Nick Rekieta's Weeb Wars videos & livestreams - MULTIPLE SLURS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Probably dumb to point out, but were Ty and Nick really banking on discovery pretty much the whole time and if so...well I don't know. I feel like I didn't get the impression that Ty was going to pretty much tell the judge we think there's enough evidence of wrong doing on the part of the defendants to warrant further investigation which will require the force of law. I mean...wtf are they supposed to do otherwise because we know Funimation et. al. don't want to co-operate.

Side-note : Man...I swear Nick better not start out his analysis by saying something along the lines of "here's how Vic can still win".
 
Last edited:
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Magnum Tenebrosum
verissimus said:
Probably dumb to point out, but were Ty and Nick really banking on discovery pretty much the whole time and if so...well I don't know. I feel like I didn't get the impression that Ty was going to pretty much tell the judge we think there's enough evidence of wrong doing on the part of the defendants to warrant further investigation which will require the force of law. I mean...wtf are they supposed to do otherwise because we know Funimation et. al. don't want to co-operate.
Click to expand...
Thats not what they're talking about. Nick is saying that of course they couldn't prove the case at this point, but they didn't have to, IE that Chupp was asking for a greater standard of evidence to pass the TCPA than is required by the law itself.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Kosher Salt, P5Fever, GenericReviewerDraco and 3 others
FluffyTet said:
I have noticed that once you reach a certain level of exceptionalness, like with popehat, zoe quinn, renfamous, and others, the attention whoring goes into overdrive and they change their handle to fit whatever they'll hyperfixated on
Click to expand...

Rhetorical question, why would popehat be fixated on the Taliban?

verissimus said:
Probably dumb to point out, but were Ty and Nick really banking on discovery pretty much the whole time and if so...well I don't know. I feel like I didn't get the impression that Ty was going to pretty much tell the judge we think there's enough evidence of wrong doing on the part of the defendants to warrant further investigation which will require the force of law. I mean...wtf are they supposed to do otherwise because we know Funimation et. al. don't want to co-operate.
Click to expand...

I think the TCPA hearing was supposed to show that.

You lay out the evidence for the judge to decide.

"Clearly these tweets are defamation. The sheer volume means that it was deliberate. The synchronized timing of these actions seem odd. Any reasonable person would read the KahmehaCon texts and say 'something is clearly wrong here.' There is a legitimate case here. Allow us to conduct discovery."

Chupp just decided to be oblivious to it all and Ty got flustered because Chupp was being deliberately obtuse.

"Man, we keep finding people who slipped and hurt themselves on chainsaws."
"This is the tenth body. It might have something to do with that 7 foot tall weirdo that lives on the outskirts of town and wears a mask of human skin."
"You keep floating that theory and I keep telling you 'Pics or it didn't happen.'"
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: TLS, P5Fever, GenericReviewerDraco and 4 others
Garm said:
Rhetorical question, why would popehat be fixated on the Taliban?



I think the TCPA hearing was supposed to show that.

You lay out the evidence for the judge to decide.

"Clearly these tweets are defamation. The sheer volume means that it was deliberate. The synchronized timing of these actions seem odd. Any reasonable person would read the KahmehaCon texts and say 'something is clearly wrong here.' There is a legitimate case here. Allow us to conduct discovery."

Chupp just decided to be oblivious to it all and Ty got flustered because Chupp was being deliberately obtuse.

"Man, we keep finding people who slipped and hurt themselves on chainsaws."
"This is the tenth body. It might have something to do with that 7 foot tall weirdo that lives on the outskirts of town and wears a mask of human skin."
"You keep floating that theory and I keep telling you 'Pics or it didn't happen.'"
Click to expand...

Yeah...that's pretty ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GenericReviewerDraco, Magnum Tenebrosum and Garm
FluffyTet said:
I have noticed that once you reach a certain level of exceptionalness, like with popehat, zoe quinn, renfamous, and others, the attention whoring goes into overdrive and they change their handle to fit whatever they'll hyperfixated on
Click to expand...
If that were true, they'd all be called 'penis'
 
Sheryl Nome said:
Thats not what they're talking about. Nick is saying that of course they couldn't prove the case at this point, but they didn't have to, IE that Chupp was asking for a greater standard of evidence to pass the TCPA than is required by the law itself.
Click to expand...
so you are saying is that their argument is "Texan judge bad"?
The TCPA law is so badly written that different judges inferred from it different standards of evidentiary burden. This judge decided to go with a more strict one and beard fucked up since he didn't account for that happening. It's not the judge fault its Ty fault.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Allanon
LaurenLauren said:
so you are saying is that their argument is "Texan judge bad"?
The TCPA law is so badly written that different judges inferred from it different standards of evidentiary burden. This judge decided to go with a more strict one and beard fucked up since he didn't account for that happening. It's not the judge fault its Ty fault.
Click to expand...

If the judge applies the wrong standard that's on the judge. Seriously, I'm not carrying water for Ty at this point but a clearly erroneous decision is a clearly erroneous decision.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Kosher Salt, Le Pew, Allanon and 7 others
AnOminous said:
If the judge applies the wrong standard that's on the judge. Seriously, I'm not carrying water for Ty at this point but a clearly erroneous decision is a clearly erroneous decision.
Click to expand...
But, us I understand, several judges applied different standard of evidance when it comes to TCPA. I saw some document on farms that basically stated that. Unfortunately it seems that the way the law is set up does not force a unique way of understanding the evidentiary burden .
 
LaurenLauren said:
so you are saying is that their argument is "Texan judge bad"?
The TCPA law is so badly written that different judges inferred from it different standards of evidentiary burden. This judge decided to go with a more strict one and beard fucked up since he didn't account for that happening. It's not the judge fault its Ty fault.
Click to expand...
Trial Judges do not actually get to unilaterally decide on the standard of law to apply to something like the TCPA.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: P5Fever and Slap47
Zero Day Defense said:
...no.

View attachment 927952

View attachment 927953

Which is why Ty kept going on about "rational inference". It does hold up in court, and Chupp's words suggested that he was in fact taking issue with what he perceived as Ty's understanding of "rational inference" rather than the employment of the concept in his case.

Either that, or he was being quippy because he thought Ty was trying to take him for a ride with what he saw as scant evidence, and didn't make clear what standard he wanted to uphold in the first place despite speaking as if he was wrestling with Ty on the latter's grounds.

Not that this would be sufficient to answer why, when the judge was willing to consider the Slatosch declaration with direct evidence of Ron committing the tort, he would throw out TI for him, on the bases that 1) Ty couldn't enumerate damages, 2) Vic was eventually reinvited to KC, and 3) Ty couldn't produce solid evidence of another con having a contract that was tortiously interfered with.

This is despite 1) the enumeration of damages being irrelevant to the fact that a contract was tortiously interfered with at all, 2) it was because of Ty and not the tortfeasor that Vic was eventually reinvited under terms that caused him to incur personal costs, and 3) you don't need to commit TI with contract more than once to be liable for TI with contract.
Click to expand...
This is my point of reference here. Even the court of appeals is not settled on what standard to apply. That's why I say that the law it's badly written - it does not provide a definition of an unique standard of evidence: they don't know if they should apply the "clear and specific" or the "prima facie" standard. As for Chupp, it seams that he preferred the "clear and specific" standard, and I can understand way - it's easier to work with.
 
LaurenLauren said:
This is my point of reference here. Even the court of appeals is not settled on what standard to apply. That's why I say that the law it's badly written - it does not provide a definition of an unique standard of evidence: they don't know if they should apply the "clear and specific" or the "prima facie" standard. As for Chupp, it seams that he preferred the "clear and specific" standard, and I can understand way - it's easier to work with.
Click to expand...
Chupp does not actually have the authority to make that determination. Thats the sort of shit that appeals are built on.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Wilhelm Bittrich and P5Fever
Sheryl Nome said:
Chupp does not actually have the authority to make that determination. Thats the sort of shit that appeals are built on.
Click to expand...

But if you read the imagies from the post i qouted, you will see that the appeals courts cannot get to an unique conclusion on that issue.
 
LaurenLauren said:
But if you read the imagies from the post i qouted, you will see that the appeals courts cannot get to an unique conclusion on that issue.
Click to expand...
What the fuck do you mean 'An unique conclusion'
He has to follow the directions of the Fort Worth court of appeals, he is literally bound by law too. It doesn't matter what any other appellant court says but the Fort Worth one does or the Supreme court does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P5Fever
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back