Here he jokes that plane masturbator should have gotten a medal. I wish the flounce had stuck. Broken link
There’s no way that clown is actually a lawyer.
It was a dumb and tasteless joke, but I think most posters have said worse. Including me. In that thread. He also made it clear the guy should be prosecuted, and expressed surprise that the guy was able to masturbate 4 times. UV deserves Pitting for many reasons, but that’s a weak one.
For example, over in ATMB, his inability to understand the issues people had with the “attack the post” language of our rules suggest he must be a really shitty lawyer.
This is his response when a woman patiently explains that she and other women are heavily socialized, if for no other reason than simple survival, to shut down and freeze when in close proximity to a man who is behaving in an aggressively unpleasant manner, especially with a sexual component.
I don’t know if he’s a good lawyer or a bad lawyer or even a lawyer at all. But on the topic of sexual politics and gender relationships, he is clearly a spectacular asshole.
The subject of this thread is a racist, misogynist, transphobic troll (recall his recent thread on pregnant men—just the title is enough to know what he’s after). He has only been emboldened since the waaaaa patrol got his latest warning rescinded. I have no doubt he is a real lawyer. I also have no doubt he is a real piece of shit.
Yes, that particular post is an asshole response. It’s also the sort of thing I used to hear from right wing talk shows. The idea is that if women want to be treated as equals, and chivalry is now considered offensive, then women should be treated like shit. In other words, “Let’s punish these uppity broads and put them in their place.”
The contents of my toilet are going to sue you for defamation.
Well they’re getting push back from the j_ws, n_____rs, and the s___ks. Who’s left to persecute?
That only works if he’s flush with cash.
I’m adding this one, because I reported it because I considered it a threadshit (to no currect effect), but I’m known to overreact.
In https://boards.straightdope.com /t/wasting-fuel-as-a-criminal-offense/960762/85
(link broken obviously)
He came into a thread that had rested for 20 days, to drop this turd -
For all of the good responses in the thread, the overarching idea seems to be a pretext to outlaw political protests we don’t like such as the Freedom Convoys.
When even the freaking OP said
What would have to happen to make wanton waste of fuel a criminal offense, particularly in the US? Question was inspired mostly by those supposed Freedom Convoys, but anything similar might count, too.
So, basically ignored the OP, ignored all the self-admitted ‘good responses’ and woke a coma thread (not a zombie yet) to defecate this political jab? A self-shitter and I can’t see it as anything but trying to make a RW ‘Boo-hoo you’re being mean to us’ mountain out of the worlds smallest molehill.
I was going to reply to you in that thread that of course freezing is exactly what some of Louis C.K.'s victims did. Understandably. It’s absolutely as natural as fight or flight. But I didn’t want to pull you back in after you exited .
You are very kind.
I also cannot understand how a lawyer would need to ask WHY the guy was arrested. (Or any reasonably informed person living in the US in this day and age)
See, it’s perfectly reasonable to say that the right to do un-permitted home improvement is as fundamentally important as the right to live openly as gay or transgender. Because most people would probably prefer to save $50 on a building permit than to live as gay or transgender.
I’ll take “What is a base rate fallacy?” for that $50, Alex.
I’ll say, “What is trolling, Alex” because that’s exactly what UV’s stunt, er post there is.
It reminds me of another poster, I think it was doorhinge, who made the challenge that if other posters couldn’t convince him of global climate change, then it isn’t happening.
And he wasn’t open to listening to reason, and would just shoot down any argument with essentially, “that’s not convincing to me”.
@UltraVires is just playing it a bit coy with the, “These aren’t my views, but the views of others, and you need to make an argument that will convince them.” Then coming back to shoot down any argument with, “That won’t convince them, in fact it’ll make them vote for Trump.”
This is a special form of trolling that really needs a name.
I backed out when I noticed him asking questions I had already answered (while assuming good faith). Either he was acting in bad faith and only responding to some people, or he has me on ignore.
Yeah, he does the same with me, most of the time.
I’m out of that thread, I think. At this point, he’s acting in bad faith in that thread.
The accompanying image leads me to suggest “coffee-standing.”