New filing on ecourts re MB

[Angela_Freda]

Hmm, I musta already done so?

[smoofox]

@eggbutt

It sure didn’t take long for the thread to go downhill with sniping. I’m so disappointed. Why not simply ignore posts you (g) find ridiculous and move on? While I appreciate MB’s GFM benefits from our negative behavior, it doesn’t accomplish anything if the thread is closed. Stepping down from the mounting block now.

This.
The bragging about it just makes it more negative… as opposed to being a good thing. Good deeds are diminished by announcing them.

Why not just let conversations flow and not suggest/dictate (choose which word you prefer) who and what can be replied to and in what way? Ignore, scroll, whatever.

@CurrentlyHorseless

@MHM

@enjoytheride

A financial penalty seems to be doing wonders aside a brief derailment.

I think it’s just enough to make people stop and think to themselves, do I really need to waste my time and energy replying to this pointless person?

So there you’re not replying to the “pointless person”, but you’re making a remark about them.

Does that cost you $10, or not?

It seems this is an important issue to iron out.

Fair point.

What is the level of donations/contributions for specific infractions?
Is snark different than being snide?
Does being passive-aggressive cost more than being direct?
Is there a flow chart of some kind to sort these issues out?

I will take myself to the penalty box…

[hut-ho78]

@enjoytheride

A financial penalty seems to be doing wonders aside a brief derailment. Back on track now and serving bourbon in the dining car

Much better than the posters on the last thread telling MB to bankrupt himself. This actually helps him.

[MHM]

Sweet! You’re ahead of the game!!

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Soooo can we review upcoming dates? Because I still have trouble grasping the schedule.

Are we currently waiting on a ruling from the judge concerning the motions (and objections ) about limiting Lollypop’s deposition? Maybe there was a hearing about this last Friday (per the electronic notice that was automatically scheduled) - maybe not?

And… there is mediation coming up on 03/30? I think it’s 03/30?

And then there was another electronic notice with a hearing automatically scheduled for 03/31 in response to GAS’s most recent motions requesting more discovery?

And… Lollypop’s deposition. Which is set to begin on 04/13… correct?

Oh. And doesn’t MB have another Krol hearing in April? Maybe 04/27?

[Maria]

Snoopy is the BEST!

[eggbutt]

Charlie Brown Teacher Speaking

[ekat]

March 17th - First date Judge can consider the motion to limit Lauren Kanarek’s deposition

March 28th - Case Management Proceeding

March 31st - First date Judge can consider GAS’s latest weird Motion

April 13th - Lauren Kanarek Deposition

April 25th - Krol hearing

April 28th - First date judge will consider outstanding motions re: Jonathan and Kirby Kanarek’s subpoenas

What you see as hearings on motions aren’t necessarily hearings. It’s the first date a judge will look at the motions, which is why when you look at the case activity, it says Paper under courtroom.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Hugely helpful. Thank you so much

[ekat]

You’re welcome!

[Maria]

My employees when I am talking to them. lol

[MHM]

@ekat

April 25th - Krol hearing

So far beyond the pale that it will be well over a year after MB was found not guilty.

As always, thank you so much for providing such detailed information.

[Knights_Mom]

@ekat deserves a salary for keeping track!

[trubandloki]

Thank you @ekat for making all the details less confusing and so clear!

[ekat]

@MHM

As always, thank you so much for providing such detailed information.

@trubandloki

Thank you @ekat for making all the details less confusing and so clear!

You’re welcome!

@Knights_Mom

deserves a salary for keeping track!

How about a donut? Will work for donuts…

[ohnoO]

Who do we think are the 5 defendants, and the 1 other?

[ekat]

@ohnoO

Who do we think are the 5 defendants, and the 1 other?

Michael Barisone
SGF
Ruth Cox
A bunch of John Doe individuals
A bunch of John Doe corporations

Other = MCPO, as they have been involved in some of the disclosure.

[Maria]

[ekat]

YUM!

[ohnoO]

@ekat

@ohnoO

Who do we think are the 5 defendants, and the 1 other?

Michael Barisone
SGF
Ruth Cox
A bunch of John Doe individuals
A bunch of John Doe corporations

Other = MCPO, as they have been involved in some of the disclosure.

Thank you. I see where I was confused! I thought that the John Doe groups numbered 30+.