Epstein Files | They’ve released wild claims

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 166K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

Thank you for bringing this bit of absolutely infuriating humor into my morning. That is so transparently stupid, that it seems exactly like a stunt the minions of St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago would pull. To paraphrase Bernoulli, you can recognize a kitten by the crap it drops on the floor.
 
05C40 said:
Thank you for bringing this bit of absolutely infuriating humor into my morning. That is so transparently stupid, that it seems exactly like a stunt the minions of St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago would pull. To paraphrase Bernoulli, you can recognize a kitten by the crap it drops on the floor.
Click to expand...
I’ve said it before — if a party in litigation produced documents this way, it would almost certainly be sanctioned by the court.
 
heelinhell said:
After reading the CBS report, one could infer that perhaps Epstein did not commit suicide by hanging himself and that perhaps it was a homicide.

But that does not make any sense. I can't imagine anyone who would have a motive and power to have him killed in a highly secure single cell.
Click to expand...
Barack Obama GIF
 
EyeballKid said:
@superrific , I mean no disrespect, but have you picked up on the vibe that this board probably isn’t the proper forum for tales of your sex life, and that most posters here aren’t really that interested?
Click to expand...
1. No, I don't pick up on "vibes." That's the point. And don't tell me you mean no disrespect when you're just going to mock me.
2. I didn't realize there was some sort of cloture requirement that posters can only discuss topics which "most people" approve of.
3. Some posters seem interested enough. And not being interested is no license for really hurtful behavior.
 
hedge said:
Oh, pooh. Let the man regale us with tales of brave Ulysses and how his naked ears were tortured by the sirens sweetly singing. You can't get this kinda thing just anywhere...
Click to expand...
At least you mock me with words I can understand instead of images I cannot, but when have I ever been mean to you?
 
superrific said:
1. No, I don't pick up on "vibes." That's the point. And don't tell me you mean no disrespect when you're just going to mock me.
2. I didn't realize there was some sort of cloture requirement that posters can only discuss topics which "most people" approve of.
3. Some posters seem interested enough. And not being interested is no license for really hurtful behavior.
Click to expand...
1. I didn’t mock you. Calm the fuck down. I’ll offer a non-apology along the lines of “I’m sorry if you took it that way.”
2. Given your own admissions of your lack of understanding of memes and other social cues, I was genuinely inquiring whether you’d missed the obvious feedback from myself and others…e.g., the “thank you” note that someone posted to NYC for keeping this thread on track, which was a (rather obvious, imo) negative reaction to your post.
3. I don’t consider it “hurtful” to offer criticism when someone steps over the line fairly egregiously. Your posts about your sex life seem to be an outlet for you to express your virility and to brag a bit. I’m simply pointing out that a board largely focused on politics, world and local events, and similar topics probably isn’t the best place for discussions about your experiences pleasuring your wife or your exes. It’s an odd intrusion and interruption of the flow of things—particularly given that you’re not one to take a joke or ribbing about it.
4. I value your input on the board in terms of your vast intellect on an array of subjects.
 
EyeballKid said:
1. I didn’t mock you. Calm the fuck down. I’ll offer a non-apology along the lines of “I’m sorry if you took it that way.”
2. Given your own admissions of your lack of understanding of memes and other social cues, I was genuinely inquiring whether you’d missed the obvious feedback from myself and others…e.g., the “thank you” note that someone posted to NYC for keeping this thread on track, which was a (rather obvious, imo) negative reaction to your post.
3. I don’t consider it “hurtful” to offer criticism when someone steps over the line fairly egregiously. Your posts about your sex life seem to be an outlet for you to express your virility and to brag a bit.
Click to expand...
1. I don't mind criticism, and I don't mind ribbing. Those are fine. I mind very much the mocking through memery and I took your post to be affirming that, sort of a pile-on.
2. I told you the reason I mention those things. Sure, I'm proud of myself because it's the one thing I've really worked at and succeeded, not starting from a privileged position. But I am serious that I wish someone had told me about this type of relationship, and I am trying to pay it forward. I honestly think the world would be a much better place if more people had truly mind-blowing sex with their spouses or partners. And one barrier to that is people who don't know how things really work. We learn from movies or porn or partners (which can be really just movies/porn indirectly), and thus do we see the depictions as fake, staged, unreal. Which they are, and the fakeness cloaks an underlying reality that is unseen.
3. Threads get distracted and put back on track all the time. this thread is 217 pages long. Merely saying thank you for keeping it on track is not a condemnation of some side discussion.
 
lawtig02 said:
I’ve said it before — if a party in litigation produced documents this way, it would almost certainly be sanctioned by the court.
Click to expand...


This is what I do for a living. There is no reliable software for large scale redaction work that is reliable, absent some very defined circumstances. Given that the vast majority of this data is scanned, it's not a set in which that software would work in any reliable fashion. Even in cases in which that software is somewhat effective there is always a second layer of human QC.

From what I've read they have FBI agents working on this instead of attorneys who do this for a living, the poor work product is foreseeable. Add in the possibility of some likely purposeful bad work/mistakes and here we are.
 
CHAMTRAIN said:
This is what I do for a living. There is no reliable software for large scale redaction work that is reliable, absent some very defined circumstances. Given that the vast majority of this data is scanned, it's not a set in which that software would work in any reliable fashion. Even in cases in which that software is somewhat effective there is always a second layer of human QC.

From what I've read they have FBI agents working on this instead of attorneys who do this for a living, the poor work product is foreseeable. Add in the possibility of some likely purposeful bad work/mistakes and here we are.
Click to expand...
There is a non-trivial percentage of FBI agents who do hold a JD, but I suspect almost none of them do redactions for a living. Thank goodness. What a waste of resources.
 
"saying you are strategic, is like saying you are a lady or a gentleman. If you have to say you are; you aren't". - Lady Margaret Thatcher
 
superrific said:
At least you mock me with words I can understand instead of images I cannot, but when have I ever been mean to you?
Click to expand...
I sincerely beg your pardon if you considered that mockery, super. I won't lie and say I read of your sexual exploits with glee, but I do find them oddly amusing or at any rate not in the least cringe-inducing (although I'll admit that I can understand how some others might). I was genuinely trying to have your back man, and I apologize if you felt I was mocking you and I have not once ever thought you have been mean to me. Upon reflection I can see how it might've come across that way and perhaps there was an ever so slight nudge to your ribs, but it was not done in the spirit of anything but mild fun...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top