TSR The Full & Glorious History of NuTSR

Dannyalcatraz · Oct 11, 2023

Snarf Zagyg said:
I did enjoy the verbiage.

That said, what struck me about that is not the language, although I did track the arguments. In essence, Defense Counsel (Tenkar's attorney) was pointing out that what Plaintiff (LaNasa) did was not proper discovery. Discovery does have rules, and you aren't just supposed to demand "stuff," and, moreover, there are limits (such as the number of interrogatories). Without getting into the more substantive issues, the response basically said, "Plaintiff didn't serve proper discovery, and even though we pointed this out, repeatedly, and even tried to have a good faith conference regarding these failures, Plaintiff is still wasting everyone's time demanding we respond to this."*

I found that alarming, too. It’s as if either his attorney is incompetent, practicing outside of his usual jurisdiction, or is following the instructions of a client who isn’t listening.

It’s possible the lawyer is just signing off on & filing stuff LaNasa is drafting himself.

Snarf Zagyg said:
But what always amazes me when I see documents from other jurisdictions is how different others jurisdictions can operate. Law is always an intensely local practice, and even though I have been fortunate enough to have practiced in multiple areas, I am still amazed at the small differences. The idea of submitting a "letter motion," to a federal court as opposed to a .... motion ... is just weird to me. I've heard that federal courts in New York (similar to local practice) allow for it, but still ... weird.

I have always advised family & friends to hire another, local attorney (if they can) instead of me when they’re in a legal pickle outside of where I live.

Besides the local variables in practice, there’s the whole dynamic of being familiar with the judges and other attorneys.

So far, I’ve only handled 2 cases outside of my local area, and it was unpleasant each time. In both cases, time was a factor and my clients were struggling. Fortunately, I got the jobs done.

Umbran · Oct 11, 2023

Wincenworks said:
Justin LaNasa is a morally repugnant buffoon, a subhuman oozing mass who diminishes the worth of humanity by counting himself among us.

Mod Note:
We have allowed a lot of nastiness to be shoveled on LaNasa. But there are limits.

On EN World, we do not dehumanize others. Poke fun at their foibles, remark upon their inane choices, make fun of their antics, and be angry when they are harmful to the community, sure - but we lose the moral high ground when we start referring to anyone as "subhuman". That's not acceptable.

Folks - keep your rhetoric in check.

Sacrosanct · Oct 11, 2023

Umbran said:
Mod Note:
We have allowed a lot of nastiness to be shoveled on LaNasa. But there are limits.

On EN World, we do not dehumanize others. Poke fun at their foibles, remark upon their inane choices, make fun of their antics, and be angry when they are harmful to the community, sure - but we lose the moral high ground when we start referring to anyone as "subhuman". That's not acceptable.

Folks - keep your rhetoric in check.

Even beyond the moral high ground, I don't think it's very smart. I mean, we're talking about a slander lawsuit, and it's a good idea to make slanderous accusations against the person who filed the suit? That seems...ironic to me. Whether or not there is merit is immaterial. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to deal with what Tenkar is dealing with even if technically he didn't do anything wrong. Don't believe me. Believe Tenkar*, or Cam Banks, or Ettin, or Shannon Appelcline about the dangers of making these kinds of comments about people and if it's worth it.

*Tenkar is going through this mess, and it's expensive. Cam and Ettin both had to make public apologies and whatever else needed to settle with Zak, and Shannon has a policy that a certain RPG publisher is verboten to mention on RPG.net due to lawsuits they filed.

Umbran · Oct 11, 2023

Sacrosanct said:
Even beyond the moral high ground, I don't think it's very smart.

Please don't use moderation posts as a basis for continuing discussion.

Mannahnin · Oct 11, 2023

Sacrosanct said:
Even beyond the moral high ground, I don't think it's very smart. I mean, we're talking about a slander lawsuit, and it's a good idea to make slanderous accusations against the person who filed the suit?

To be fair, slander is definitionally both false and damaging to reputation. Wincenworks made no false representations about JL in that post as far as I can see. Just insults. Which are violations of ENworld rules but not of law.

Sacrosanct · Oct 11, 2023

Mannahnin said:
To be fair, slander is definitionally both false and damaging to reputation. Wincenworks made no false representations about JL in that post as far as I can see. Just insults. Which are violations of ENworld rules but not of law.

Again, I shall refer you to Tenkar, Cam Banks, Ettin, and Shannon. And the fact that that doesn't matter what "technically" is slander or not. Is it worth the lawsuit?

Gradine · Oct 11, 2023

So here's the thing; dehumanizing people sucks. A lot. We are watching right now on the global stage the kind of tragedy that unfolds when a people are systematically dehumanized for decades. It's less dangerous in the individual sense, but still not a really great precedent to set, you know?

That said, people of LeNasa's caliber (that is, bigots) cannot be tolerated. But how can we do that in a culture that highlights the eminence of freedom of speech? The freedom of speech is our most valuable and sacred right; it allows us to say what we like (although with exceptions) without fear of legal repercussions. It's hopeless, right?

Nah fam, there's so many different kinds of repercussions to enact. In a world where the law cannot uphold Popper's Paradox (something he himself specifically never advocated for, I'll add!), there is so, so much more room for us to fill in the gaps ourselves. There ain't no constitutional protections against the social consequences of anything. And that's a blessing.

I'm not saying we call bigots subhuman, to fully dehumanize them; that's essentially trying to use a tool they've mastered against them, and that's never going to work. But we can, and I would argue morally must, turn our backs on them. Close our spaces to them. Give them no shelter, no comfort, no peace. It should not be easy to be a bigot. We kind of have to make it hard as hell for them.

There's a couple of common arguments against this approach. One is the whole "so there's nothing they can do to be forgiven" refrain, which is patently false; folks who sincerely apologize for the harm they've caused and show signs of making things right are welcomed back into broader communities all the time. That's restorative justice, son, and it works like gangbusters. You don't really see it much because the higher-profile cases tend to feature a lot of either doubling-down or issuing bland non-apologies (usually along the lines of "sorry you were offended...") followed by refusing to ever bring it up again. You know, the Dinehart and Ernie approaches, respectively, to give a relevant example of both. We also got an example of the welcoming back in the case of Michael Hovermale; true, you can say his heel-face-turn didn't exactly stick, but you can't argue he wasn't welcomed back into the community after full-throatingly condemning the bigotry of his former colleagues.

Then there's the argument that if you shut people off from healthy community you only drive them further into those that would radicalize their bigotry. Is there truth to that? Sure. There are also folks doing incredibly patient and amazing work doing outreach to de-radicalize people sucked into those communities, and that's to their credit. But you can't expect that level of commitment out of everybody. And if this sad ending to Ernie's tale has taught us anything, it's that when the chips are down, bigots aren't going to have your back. And that's when you can ask... was it worth it? That's when you can open the door, and try to coax them back in. For many it will be too late. But that's kind of the point too. Dying, friendless and alone, is the ultimate cost of embracing bigotry.

Look, everyone involved in this whole sordid NuTSR/Wonderfilled shenangins, your Ernies and Lanasas, your Dineharts, your Leasons and Wards, your Dave Johnsons by any other name, alive or allegedly dead, have either directly engaged in open homophobia, transphobia, and/or racism, or are completely comfortable working alongside and being willingly associated with homophobes, transphobes, and racists. Which is, honestly, a distinction without a difference. Whatever fate they ultimately receive is either going to be exactly what they deserve or, more likely, far far better than what they deserve. Can they earn back any respect they may have at one point had from the community? Sure, though none of them have exactly been champing at the bit for a chance to redeem themselves. Once again, it genuinely worked for Hovermale (at least until whatever the hell ended up happening with him happened, but that was an unforced error on his part). Some will have substantially more work to do than others; Leason and Ward probably will end up having the most benefit of the doubt if they ever bother to try to distance themselves from the rest of these cretins.

Can they earn forgiveness? Depends. As much as a person can do to make good of the damage they've done through any kind of restorative justice, nobody is actually owed forgiveness. Many of the people I've named have said incredibly disparaging things about people like me (and in one case, actually directly to me, leading to my twitter DMs being temporarily a flood of slurs and threats), or are perfectly happy and comfortable working alongside with these folks who are quite publicly saying and doing these things, so I'm not personally inclined towards forgiving any of them. But I'd never say never. And that's much different from being comfortable with them welcomed back after sincerely apologizing and working towards correcting the damage they've caused. That's always a win. But often, a person really has to hit rock bottom before they can see that that's their only way out.

But the one has to come before the other. You don't get redemption without earning it, and until that happens, you don't deserve concern or care or even pity. That's the cost of your choices. That's the cost of the very real harm you've caused others.

This has been kind of a rambly post, and I almost certainly ended up not where I thought I was heading. I'm sure I'll be excoriated for being callous towards a real human being who is dying, someone who I'm sure many of us at least used to admire, who many have likely met, and even some who might still consider a friend. But honestly? I'm tired, and my filter has run raw. You try being a part of a community so demonized and demoralized that nearly half of its members have actually attempted to end their own life; a community where people you know and care about are routinely harassed, and stalked, and who die, either by their own hand or another, at a pace you could not even begin to fathom if you weren't actually in it, and see how generous you feel like being in this moment.

Sacrosanct · Oct 11, 2023

Gradine said:
This has been kind of a rambly post, and I almost certainly ended up not where I thought I was heading. I'm sure I'll be excoriated for being callous towards a real human being who is dying, someone who I'm sure many of us at least used to admire, who many have likely met, and even some who might still consider a friend. But honestly? I'm tired, and my filter has run raw.

Nah, you worded it pretty well. Part of me was holding out hope Ernie would try to make amends (especially after LaNasas completely threw him to the curb), but it doesn't look like it's gonna happen.

Wincenworks · Oct 11, 2023

Dannyalcatraz said:
It’s possible the lawyer is just signing off on & filing stuff LaNasa is drafting himself.

I don't think that's the case. I think his attorney is burned out and used to operating either as criminal defence or second chair, so is out of his depths when it comes to civil procedure.

The original claim, and the amended one both have a failing to "speak to the facts" which suggests to me he's used to "putting the opposition to the proof" which is basically the strategy of last resort in criminal defence. Similarly he overplays being the good guy in this - which works if you're representing a very sympathetic client, but not so well when it's a millionaire tattoo shop owner who posts all kind of reactionary content.

Defamation is usually a plaintiff's tort, they start the ball rolling and then it's up to the other side investigate and disprove everything (which why Vivek got a truly staggering legal bill from her own counsel in the case where Zak S was awarded $1 + costs) but like, in this case he hasn't clearly set up what the actual defamation is... just copy-pasted out of textbooks and then asked the judge to watch some YouTube videos.

There's lot of things that have been going on, but it seems his lawyer is genuinely drafting these, just he's doing it... in a manner that doesn't seem to match what you'd expect given his credentials etc.

Sacrosanct said:
Again, I shall refer you to Tenkar, Cam Banks, Ettin, and Shannon. And the fact that that doesn't matter what "technically" is slander or not. Is it worth the lawsuit?

I removed the paragraph since it's not having the intended illustrative effect, and I have no wish to make more work for the mods - but I do wish to point out that the reason Anti-SLAPP laws exist is precisely because it is widely agreed that the chilling effect of people's opinions through the threat of meritless suits is considered a bad thing in the modern societies we live in.

Also "technically correct" is the best kind of correct in these kinds of cases, which has been the problem for many people charged with defamation in the cases above but also why Justin's lawyer is floundering chaotically in this case - he can't point to a single statement and yell "Ah ha!"

Deset Gled · Oct 11, 2023

Dannyalcatraz said:
I found that alarming, too. It’s as if either his attorney is incompetent, practicing outside of his usual jurisdiction, or is following the instructions of a client who isn’t listening.

Wincenworks said:
I don't think that's the case. I think his attorney is burned out and used to operating either as criminal defence or second chair, so is out of his depths when it comes to civil procedure.

I agree that what we're seeing is most likely the fact that Lanasa's lawyer is outside of his comfort zone. From a light googling, it appears that most of Kleinman's career has been spent as a criminal defense attorney (including a couple of people accused of violent terrorism). His demands that Tenkar supply information seems very much in line with the type of thing a criminal defendant would (rightly) demand the prosecution turn over. But, obviously, those demands are simply nonsensical for the plaintiff in a civil defamation suit.

I have also heard rumors that Lanasa had to shop around to find a lawyer that would agree to take his case; at least a couple turned him down because the case was too ridiculous. Assuming that's true, this is probably the best Lanasa could find. And to be fair, Kleinmann has some real skill at pounding the table and making loud noises, even if it is just wharrgarbl.

TSR The Full & Glorious History of NuTSR

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator

Umbran

Mod Squad

Sacrosanct

Legend

Umbran

Mod Squad

Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen (He/Him)

Sacrosanct

Legend

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/her)

Sacrosanct

Legend

Wincenworks

Hero

Deset Gled

.

Similar Threads

Voidrunner's Codex

Related Articles

Voidrunner's Codex