Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

She signed a severance agreement with a non-disparagement clause.  How did she ever think she was going to publish a book on him? 

Posted
1 hour ago, gsoda3 said:

She signed a severance agreement with a non-disparagement clause.  How did she ever think she was going to publish a book on him? 

I mean, the book is published and is a best-seller. You can get it delivered by 8AM tomorrow morning

  • Haha 3
Posted
7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I mean, the book is published and is a best-seller. You can get it delivered by 8AM tomorrow morning

That's the thing about non-disparagement clauses.  They can't stop someone from telling the verifiable truth.

Posted
3 hours ago, gsoda3 said:

She signed a severance agreement with a non-disparagement clause.  How did she ever think she was going to publish a book on him? 

The way she did. 

2 hours ago, Firemans4Horn said:

I’m not too active on FB but the time has come to delete my account. The algorithm is absolute trash and Zuckerberg is a human buttplug. 

Hey, used right a buttplug brings pleasure. Zuck? Not so much. He’s more of an enema. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Captain Ron said:

 

The article ends with a great line:

“The more power they grasp,” Wynn-Williams writes of Facebook’s leadership, “the less responsible they become.”

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

The article ends with a great line:

“The more power they grasp,” Wynn-Williams writes of Facebook’s leadership, “the less responsible they become.”

And the less answerable to the rule of law they become.  

They think that's great.  Which it is.  Right up until the point where it's not.  It is in everyone's best interests for the Rule of Law to govern.  There are very, very good reasons to stay inside the lines of the Rule of Law.  Because when you step outside them and say "what the fuck are you going to do about it?", eventually someone steps up and answers your question.

luigi-mangione-2024-12-23.jpg

 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
7 hours ago, Captainant said:

I mean, the book is published and is a best-seller. You can get it delivered by 8AM tomorrow morning

Sure. But she had to have realized there would be repercussions. I guess she didn't care.

6 hours ago, Samson's Wig said:

That's the thing about non-disparagement clauses.  They can't stop someone from telling the verifiable truth.

Nope. Non disparagement clauses don't consider truth as a standard. 

Posted
1 hour ago, gsoda3 said:

Sure. But she had to have realized there would be repercussions. I guess she didn't care.

Nope. Non disparagement clauses don't consider truth as a standard. 

So exactly what are these repercussions? Do tell? Her book is a NY Times bestseller.

Posted
9 hours ago, Captain Ron said:

So exactly what are these repercussions? Do tell? Her book is a NY Times bestseller.

The repercussions are this legal battle going to arbitration.  It's quite possible she read the room and was banking on this public support.  The risk she's taking is the results are going to go her way.  

Posted
14 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

The repercussions are this legal battle going to arbitration.  It's quite possible she read the room and was banking on this public support.  The risk she's taking is the results are going to go her way.  

A few things here.  Theoretically speaking, truth is no defense against a non-disparagement agreement, but from a policy standpoint (as in voiding the clause) and a factual standpoint, relaying objective facts that may or may not cast a business in a bad light may or may not breach the agreement.  Legally, you can probably bargain away your First Amendment rights, but the public may also have a right to know factual information.  This is a problem with NDAs generally when they concern non-trade-secret/commercial information.

But a couple of the main things is a) they are personal (they don't extend to publishers or republishers if the information is non-defamatory) b) they are enforceable typically only by monetary damages rather than an injunction, which is a possible remedy in trade secret disclosure cases.

Arbitration is kind of an amusing way to have to handle this.  It's private, so that's probably a big win for Zuck and the forum/arbitrator is probably less likely to conclude that enforcement of the clause violates public policy.  But the damages award is likely to be pretty conservative and subject to pretty strict proof (it's hard to causally connect disparagement to actual financial losses, so these usually have liquidated damages clauses, or just purport to force you to return severance).

So, such clauses are kind of nasty, but they're not as effective as employers would like them to be.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
53 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

A few things here.  Theoretically speaking, truth is no defense against a non-disparagement agreement, but from a policy standpoint (as in voiding the clause) and a factual standpoint, relaying objective facts that may or may not cast a business in a bad light may or may not breach the agreement.  Legally, you can probably bargain away your First Amendment rights, but the public may also have a right to know factual information.  This is a problem with NDAs generally when they concern non-trade-secret/commercial information.

But a couple of the main things is a) they are personal (they don't extend to publishers or republishers if the information is non-defamatory) b) they are enforceable typically only by monetary damages rather than an injunction, which is a possible remedy in trade secret disclosure cases.

Arbitration is kind of an amusing way to have to handle this.  It's private, so that's probably a big win for Zuck and the forum/arbitrator is probably less likely to conclude that enforcement of the clause violates public policy.  But the damages award is likely to be pretty conservative and subject to pretty strict proof (it's hard to causally connect disparagement to actual financial losses, so these usually have liquidated damages clauses, or just purport to force you to return severance).

So, such clauses are kind of nasty, but they're not as effective as employers would like them to be.

Thank you for explaining that much more eloquently than my slapdash throwaway sentence. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
2 hours ago, Captain Ron said:

Heather Cox Richardson, for those that don’t know, is a historian and professor at Boston College. She’s also a staunch critic of Donald Trump. She cites a lot of history (of obvious reasons) in her critiques. This move clearly has political motivation. 

Ive been following her since the new year. SHe posts really long, detailed posts every day or two about what's going on, why it's illegal, etc. I mean long posts. I also see several of the sparse folks I do follow on FB also sharing her posts. She's got a following. Her shit disappearing is 100% political. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
On 3/19/2025 at 1:11 PM, Firemans4Horn said:

I’m not too active on FB but the time has come to delete my account. The algorithm is absolute trash and Zuckerberg is a human buttplug. 

Sadly, I have friends that pretty much only communicate via Facebook DM.... its really all I use it for at this point.

Posted
46 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Ive been following her since the new year. SHe posts really long, detailed posts every day or two about what's going on, why it's illegal, etc. I mean long posts. I also see several of the sparse folks I do follow on FB also sharing her posts. She's got a following. Her shit disappearing is 100% political. 

Blah blah blah, but fascism isn't real, Brisket.  Everything is just fine, Brisket.

Billionaires working in league with the state is poison.  We are past the point of no-return.

Posted
51 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Blah blah blah, but fascism isn't real, Brisket.  Everything is just fine, Brisket.

Billionaires working in league with the state is poison.  We are past the point of no-return.

Wisconsin says hi.

 

We aren't past the point of no return, they are just making the fight harder. But remember, there are a hell of a lot more of us than there are of them.

 

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

Ive been following her since the new year. SHe posts really long, detailed posts every day or two about what's going on, why it's illegal, etc. I mean long posts. I also see several of the sparse folks I do follow on FB also sharing her posts. She's got a following. Her shit disappearing is 100% political. 

 

I've followed her since she was on Jen Ruben's and Kara Swisher's shows. She is really damn good. And despite our current directions, she has felt that the US will still turn this around, even if it takes a long damn time.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

Sadly, I have friends that pretty much only communicate via Facebook DM.... its really all I use it for at this point.

You know this guy?

image.png.5d35133d00b83ed4c052d3f3e7c9e62e.png

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 7
Posted (edited)

I mean, if you're of the masses, keep doing you. If you want to try more complex boardgames that require different skill sets than Catan, TtR, Monopoly, etc., here's a list to look at: 

- Spirit Island (co-op anti-colonial strategy game) 

- Azul (competitive tableau drafting) 

- Canvas (competitive painting creation using transparent cards, really cool) 

- John Company 2nd Edition (competitive/cooperative hybrid that has you running the British East India Company and dealing with the ramifications of that) 

- Root (asymmetric competitive strategy with Redwall series aesthetics so cute

- Heat: Pedal to the Metal (super immersive competitive racing boardgame)

- Pandemic Legacy Season 1 (baby's first cooperative legacy game, where actions and events during each game round will change the shape of future games)

There are loads more. 

ETA: I enjoy Catan, TtR, and even Monopoly on occasion. The annoying gatekeepy boardgamer is a bit. Play whatever games you enjoy

 

Edited by safe sex
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

BTW - Zuck is about to see if what he paid for is worth a damn

https://www.theverge.com/news/640368/mark-zuckerberg-meta-eu-fine-trump

The gist of the article is that the EU has found Facebook and Instagram’s advertising model violates their Digital Markets Act (DMA). Under the DMA and Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU can financially penalize Meta up to ten percent of its annual revenue — $16 billion based on the company’s 2024 earnings — for failing to comply with regulatory requirements. Basically this is Zuck trying to get Trump to put pressure on the EU (via tarrifs or other) to get the fines reduced or removed.

1 hour ago, safe sex said:

I mean, if you're of the masses, keep doing you. If you want to try more complex boardgames that require different skill sets than Catan, TtR, Monopoly, etc., here's a list to look at: 

- Spirit Island (co-op anti-colonial strategy game) 

- Azul (competitive tableau drafting) 

- Canvas (competitive painting creation using transparent cards, really cool) 

- John Company 2nd Edition (competitive/cooperative hybrid that has you running the British East India Company and dealing with the ramifications of that) 

- Root (asymmetric competitive strategy with Redwall series aesthetics so cute

- Heat: Pedal to the Metal (super immersive competitive racing boardgame)

- Pandemic Legacy Season 1 (baby's first cooperative legacy game, where actions and events during each game round will change the shape of future games)

There are loads more. 

ETA: I enjoy Catan, TtR, and even Monopoly on occasion. The annoying gatekeepy boardgamer is a bit. Play whatever games you enjoy

 

Splendor?

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Beta cuck. 
 

 

We live in the naked quid pro quo era.  Zuck is going to ask Trump to use the power of the US government against the EU to help Meta.  In exchange, Trump will demand (and get) full compliance and cooperation by Meta with any and all communication strategies he has, including suppression of dissenting viewpoints/posts.

You all know how this has gone, and will continue to go.  The US government is now nothing more than a tool and toy for Trump to use, deploy, or withhold in order to serve his own individual goals and purposes.  He treats it like his personal possession, and his party goes along with it.  And the billionaire shitbags like Zuck eat it up, and encourage it.

Zuck is a giant net negative on humanity, and the day he chokes to death on Trump's cheeto-stained dick will be a great day for the planet.

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
3 hours ago, safe sex said:

I mean, if you're of the masses, keep doing you. If you want to try more complex boardgames that require different skill sets than Catan, TtR, Monopoly, etc., here's a list to look at: 

- Spirit Island (co-op anti-colonial strategy game) 

- Azul (competitive tableau drafting) 

- Canvas (competitive painting creation using transparent cards, really cool) 

- John Company 2nd Edition (competitive/cooperative hybrid that has you running the British East India Company and dealing with the ramifications of that) 

- Root (asymmetric competitive strategy with Redwall series aesthetics so cute

- Heat: Pedal to the Metal (super immersive competitive racing boardgame)

- Pandemic Legacy Season 1 (baby's first cooperative legacy game, where actions and events during each game round will change the shape of future games)

There are loads more. 

ETA: I enjoy Catan, TtR, and even Monopoly on occasion. The annoying gatekeepy boardgamer is a bit. Play whatever games you enjoy

 

No full RPGs in your mix, I'm pulling your nerd card! D&D or bust, mix in some old school Cyberpunk, want to play out your inner edge lord Twilight 2000 still exists where you get to fight Ruskies. 

  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

No full RPGs in your mix, I'm pulling your nerd card! D&D or bust, mix in some old school Cyberpunk, want to play out your inner edge lord Twilight 2000 still exists where you get to fight Ruskies. 

Bitch, the conversation was about boardgames! Not TTRPGs. I did just order a new set of dice tho

  • Haha 2
Posted
1 hour ago, safe sex said:

Bitch, the conversation was about boardgames! Not TTRPGs. I did just order a new set of dice tho

What, are you new here? Do you think this is Nahm? There are rules! Pics or it didn't happen.

:::Is pretty sure he's the only poster curious what the dice look like:::

Posted

So Zuck paid $23  million (cash) for a place 10 minutes from the White House.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/04/02/mark-zuckerberg-washington-dc-home-trump-real-estate-00267270

I mentioned the EU thing yesterday, but he was likely lobbying more for this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/02/technology/mark-zuckerberg-trump-meta-antitrust.html?unlocked_article_code=1.804.SAer.5xYTEdjj4L1R&smid=url-share

Facebook has an antitrust suit going to trial in 2 weeks. Will his money and influence get him anything?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

 

On 4/2/2025 at 2:26 PM, Captain Ron said:

BTW - Zuck is about to see if what he paid for is worth a damn

https://www.theverge.com/news/640368/mark-zuckerberg-meta-eu-fine-trump

The gist of the article is that the EU has found Facebook and Instagram’s advertising model violates their Digital Markets Act (DMA). Under the DMA and Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU can financially penalize Meta up to ten percent of its annual revenue — $16 billion based on the company’s 2024 earnings — for failing to comply with regulatory requirements. Basically this is Zuck trying to get Trump to put pressure on the EU (via tarrifs or other) to get the fines reduced or removed.

 

In terms of both Zuck and Musk, I don't see what they get here. Given the tariffs, the EU might as well go directly after these guys. They might have gone for cover, but I don't see them getting it now.

 

9pqd8z.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Captain Ron said:

In terms of both Zuck and Musk, I don't see what they get here. Given the tariffs, the EU might as well go directly after these guys. They might have gone for cover, but I don't see them getting it now.

100%

In fact, that would be the smart play: put pressure on the people who can bring about change.  The EU's retaliatory actions should be directly and nakedly targeted at the billionaires who control the US government.  Brutal and painful treatment of every venture Zuck, Bezos, and Musk have.  A 200% tariff or additional duty or tax on every car company that rhymes with "Mesla," shit like that.  Squeeze them, so they run crying to and squeeze Trump.

Hurt the American little guy?  Sure, eventually, that creates some electoral pressure, maybe.

Hurt the American billionaires?  That gets some immediate response.  And let them know, via back channel, that if they do the RIGHT thing (get their rabid dog back under control), then things will be much more lucrative for them.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
47 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

100%

In fact, that would be the smart play: put pressure on the people who can bring about change.  The EU's retaliatory actions should be directly and nakedly targeted at the billionaires who control the US government.  Brutal and painful treatment of every venture Zuck, Bezos, and Musk have.  A 200% tariff or additional duty or tax on every car company that rhymes with "Mesla," shit like that.  Squeeze them, so they run crying to and squeeze Trump.

Hurt the American little guy?  Sure, eventually, that creates some electoral pressure, maybe.

Hurt the American billionaires?  That gets some immediate response.  And let them know, via back channel, that if they do the RIGHT thing (get their rabid dog back under control), then things will be much more lucrative for them.

Agreed. I don't quite understand (yet) why Bezos, Zuckerberg and some of the other top 10/20 richest Americans are letting Trump do this to the economy and markets. He's cost them billions upon billions of dollars. Is it simply lose X billions today but you'll get 10-20X that once we privatize everything when the entire country crumbles and falls? Is that what we're looking at? (I get Musk's angle. His wealth is tenuous as Tesla can't justify the stock price with fundamentals and his wealth is very dependent on Tesla's stock price. He's also able to eliminate all the nasty government agencies that could regulate what he's doing at SpaceX, Twitter or the rest of his companies.)

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Agreed. I don't quite understand (yet) why Bezos, Zuckerberg and some of the other top 10/20 richest Americans are letting Trump do this to the economy and markets. He's cost them billions upon billions of dollars. Is it simply lose X billions today but you'll get 10-20X that once we privatize everything when the entire country crumbles and falls? Is that what we're looking at? (I get Musk's angle. His wealth is tenuous as Tesla can't justify the stock price with fundamentals and his wealth is very dependent on Tesla's stock price. He's also able to eliminate all the nasty government agencies that could regulate what he's doing at SpaceX, Twitter or the rest of his companies.)

When you’re worth nearly $200 billion, losing 10% of your net worth in the short term is nothing. In the long term, it’s a good investment that allows guys like Zuck to further consolidate their power to be able to influence policies to their liking and benefit. They’ve found their useful idiot and are manipulating him without any pushback. Look no further than Russia to see how cozying up to Putin has benefitted that country’s oligarchs. We are no longer a country for the common man.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, royiv said:

When you’re worth nearly $200 billion, losing 10% of your net worth in the short term is nothing. In the long term, it’s a good investment that allows guys like Zuck to further consolidate their power to be able to influence policies to their liking and benefit. They’ve found their useful idiot and are manipulating him without any pushback. Look no further than Russia to see how cozying up to Putin has benefitted that country’s oligarchs. We are no longer a country for the common man.

I have a dream. I have a dream where we get to see the faces of these mega-billionaires at the exact moment they come to the realization the man who famously bankrupted a casino has driven them all over the proverbial cliff to their death. Please let me live long enough to see this through.

  • Hook 'Em 4

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...