got a settlement about keeping a confederate statue thrown out almost entirely by accident
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 14:34
|
|
|
I've read the brief. It is actually super duper rear end, what the hell. It's not hellfiling bad - buuuut it's not too far from that either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 14:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/questauthority/status/1230515992981196806?s=19 Here we go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
Starting off with a blatant lie by omission.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
Covok posted:Can we stop citing an rear end in a top hat with an avatar opposing the removal of confederate statues? The...guy who's responsible for the removal in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 18:24
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
lol "can we stop quoting the one guy who's essentially been on the forefront of the case and providing useful analysis because i made an incorrect kneejerk assumption"
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
Covok posted:Can we stop citing an rear end in a top hat with an avatar opposing the removal of confederate statues?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 18:49
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:that was chief wiggum  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2jJ5A-geQo On Mignogna-centric news, since twitter has been fucky for me this whole day, can someone give me a Cliff's Notes as to what was said about the case today?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Also I think Covok got the hint the first time, we don't need dozens of people dogpiling on them, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
Wark Say posted:Okay, I admit it! My Simpsons-fu ain't what it used to be! Vic's brief is out. It is an absolute clown car. It's also 3400 words short of limits. It also directly lies to the court. Fun stuff all around. The geniuses over at kiwifarms, of course, think it's great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
Julias posted:Also I think Covok got the hint the first time, we don't need dozens of people dogpiling on them, thanks. Not until Covok shows that he's learned his lesson 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 21:31
|
|
|
Exercu posted:Vic's brief is out. It is an absolute clown car. It's also 3400 words short of limits. Like isn't this the kind of poo poo that gets your case thrown out of court for?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
Julias posted:Also I think Covok got the hint the first time, we don't need dozens of people dogpiling on them, thanks. In feel and because I hadn't refreshed the page so I didnt realize that other people had pointed out Doucette had actually gotten a confederate statue nixed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
Doucette's thread about the statue is a good read and now apparently the FBI have done some preliminary interviews about the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
Wark Say posted:I swear that someone must be writing a movie script somewhere about this, because all of this just seems... I don't know, kinda bogus? Seems like its easier to just kill the case on the merits and let the misconduct be somebody else's problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
Wark Say posted:I swear that someone must be writing a movie script somewhere about this, because all of this just seems... I don't know, kinda bogus? Worth a Lifetime Original Movie starting Eric Roberts as the Vic. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 05:04
|
|
|
Hub Cat posted:Seems like its easier to just kill the case on the merits and let the misconduct be somebody else's problem. I don't think that will happen because Beard and company are very invested from sucking as much money from Vic as possible and Vic blandly assumes they're doing everything they can and it'll work out in the end. The only one on the hook is Vic and he's too dumb to notice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
I'm not sure it really is all about the grift tbh, a lot of the worst blunders have happened because of how emotionally invested Beard and Nick are in owning Vic's victims and MeToo victims in general. I think they could have steered this to the scene of the crash in a terrible but bland fashion, thrown everybody under the bus "aw shucks those evil SJWs, I guess we lost, tune in next time for when we sue somebody else" collected their 250k and rode off into the sunset everybody goes away thinking they stuck it to {insert chud villain here} like a chuddier version of the producers , but they haven't so far and I feel like its cost Nick and Beard big time in their chud credibility(for whatever the hell that is worth). They obviously don't care about Vic, this was never really about him, he is just a huge dumb narcissist and they told him it would be a free lawsuit. I think If they were just trying to make money they would be teeing up some fresh cases at this point. Anyway, my original point was that I don't think the appeal court is going to bother to slap down Beard on the lying and whatever other dumb poo poo he did, they are just going to deny the appeal on the merits(or lack thereof in this case) and then let his incompetence and lack of ethics be the Texas Bar's problem. This case isn't even going to get oral arguments, they definitely aren't going to take the time out to rebuke Beard. Oh you think I'm saying Beard should drop this? No chance of that, will not be surprised when they are trying to take this to the Supreme Court or something dumb like that. Hub Cat fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Mar 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
Dr. Killjoy posted:Worth a Lifetime Original Movie starting Eric Roberts as the Vic.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2020 19:38
|
|
|
Eh, Vic would only be tangentially in the movie. It'd be more "Rosennick and Beardenstern are Dumb".
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
The bits that he’s in though must make it clear he’s a piece of poo poo, and not someone for whom the audience should have sympathy despite his hapless representation. Bumbling fools representing a piece of poo poo makes for some fine comedy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PoorlyAgedStuff/status/1236734585477697537 Replies are basically what you'd expect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 00:45
|
|
|
Can Of Worms posted:https://twitter.com/PoorlyAgedStuff/status/1236734585477697537 Yeah, the tweet's hilarious but for the love of god do not read the comments. I know this is the internet and that should be obvious but it's worth pointing out nonetheless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
Holy poo poo!  So, any updates on the appeal after Vic's brief? Or is this whole thing on hold?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
Wark Say posted:Holy poo poo! Next up are the responsive briefs from all of the Defendants I believe (and this isn't even factoring in extensions). I dunno if the Texas appellate courts do it, but the Plaintiff can do reply briefs within a shorter window if they choose to in other states. And then it's up to the clerks to comb through all of this mess in a way that doesn't have their judges throwing poo poo in their faces at least the first go around, and then the Judges need to decide if they actually want to grant oral argument for this poo poo show.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 03:23
|
|
|
Can Of Worms posted:Replies are basically what you'd expect. 'how dare you he ate a jellybean' 'the absolute nerve he just stroked somebody's hair' 'one time i turned into a dog and vic helped me thank you'
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 13:47
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:'how dare you he ate a jellybean' The fact that there people on Team Vic who just openly advocate for even feeling on a coworker’s hair unsolicited will never not be simultaneously hilarious and stupefying Like, these people do have jobs with minimally competent HR departments right? Or were taught personal space and boundaries right? Don’t answer any of that, I’m still just like “ where in the gently caress did they find these people” whenever I look at 99% or Vic supporters
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 16:32
|
|
|
MechaX posted:Like, these people do have jobs with minimally competent HR departments right? Or were taught personal space and boundaries right? I imagine the majority of them are NEETs so probably not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
MechaX posted:The fact that there people on Team Vic who just openly advocate for even feeling on a coworker’s hair unsolicited will never not be simultaneously hilarious and stupefying It’s the weebs who are afraid animegate will take away their 200 year old titties
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 22:56
|
|
|
The number of people who don’t know that it was Vic suing them instead of the other way around is baffling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
Tribladeofchaos posted:The number of people who don’t know that it was Vic suing them instead of the other way around is baffling. Or the people that do get that vic sued...but don't understand the difference between a criminal case and a civil case. At all. And basically rebut this case by going "Where are the criminal charges!!!" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
I think it is entirely to plan on Team Vic that people seem to think he's on trial for sexual harassment rather than having filed a defamation suit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 23:40
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:I think it is entirely to plan on Team Vic that people seem to think he's on trial for sexual harassment rather than having filed a defamation suit. "Plan" seems like a generous way to describe anything the Vic people have been doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
They're just being disingenuous little shits. We're going on almost a year of this, anybody still defending Vic knows what's going on at this point. You see the same kind of deliberate obfuscation over and over in all the reactionary rallying cries.
Hub Cat fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Mar 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2020 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:12 |
|
|
Remember! Vic doesn't want people doxxed or harassed unless that happens then whatever. https://twitter.com/renfamous/status/1238509708073467904 Edit: Kitchener Con was one of the cons that decided it was a bold move to continue inviting Vic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2020 22:55
|
|