Cultcow Russell Greer / Mr. Green / @ just_some_dude_named_russell29 / A Safer Nevada PAC - Swift-Obsessed Sex Pest, Convicted of E-Stalking, "Eggshell Skull Plaintiff" Pro Se Litigant, Homeless, aspiring brothel owner

If you were Taylor Swift, whom would you rather date?

  • Russell Greer

    Votes: 117 4.5%
  • Travis Kelce

    Votes: 138 5.3%
  • Null

    Votes: 1,449 55.8%
  • Kanye West

    Votes: 283 10.9%
  • Ariana Grande

    Votes: 608 23.4%

  • Total voters
    2,595
Are you kidding? The Judge was absolutely right to grant this motion. As mentioned in the document itself Null clearly states he accepts service via that email address. Ergo, he consented to alternate service. It would be biased and improper for the judge to deny this motion purely on the grounds that Russell is an idiot. Doing what you want would be the real "capriciouly[sic]" deciding "wether[sic] or not to follow standard proceedings and laws".

The email is for legal notices regarding Kiwi Farms and Lolcow LLC. It is not for Null personally, who Russell is currently sueing. Null has stated multiple times he does not waive his right to be serviced normally.
 
Oh my god, I haven’t checked the thread for a long time and here we are, full on gay Russ. Thank you to Matt Anthony for posting. You’ve potentially saved some other sex workers from a bad time.

I used to follow him quite closely till he got boring, and he always did set my gaydar off. I think I even talked about it here a few times. The type of women he goes for didn’t ring true for me with him, it was always as though he was going for women he thought he should be attracted to, rather than being actually attracted to them. Plus him insisting on having dates was always about him wanting other guys to see him with what he assumed was the women they were attracted to.

Its interesting to see how he responds to women v men though isn’t it? If Matt was a woman she’d have had so much abuse and stalking behaviour, maybe even a lawsuit instigated. He thinks women are beneath him and men are his equals. Some gay/bi guys are raging misogynists because they resent women for being able to attract almost any man, whereas they can only attract men like them. I’m quite convinced now that he will snap one day and really hurt a woman. I know he’s a pathetic wee rat, but even a guy like that is dangerous with a knife or a gun.

If he is ever smart enough to figure out that incels just need to put on a pair of cat ears and knee high socks to get full scale societal support to hate and openly abuse the women they can’t have then he’ll join the tranny train, I’m excited to see him on the terf battlefield.

He’ll always be the most loathsome little man, and if there is a God he knew what he was doing when he gave him that face.

edited to fix Matt’s name because I’m a dick.
 
Last edited:
You literally quote in your own retarded post where he consents. But by all means, take my complete exasperation with you as a win.
1. That's now how it works in law
2. No sane person would assume "I'll throw them out" to mean "Yeah, sure, send me and I will accept your service". You might find it interesting, that it violated rule R164-26-6 by being in improper form. As in, Utah's own laws admit this is stupid.
The email is for legal notices regarding Kiwi Farms and Lolcow LLC. It is not for Null personally, who Russell is currently sueing. Null has stated multiple times he does not waive his right to be serviced normally.
This should have been a big problem too.
 
You literally quote in your own retarded post where he consents. But by all means, take my complete exasperation with you as a win.
And you're still wrong, you smug retard. Lolcow LLC may be served via email. Greer tried to serve Null, personally, who is legally distinct from Lolcow LLC.
That's one purpose of having an LLC in the first place.

Consider this: Being insisent and stupid isn't a good combination...
 
Last edited:
As an alternative, sure. But since we are arguing the motion was granted improperly, then Lolcow LLC would have to be served under Rule 4 (h) (b)
Sounds to me like the judge has given up hope on Greer ever getting it right, and just granted the motion to get this over with. They'll probably dismiss it at the first opportunity.
 
I have to wonder if his parents know about this, I'm not sure about how conservative they are in their Mormonism. And I am not sure how Mormons view gays and trannies.

But I have to wonder if it's bad, how quickly would they have cut contact with Russ after tolerating how much of a perverted gremlin he is for so long on top of trading handjobs for car rides, ass sex for job opportunity and now bareback gay sex for pleasure.
 
Sounds to me like the judge has given up hope on Greer ever getting it right, and just granted the motion to get this over with. They'll probably dismiss it at the first opportunity.
I personally just think that the judge had a very loose understanding on how "consent" works, and also assumed that a "help" page was Null's DM to Russel or something like that.
 
Sounds to me like the judge has given up hope on Greer ever getting it right, and just granted the motion to get this over with. They'll probably dismiss it at the first opportunity.
The court is not ruling for Russ on technical issues so they can dismiss a meritless case (if so, he would have gotten his Taylor cases through). They already had the chance to dismiss because he's filing as a pauper and they chose not to. This is Vic levels of denialism- "We're winning by losing!"
 
The court is not ruling for Russ on technical issues so they can dismiss a meritless case (if so, he would have gotten his Taylor cases through). They already had the chance to do that because of the way he's filing (pauper status). This is Vic levels of denialism- "We're winning by losing!"
I'm obviously not a lawyer, so this is a genuine question based on a tenuous grasp of due process:

If Null the individual has indeed been serviced improperly, would acknowledging it at all, e.g., objecting in some fashion to the ruling, constitute some kind of receipt of the service?

I could be way off base but I always thought that the practical purpose of service was to ensure that an entity had been adequately notified of a legal action that pertains to them.
 
All I wanted to was to have a nice cuppa and enjoy Russell Greer being outed as a seeker of bareback tickle wrestling cum play with male prostitutes, but no.

My lovely tea break is interrupted by an extended slap fight between two mongs over who can read law words good and better.
 
I have to wonder if his parents know about this, I'm not sure about how conservative they are in their Mormonism. And I am not sure how Mormons view gays and trannies.

But I have to wonder if it's bad, how quickly would they have cut contact with Russ after tolerating how much of a perverted gremlin he is for so long on top of trading handjobs for car rides, ass sex for job opportunity and now bareback gay sex for pleasure.
Yes, this is relevant. (2:00 in if you want to skip over the rest.)

But seriously, from a discussion I was witness to w/ a Mormon friend, she did confirm that some LGBT Mormons do end up repressing those parts of themselves for marriage and family. (Mostly the LGB ones, I'd have to ask on the T.) Things may have loosened up since then, but I wouldn't be surprised if Russ's family would be a bit harder on him if they knew he bats for both teams.
 
I'm obviously not a lawyer, so this is a genuine question based on a tenuous grasp of due process:

If Null the individual has indeed been serviced improperly, would acknowledging it at all, e.g., objecting in some fashion to the ruling, constitute some kind of receipt of the service?

I could be way off base but I always thought that the practical purpose of service was to ensure that an entity had been adequately notified of a legal action that pertains to them.
Attorney Natalya Rose did just such a thing in the first Russ v. Taylor lawsuit- she entered into the case in a limited fashion on behalf of Swift to oppose the default judgement due to improper service. I think that Null's lawyer did something similar in this case to oppose the default but I can't find it in the record so either I'm getting confused by his various lolsuits or it was removed from the public-facing case search.
 
I think that Null's lawyer did something similar in this case to oppose the default but I can't find it in the record so either I'm getting confused by his various lolsuits or it was removed from the public-facing case search.
I think you might be thinking of Melinda's suit against Null in which Null's lawyer did, indeed, oppose the default, and has as of today got it overturned
 
I think you might be thinking of Melinda's suit against Null in which Null's lawyer did, indeed, oppose the default, and has as of today got it overturned
Shit, you're right. And her suits make Russ look like a... well, not a lawyer, but less batshit insane comparitively.
 
Back