Russell Greer / @theofficialinstaofrussellgreer grammar spergs

[artilleryfroth]

This is a bit bad. I thought Skordas was meant to be good? Or is he only good enough to kick the ass of someone like Russ? He filed a reply *after* Russhole’s initial motion had already been ruled on, and uses strangely wrong apostrophes. God I hope the judge likes his face...

 

[artilleryfroth]

“was done is bad faith”
“defendants’ should be”

FFS nobody can accuse Slurpface of poor editing after this.

 

[StinkySnack]

This is a bit bad. I thought Skordas was meant to be good? Or is he only good enough to kick the ass of someone like Russ? He filed a reply *after* Russhole’s initial motion had already been ruled on, and uses strangely wrong apostrophes. God I hope the judge likes his face...

That's not correct. Skordas filed a reply to Russ' reply on the motion to dismiss. That hasn't been ruled on at all.

 

[artilleryfroth]

That's not correct. Skordas filed a reply to Russ' reply on the motion to dismiss. That hasn't been ruled on at all.

I think you are incorrect on that, but anyway, my point about the current Skordas filing being almost illiterate stands.

 

[StinkySnack]

I think you are incorrect on that, but anyway,

I'm incorrect on what?

my point about the current Skordas filing being almost illiterate stands.

A misplaced apostrophe and a somewhat strangely worded sentence makes Skordas almost illiterate?

It's a little more illiterate that you can't read the docket.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

This is a bit bad. I thought Skordas was meant to be good? Or is he only good enough to kick the ass of someone like Russ? He filed a reply *after* Russhole’s initial motion had already been ruled on, and uses strangely wrong apostrophes. God I hope the judge likes his face...

If you want to shit on someone, fine, but don't start faking stuff to get mad about. Makes you seem like a retard.

I think you are incorrect on that

He literally is, though. Look at the docket.

Edit: I'd like to point out that @artilleryfroth knows he is wrong, because (in an earlier post) he pointed out the same thing as @StinkySnack said to him.

Dude...

6. Plaintiff filed a Motion for a Hearing for Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction
and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss on May 7, 2021.
7. This Court entered an order, denying Plaintiff's Motion for a Hearing, on May 18, 2021.
8. Defendants filed their reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss on
May 19, 2021.

 

[artilleryfroth]

I love Skordas's decorous language. "Plaintiff makes repeated personal attacks against the character of Mr. Skordas and his firm in his proposed supplemental briefing." I guess that's one way to paraphrase Russell's typo-ridden, histrionic screed.

Read "Why I Sued Taylor Swift" and then say that.

Read it, found it poorly written, then read this filing by Skordas and found it similarly poorly written. Just because someone is legally correct doesn’t mean it’s okay for them to be sloppy. I hope he’s doing this pro bono.

EDIT: Of course, if he’s acting pro bono, then it’s forgivable.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Read it, found it poorly written, then read this filing by Skordas and found it similarly poorly written. Just because someone is legally correct doesn’t mean it’s okay for them to be sloppy. I hope he’s doing this pro bono.

EDIT: Of course, if he’s acting pro bono, then it’s forgivable.

Few grammatical errors are not sloppy for a lawyer. Sloppy would be if he used poor law, or if he misrepresented it.

EDIT: Of course, if he’s acting pro bono, then it’s forgivable.

He is not. Null has confirmed he is paying Skordas

 

[artilleryfroth]

Few grammatical errors are not sloppy for a lawyer. Sloppy would be if he used poor law, or if he misrepresented it.


He is not. Null has confirmed he is paying Skordas

What kind of judge do you have if they don’t go nuts about sloppy submissions?

 

[Useful_Mistake]

What kind of judge do you have if they don’t go nuts about sloppy submissions?

A judge is not your highschool teacher. They care about few things, and few grammatical errors are not one of the things they care about. A lawyers job is to represent law, not write an essay that would get a linguist's panties wet. The idea that a lawyer should get paid less for a grammatical mistake, is ridiculous. Judges encounter grammatical errors all the time, and you'll be shocked, but they make them themselves too. As long as the lawyer heeds the IRAC framework, judge is not all that likely to care about a grammatical mistake.

 

[Andrew Neiman]

Read it, found it poorly written, then read this filing by Skordas and found it similarly poorly written. Just because someone is legally correct doesn’t mean it’s okay for them to be sloppy. I hope he’s doing this pro bono.

EDIT: Of course, if he’s acting pro bono, then it’s forgivable.

I respect your willingness to defend an unpopular position, but I really don't see how you can compare one to the other. Skordas, or whoever typed the document, used an apostrophe incorrectly and wrote "is" when he meant "in." These are both pretty normal, and minor, oversights. Russell's book is a cover-to-cover mess of typos and weird formatting decisions -- remember "(Too studly for this blank space - photo on next page)"?

 

[DarkAlien]

What kind of judge do you have if they don’t go nuts about sloppy submissions?

Bitch go eat a Snickers or something.
Do you seriously think lawyers write everything perfectly? They have paralegals, assistants and all sorts of minions that proof read their shit, clearly they failed here.

I maintain dozens of fake thot instagram accounts in an effort to trap, harass and torment Russ and shame his disability.

I accomplish this via not replying when he DMs me.

Even more pathetic, thnx mate

you know exactly what would happen.

“WHY THE FRICK ARE YOU WITH HIM LOLLL?? I’m so much better-looking!!”

Russ doesn’t really have an “all attractive guys are evil” mentality. He describes himself, laughably, as a 9/10.

Russ’ thought process when seeing men on hot women’s social media is this:

>hot trophy woman detected
>boyfriend present in photo

OPTIONS:
>boyfriend ugly: “he’s ugly, I am better-looking, date me!”

>boyfriend handsome: “he’s shallow, I am deep, date me!”

>boyfriend rich: “he’s a spoiled rich boy, I’m down to earth, date me!”

>boyfriend poor: “he’s poor, I can give you a better life, date me!”

Russ finds a reason for why ANY guy is not as good a boyfriend as he would be for random women.

Would love to see his reaction to a THOT with a disabled boyfriend. Thought knowing Russ, he's just gonna claim they aren't disabled enough because no one is as disabled and discriminated against as him

Even that pic that's altered to show him smiling doesn't make him look good. Even without his deformity, he'd be a 4 at most. He's just not pleasant to look at. He could offset this by being a good, interesting person. Instead, he's a textbook example of NPD and low IQ.

Disability aside, the thinning greasy hair, oily face and poorly fitted clothing make it impossible for him to be attractive. I remember seeing an older pic of him, maybe from missionary time frame, where he has like lush hair and I was like, WTF happened, how did that turn into the permanent wet greasy mess he now sports?

New docs by Null.

Spoiler: MEMORANDUM OPPOSING MOTION

View attachment 2482368
View attachment 2482369
View attachment 2482370
View attachment 2482371
View attachment 2482372
View attachment 2482373

Edit: After reading this document, this presents a very good argument as to why Russel's motion should be denied. Good job, Skordas!

"Unsound legal theories" is my favorite thing in this whole doc! Such an eloquent way to say Batshit rambling theories.

 

[artilleryfroth]

I respect your willingness to defend an unpopular position, but I really don't see how you can compare one to the other. Skordas, or whoever typed the document, used an apostrophe incorrectly and wrote "is" when he meant "in." These are both pretty normal, and minor, oversights. Russell's book is a cover-to-cover mess of typos and weird formatting decisions -- remember "(Too studly for this blank space - photo on next page)"?

Skordas misused apostrophes all the way through. If I had ever done that I would have been shouted all the way out of court! Are US courts willing to accommodate illiteracy like that?

 

[cromit]

Skordas misused apostrophes all the way through. If I had ever done that I would have been shouted all the way out of court! Are US courts willing to accommodate illiteracy like that?

Yes. You can’t get disbarred over punctuation.

 

[artilleryfroth]

Yes. You can’t get disbarred over punctuation.

That might be a pity.

 

[StinkySnack]

Skordas misused apostrophes all the way through. If I had ever done that I would have been shouted all the way out of court! Are US courts willing to accommodate illiteracy like that?

Are you on drugs.

 

[Andrew Neiman]

Skordas misused apostrophes all the way through. If I had ever done that I would have been shouted all the way out of court! Are US courts willing to accommodate illiteracy like that?

I have no idea what level of proofreading accuracy is considered the minimum or the norm in most US courts. It is true that a lot of American seem to have a loose grasp on written English. Public education systems in some parts of the US are shockingly bad. I wouldn't be surprised if most judges were glad to shrug their shoulders at the occasional misplaced apostrophe, especially if it doesn't actually obscure the intended meaning of the document.

I think you've made your point re: Skordas, and just reasserting it without putting forth any new arguments or new evidence seems unlikely to persuade anyone.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

If I had ever done that I would have been shouted all the way out of court!

What fucking country are you in?

Are US courts willing to accommodate illiteracy like that?

Neither in US, nor in Europe, do you get kicked out of the court for minor grammatical mistakes. Do you practice in non-developed world?

That might be a pity.

If I pay my lawyer, I pay him for law, not to make a grammar-free essay. If I wanted that, I'd hire a teacher or something.

. I wouldn't be surprised if most judges were glad to shrug their shoulders at the occasional misplaced apostrophe, especially if it doesn't actually obscure the intended meaning of the document.

Everyone makes grammatical mistakes, both judges and not. To expect anything else is just silly. But, yeah, like you said, if the meaning remains clear, they usually don't care. That's true for the best and the worst judges.

 

[cromit]

I think you've made your point re: Skordas, and just reasserting it without putting forth any new arguments or new evidence seems unlikely to persuade anyone.

Seems to have followed the Law According to Russell G. Greer guidelines on how to present arguments against Skordas.

 

[artilleryfroth]

I have no idea what level of proofreading accuracy is considered the minimum or the norm in most US courts. It is true that a lot of American seem to have a loose grasp on written English. Public education systems in some parts of the US are shockingly bad. I wouldn't be surprised if most judges were glad to shrug their shoulders at the occasional misplaced apostrophe, especially if it doesn't actually obscure the intended meaning of the document.

I think you've made your point re: Skordas, and just reasserting it without putting forth any new arguments or new evidence seems unlikely to persuade anyone.

Thank you. There is no point in going through the rest of the document and pointing out all of the hideous errors. There are members here who will defend every one of them, for several obvious reasons. I’ll leave it now, but note that if I were the client, I wouldn’t pay for this filing.