Weeb Wars / AnimeGate / #KickVic / #IStandWithVic / #vickicksback - General Discussion Thread

boulderblundermatt90 said:
a thought just occured. what if Toei starts payrolling the lawsuit after the first 200,000?
Click to expand...

Why? If they want Funimation to lose they'd just step in and force them to settle to save money. Funding a lawsuit that will damage their brand and cost them money is the kind of sound logic I'd expect to see out of Shane, not Toei.

Pedro Sanchez said:
Nick and Ty have explained this numerous times already. All Vic has to do to prove it's defamation is to say under oath that "No, these statements are false" and then the burden of proof falls on the other party to prove all these claims true in order to counter Vic's claim.
Click to expand...

Nick mentioned in one of his early streams that the reason for this is that the burden of proof is easier in a civil case like this than a criminal one. Thus, in a criminal one it would be harder. That's where the confusion is coming from. These internet experts have all their expertise from google and LAO, and that's all geared toward criminal court, not civil (except stuff like Judge Judy, which is small claims and also very different, since it's mostly up to judicial discretion).
 
5t3n0g0ph3r said:
Not really. Shannon can be a dude's name, just like Ashley. It's just most people in the present associate it as a female name.
Click to expand...
Yep. Shannon is captain of the women's swim team & has her dorm keys on a UNC lanyard.
 
Burnout said:
I'd start playing the punchbuggy game, but @OneHandClapping 's avatar would beat the shit out of us all.
Click to expand...
The Ripple train has no brakes.

Speaking of anime, I think this will be fitting as we come closer to D-Day, moreso because it's a Funimation show
727059
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Pina Colada, Solo Wing Pixy, Exterminatus and 6 others
What do you guys think is the other embarassing thing Nick is going to show today? The one about a "shamefur disprey"
 
Hey guys question, civil trials don't have juries right? I feel like people occasionally mention the prospect of juries and I figure that they're just mixing up criminal and civil court
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Zero Day Defense, Recoil and 5t3n0g0ph3r
Tard said:
What do you guys think is the other embarassing thing Nick is going to show today? The one about a "shamefur disprey"
Click to expand...

He probably knew about dominique skye ahead of time

Either that or he's gonna reveal chris sabat is a philanderer

SteelPlatedHeart said:
Some of those who are served may not be screeching about it on Twitter either, you guys. Or they’ll lie and say they didn’t get anything. Just saying.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking that same thing. But only a few of them have shown IQs that high. Shane and Ron definitely aren't smart enough, Dominique probably isn't.

Monica, Jamie and Sabat might be that smart though.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Like
Reactions: Zero Day Defense, Recoil and SinglePlayerCarl
Dog Prom 3D said:
I'm utterly clueless where these sorts of matters are concerned so someone fill me in: Was Vic always going to be given his own floor, or did the other attendees act like they were so scared of the hug-monster that he needed to be placed somewhere away from them, preferably on a wholly different floor? It would be very funny to me if others insisted Vic be separated and he still drew larger crowds, and that separating him allowed con staff and attendees to see very clearly who the biggest draw really was.

Also, now that I know Vic was on his own floor, away from the rest of the con, that makes Dominique's ploy all the more ridiculous because she had to go seek him out on his own floor in order to fuel her "unsafe" narrative. I also don't get Dominique's appeal. I'm a cishetero-female so can someone with a boy-dick explain to me why her ass specifically is so thirsted after? Why is that ass in particular worth looking like a moron on social media? Does Sabat really have no access to better quality women and he really thinks that this donkey-jawed skank who dresses her little girl up to be a prostithot in matching costumes is even worth masturbating over? I don't get it.

I know this has been very hard on Vic but I am so glad he is fighting back. My own little pond has been affected by #metoo bullshit, mostly complaints based on a need for revenge against those more successful or to punish wrongthink, and I'm so tired of seeing good people who create being ground down by those whose only skill in life is to destroy. I have no illusions that this will affect other potential witch hunts - every zealot thinks their lies are justifiable and there will always be stupid people dying to be woke to back them up - but if The Beard and the ALoD pull this off, the joy of watching as KickVic-ers get their shit wrecked and hard, will be a nice consolation.
Click to expand...


The Bright Lord said:
1. Her being slutty is part of the appeal. If you're trying to get laid (especially if it's on the side) you want a girl who'll smash for a slice of pizza (fun and convenient), not a girl who demands an engagement ring. (Time + money)

2. Just because I can name a thousand hotter cosplayers doesn't mean I can name a thousand hotter cosplayers that want anything to do with Chris Sabat.

3. The most unappealing thing about her is that she's a vile toxic SJW but how would anyone have known that prior to this fiasco? And even if he did, he's on her side anyway so he erroneously thinks it's not his problem.
Click to expand...

You can find a slightly more accurate appeal structure here, in my earlier reply.

I'll even go into critical and painful detail.

SinglePlayerCarl said:
Agree.​
​
Some people will do anything to have a security blanket to hold onto to get through the night without bawling themselves to sleep.​
​
​
These thots (and their sycophantic following) are fundamentally broken inside — they were too far gone the moment they traded a certain kind of sickness for stroking/being potential pay pigs by the shaft as an elaborate form of cock and ball torture.​
​
The closer to the edge they bring their fanbase to the fruition that'll never be fulfilled is another step closer to the edge of their fabricated amount of separation between "reality" and their "kayfabe" being utterly shattered like a proverbial hymen when confronted by a paypig that broke free of his feeder trough and wants satisfaction.​
​

But once the illusion cracks and the ugliness is put on full display, it's hard to shove that pussy back in the bag.
Click to expand...

As the market place continues to further devalue sex because of how badly certain women will degrade themselves to get sexual attention through being eThots for show, guys have become further desensitized.

These thots are too much a coward to go all the way and strip nude, and they're too much a prude/self-respecting on some level to out-and-out get their box pounded for porn as Streamer thots/Beauty Youtubers Celestia Vega and LenaThePlug did— and that's not even an achievement by all counts, because their sex tapes and scenes are fucking boring.

Now as this wave of Thottery Barn protection becomes more and more tantalizing for regular women to do just to get a little more attention, the ones who've weaponized it into the paypig structure benefit greatly for doing nothing but the absolute bare minimum requirements, while the regular women are getting diminished returns;

The end result is multiple trains of rationalizing thought co-existing due to risk aversion and effort/cost analysis:

"If I can just pick up loose sluts on Tinder, OkCupid, and even from hook-ups from conventions, why would I invest into someone?"​
​
"If all these thots have to offer is a shitty picture set behind a $40 paywall that got leaked to the internet anyways, why wouldn't I just watch real hardcore porn over their snapchat leaks and sex tapes that have all the charisma of bar soap?"​
​
"Why risk rejection and being embarrassed in public with girls when they'll just accuse me of rape for even daring to talk to them, let alone compliment them on what they're wearing? I can just look at twitch thot from in chat."​
​
​
No matter who you are, especially if you're just a regular guy or girl, the only ones who win in this equation is the thots — because there will always be a defeatist paypig who doesn't think he's good enough for anyone who'll always take the cuck's way out and hand over his money and loyalty for the shame of watching a 7~10 hour stream schedule, just to hope for an (((intentional))) wardrobe malfunction.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: beardium, Dog Prom 3D, Zero Day Defense and 8 others
The Bright Lord said:
Hey guys question, civil trials don't have juries right? I feel like people occasionally mention the prospect of juries and I figure that they're just mixing up criminal and civil court
Click to expand...

It's right in the Constitution dude. Seventh Amendment.

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: ConSluttant, damian, Francis York Morgan and 13 others
boulderblundermatt90 said:
civil can have juries if requested and the judge is fine with it.
Click to expand...

Has jack shit to do with the judge being "fine with it." In federal court, civil has juries if the amount in controversy is over $20. It's in the Constitution.

In state court, it varies because the Seventh Amendment isn't incorporated upon the states (see Slaugherhouse bullshit), but most states I'm aware of have state constitutional requirements similar to the 7th.

The only time you'd do a bench trial is if you're asking for some sort of order where money doesn't change hands from party to party (e.g. injunctive relief). Vic will be asking for damages. There will be a demand for a jury trial. They've got no choice.
 
  • Winner
  • Informative
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: damian, JohnDoe, Francis York Morgan and 11 others
Captain Manning said:
Has jack shit to do with the judge being "fine with it." In federal court, civil has juries if the amount in controversy is over $20. It's in the Constitution.

In state court, it varies because the Seventh Amendment isn't incorporated upon the states (see Slaugherhouse bullshit), but most states I'm aware of have state constitutional requirements similar to the 7th.

The only time you'd do a bench trial is if you're asking for some sort of order where money doesn't change hands from party to party (e.g. injunctive relief). Vic will be asking for damages. There will be a demand for a jury trial. They've got no choice.
Click to expand...
thanks for the correction... or perhaps clarification? I knew you could get juries for civil stuff but was foggy on the deets. deets that you've provided. thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Bright Lord
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back