I’m Not Making This Up, You Know


According to PACER, The Dreadful Pro-Se Schmalfeldt really did file this—

UPDATE—Among the first bits of nonsense one finds in the Cabin Boy’s™ opposition is the whining that Patrick Grady has filled four motions, etc., without answering the Cabin Boy’s™ complaint. Rule 12(b) motions are made and disposed of before any answer is filed. In the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness, I filed more than a dozen motions, oppositions, replies, etc., before the case was dismissed. I never filed an answer; that case never got that far.

popcorn4bkSimilarly, I doubt that any of the defendants will ever have to answer Schmalfeldt’s complaint. That’s not to say that one won’t do so. A defendant would have to answer the complaint to file any counterclaims or …

Stay tuned.

 

Prevarication Du Jour


grouch365|201507180221ZOf course, nothing I’ve written here at Hogewash! comes remotely close to undermining Patrick Grady’s arguments concerning personal jurisdiction in the Cabin Boy’s LOLsuit.

OTOH, Bill Schmalfeldt is a laughing matter.

I don’t mean that his lawfare shouldn’t be taken seriously. It must be. What I mean is that he is not a serious person himself. He is an intellectual lightweight. He has an overinflated ego. And he is in over his head.

He is also vile and has spent much of the past decade inflicting himself on others via the Internet. XMFan, Daily Kos, Facebook, etc., have banned or suspended him. He now maintains his presence by moving from blog to blog and Twitter account to Twitter account while playing musical chairs with Internet radio feeds. And his faildoxes keep on coming.

A couple of years ago, some folks, I was among them, had had enough of the Cabin Boy™, and we began taking legal action against him. I was the first to be successful, but others have also succeeded in getting restraining orders against him. Schmalfeldt has tried various legal counterattacks, and all have failed or are failing. Schmalfeldt has further beclowned himself with his lawfare.

While Schmalfledt’s lawfare must be dealt with seriously in the courts of law, it should be subjected to ridicule in the courts of public opinion. Thus, one of my responses to his lawfare might be termed LOLfare. Somethings simply deserve to be laughed at.

UPDATE—Caution! Crackpot Theory Alert!grouch365201507181322ZAlso, the Cabin Boy™ hereby demonstrates his inability to correctly read the emotional responses of others. There is a huge difference between anger and derisive laughter.

Blogsmoke


BlogsmokeSOUND: MODEM CONNECTING FADES UP TO FULL MIKE—SINGLE SHOT—RICHOCHET

MUSIC: UP AND UNDER—RECORDED—CUT 1

ANNOUNCER: (VOICE OVER MUSIC) Around Twitter Town and in the territory of the net—there’s just one way to handle the harassers and the stalkers—and that’s with an Internet Sheriff and the smell of “BLOGSMOKE”!

MUSIC: THEME HITS: FULL BROAD SWEEP AND UNDER—RECORDED—CUT 2

ANNOUNCER: “BLOGSMOKE” starring W. J. J. Hoge. The story of the trolling that moved into the young Internet—and the story of a man who moved against it. (MUSIC: OUT)

JOHN: I’m that man, John Hoge, Internet Sheriff—the first man they look for and the last they want to meet. It’s a chancy job—and it makes a man watchful … and a little lonely.

MUSIC: MAIN TITLE—RECORDED—CUT 3 Continue reading

Sex, Grammar, and Microagression


The recent brouhaha over Bruce Jenner has led me to want to explain the use of English language pronouns on this blog—

Feminine pronouns (she/her/hers) are used for human beings lacking Y-chromosomes, other female biological entities, and for certain inanimate objects such as ships.

Masculine pronouns (he/him/his) are used for human beings possessing Y-chromosomes and other male biological entities.

Indefinite pronouns (he/him/his) are used for human beings whose possession of Y-chromosomes is unknown and may be use for other biological entities. One/one/one’s may be used for any human being regardless of Y-choromosome status when the subjunctive mood is used.

Neuter pronouns (it/it/its) are used for inanimate objects and may be used for non-human biological entities.

The plural pronouns (they/them/their) should only be used for groups of person or things.

These rules are not microagression. They’re science-based, clear-thinking, real-world grammar punching back twice as hard.