The Kalwejt Foundation for the Promotion of Atlas Hilarity

[Continential]

I'm still optimistic and say never. He will be the nominee and defeat Donald Trump to become the 46th President of the United States.

Context: September 29th.

[Continential]

Heart murmers are a leading cause of death in your sleep.  Its important to keep your health up so that won't happen

Context: John Conyers death thread

[Continential]

I really hope Farage gets a seat this time. He’ll be tempted to run in a Labour Leave constituency but that’s not the right move. I think he’s got conviction, believes in his cause and unlike his friend Trump - isn’t a fraud

Yeah, right.

[Continential]

It's too many people, to have IA and NH as make or break states. They dont represent the country. I have already warmed up to Biden, due to fact he can win Appalachia; whereas, Warren isnt. Biden just received an endorsement from a TX black Congressman😎

JOE BIDEN CAN WIN WEST VIRGINIA!

[Continential]

Kevin Faulconer could defeat Newsom, if 2022 is a R wave year.

[Continential]

Low, although thankfully that's about to change.

[Continential]

I'd rather help women get healthcare

What, are you gonna turn away trans men who want to have abortions?

[Continential]

Now I am not entirely certain about Boris Johnson, but Michael Johnson?  That dude?  Yeah I am absolutely certain about that cat.  He was a real party man.  He could throw them like the best of 'em.  Get all the tables set up, get the chairs set up, and then bringing out the Solo Cups.  Like no joke dude I would come home some nights, the dude lived across the street, and like there would be all these banging hot cheerleader chicks and like half the football team just hanging outside drinking beers and smoking cigarettes.  Michael man, he was real chill about that sort of stuff, he even would sneak in some of the good wicked stuff.  Dude, one time I even saw the Vietnam War.  That's how good it was.

But was was just the most absolute bomb about Michael Johnson was that he would get us all mad amped up, we'd have like a couple of Four Lokos with a Redbull chaser and we would like just get wicked and just run outside for hours and hours in front of the house like gawddang maniacs.  Sometimes we would even rob several Blockbusters before stopping at the local QuikTrip and getting a dozen Chicken Taquitos.  Man I sure do miss the old days when you could at least occasionally make money from the distribution of video.  Man, I sure miss Blockbuster.  It had a nice design and had all the game systems and games and movies you could rent and they had like the concessions at the register and like 30 day movie passes that was mad dope.  I saw so many random movies with that sh**t. .  . . .christ I'm getting nostalgic I'm sorry.

Anyway, Boris Johnson?  What party would he be in?  No idea politically, but I would bet money he'd probably show up at the kind of parties Rob Ford went to, AM I RIGHT LADS?!

[Continential]

I mean, his work is considered the culmination of Renaissance polyphony, so he does deserve some kudos.

[Continential]

Then perhaps you should have articulated that rather than calling him insufferable.

Scholl, Swing Voter v. Horus
Talk Elections Blog Court of Appeals, USGD Circ., 2021

Justice DULE delivered the opinion of the court:

I. The facts of the case are not in dispute. In response to the suspension of Jim Banks from the online platform Twitter, defendant Horus made a brief public statement, arguing that Banks' actions were "not worth" a suspension, further stating that the action by Twitter was "playing into" the Republican argument that Big Tech is censoring right-wing views. Plaintiff Scholl responded as follows:

It doesn't matter what you think is worth a suspension because you don't make the rules at Twitter. If it is against their rules they are within their rights to remove the offending content and restrict the account. There are apps like Parler that right-wingers can be as bigoted as they want to on.

To which the defendant replied:

No one said Twitter didn't have the right to suspend him. They have the right, I think it's dumb. You're getting increasingly insufferable as more people call you out.

It was at this point that plaintiff Swing Voter entered the exchange on behalf of plaintiff Scholl. Traditional internet arbitration proved inadequate to resolve the issue, and plaintiffs appealed to the courts. Defendant Horus thus stands charged with:

1) One count of misrepresenting the facts in an internet argument, and
2) Two counts of ad hominem attack.

II. In assessing whether a party is guilty of tortious misrepresentation of facts, this court has historically used a two-pronged test. First, we ask whether the defendant made a material statement of fact which was duly proven false; second, if room for interpretation in the comment in question existed, we ask whether the plaintiff acted reasonably in choosing to interpret the comment in the way he chose.

In this case, defendant Horus stated that Banks' actions were "not worth" a Twitter suspension. Taken literally, this statement merely implies that, given the rules laid out by the website in question, the conduct by third party Banks did not rise to a level that merited a suspension. Implicit in this claim is the concession that Twitter is allowed to write whatever rules of conduct it sees fit for its site; thus, the claim that the defendant misrepresented the website's rights under the First Amendment is erroneous. At no point did the defendant assert that Twitter did not act within its constitutional rights in exercising its power to suspend a user of its site.

Defendant further stated that Twitter "played into" the hands of the GOP in its actions. Because this is a claim regarding potential future events, and because it was made in the context of political commentary, it is classified as an opinion. See Atlas Board of Moderators v. Fuzzy Bear. Opinions, unless grossly unsubstantiated, are not actionable as misrepresentations of facts. The plaintiff's subsequent response, as such, does not fall within the definition of "reasonable interpretation." In order for a plaintiff to "reasonably interpret" a political prediction as a misrepresentation of fact, such a prediction must be grossly unsubstantiated, motivated by bad faith, and phrased in such a way as to induce anger in the reader. See BRTD v. MattRose. The defendant must also have exhibited a "pattern of behavior that reasonably establishes an ulterior motive in making the prediction in question." See MacArthur v. Woodbury. In this case, no such pattern exists.

Because of this, the court must conclude that plaintiff Scholl willfully, recklessly, and negligently misinterpreted the initial comment by defendant Horus. The claim is dismissed.

III. The second claim-- two counts of ad hominem attack-- is even more straightforward. Under internet convention, the initiator of a confrontation bears the burden of establishing the tone of the confrontation. See Scholl v. dead0man. In this instance, plaintiff Scholl's willful, reckless, and negligent misinterpretation of defendant Horus' comment established a decidedly negative tone to the interaction. Defendant Horus was thus not bound by any conventions of civility and was free to express any derision that is protected under forum law.

While this court agrees that commenters bear some responsibility to correct misinterpretations of their statements, such misinterpretations must arise out of good faith in order to place a burden on the original poster to clarify his statements. See Scott v. Alcibiades. In any case, the initial comment here is so divorced from the interpretation imposed upon it by the plaintiff that any clarification becomes unnecessary. The defendant is not required to hold the reader's hand as they navigate through their comments.

The claim is thus dismissed, with costs.

[Continential]

Ishan asj alot of questions like Autism type questions😃, 😃

I have autism.