Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

You mean the WF supporter who posted the link to the Court document, via a reddit link, where Blake admitted that there was no evidence that Flaa acted at the direction of defendants? The admission that one pro Lively poster vehemently argued didn’t exist until it was posted here? And then she continued to attack Flaa in multiple posts after she was proven wrong. And you claim the WF supporters are the ones who are crazy? Ok, then, tells me all I need to know about your logic.

That post did not clink a court document. It screenshotted excerpts of a court document, which you misrepresented to be RFAs along with some crazy commentary about the contents and weird emojis.

I don’t know who Flaa is.

Yes, I mistakenly copied the body of the post, which I said at the time was unintended.
You must have missed that as well as Blake’s allegations about Flaa, the post denying the admission occurred (even though filed days ago), and the multiple posts where Flaa’s career was discussed by posters on both sides.

Or you are gaslighting, as always.

Are you the “WF supporter” you referenced above?

Obviously, or I wouldn’t have explained the post. The only honest poster here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

You mean the WF supporter who posted the link to the Court document, via a reddit link, where Blake admitted that there was no evidence that Flaa acted at the direction of defendants? The admission that one pro Lively poster vehemently argued didn’t exist until it was posted here? And then she continued to attack Flaa in multiple posts after she was proven wrong. And you claim the WF supporters are the ones who are crazy? Ok, then, tells me all I need to know about your logic.

That post did not clink a court document. It screenshotted excerpts of a court document, which you misrepresented to be RFAs along with some crazy commentary about the contents and weird emojis.

I don’t know who Flaa is.

Yes, I mistakenly copied the body of the post, which I said at the time was unintended.
You must have missed that as well as Blake’s allegations about Flaa, the post denying the admission occurred (even though filed days ago), and the multiple posts where Flaa’s career was discussed by posters on both sides.

Or you are gaslighting, as always.

Are you the “WF supporter” you referenced above?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

You mean the WF supporter who posted the link to the Court document, via a reddit link, where Blake admitted that there was no evidence that Flaa acted at the direction of defendants? The admission that one pro Lively poster vehemently argued didn’t exist until it was posted here? And then she continued to attack Flaa in multiple posts after she was proven wrong. And you claim the WF supporters are the ones who are crazy? Ok, then, tells me all I need to know about your logic.

That post did not clink a court document. It screenshotted excerpts of a court document, which you misrepresented to be RFAs along with some crazy commentary about the contents and weird emojis.

I don’t know who Flaa is.

Yes, I mistakenly copied the body of the post, which I said at the time was unintended.
You must have missed that as well as Blake’s allegations about Flaa, the post denying the admission occurred (even though filed days ago), and the multiple posts where Flaa’s career was discussed by posters on both sides.

Or you are gaslighting, as always.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

You mean the WF supporter who posted the link to the Court document, via a reddit link, where Blake admitted that there was no evidence that Flaa acted at the direction of defendants? The admission that one pro Lively poster vehemently argued didn’t exist until it was posted here? And then she continued to attack Flaa in multiple posts after she was proven wrong. And you claim the WF supporters are the ones who are crazy? Ok, then, tells me all I need to know about your logic.

That post did not clink a court document. It screenshotted excerpts of a court document, which you misrepresented to be RFAs along with some crazy commentary about the contents and weird emojis.

I don’t know who Flaa is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

You mean the WF supporter who posted the link to the Court document, via a reddit link, where Blake admitted that there was no evidence that Flaa acted at the direction of defendants? The admission that one pro Lively poster vehemently argued didn’t exist until it was posted here? And then she continued to attack Flaa in multiple posts after she was proven wrong. And you claim the WF supporters are the ones who are crazy? Ok, then, tells me all I need to know about your logic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

Meaningless because you’ve been pro lively for nearly a year.

And always try to disclaim it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

Meaningless because you’ve been pro lively for nearly a year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Sorry, are you saying this about the pro-lively posts that provide links to the actual court documents? Or the semi-hysterical pro-Baldoni posts that either don’t link anything or link some insane subreddit?

If you are talking about the pro-Lively posts, then I guess all I can say is they are great bots, because they actually sound intelligent. If you are talking about the pro-Baldoni posts, then I agree they seem a lot more bot-like given the hysterics and lack of linking to or referencing court docs. And they definitely shifted me closer to the Lively camp because who wants to be on the side of crazy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another question: Wallace's deposition seems so obviously to be loaded with falsehoods that it seems crazy to me. Like just for instance, here is a conversation from October 2024 between Melissa Nathan, Jed Wallace, and a redacted entity (a client of TAG and Wallace) discussing work TAG and Wallace are doing for the client: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1043.10.pdf

The conversation clearly shows TAG and Wallace discussing, in some detail, manipulating algorithms on behalf of the client in order to suppress certain info and promote other info. In his deposition, Wallace denies this is something he does, or is even capable of doing, and claims this was entirely "puffery."

If Wallace is telling the truth in his deposition, then he was lying to this client and, as well as Wayfarer, about his abilities and his actual work, while collecting large payments. That's fraud. On the other hand, if he's lying in his deposition, that's perjury. If he's committing perjury, you have to ask why, which raises the strong likelihood that if he is lying, the behavior he is lying to conceal is worse than fraud.

No matter how you slice it, Wallace seems like a bad actor here. And then it's just a multiple choice quiz as to which unethical, illegal activity he engaged in.

Wild.

I’m sure this will turn out to be as accurate as the 1000 bot army that one or more of you claimed Wallace employed and would easily be proven after discovery.

You're sure *what* will be that accurate? Wallace either lied to his clients or he lied in his deposition. There is no other option, as there is multiple documented instances of Wallace telling clients that he employed a team of people who could manipulate algorithms to boost certain content and suppress other content, and there is documentation that he was paid tens of thousands of dollars a month to do this. But in his deposition, he says he employed no team, that he is the only employee of Street Relations, and that the only work he has ever done for clients is to monitor online activity on their behalf.

So: fraud or perjury? Which do you think it is?

Anonymous wrote:The easy way to spot a bot. They post the same thing over and over. They have a new talking point each day. Today is perjury day. I think we are over two dozen non responsive posts.

They also like to report any post that calls out how crazy this appears to Jeff, hoping a new poster doesn’t realize they’ve been saying the same thing over and over for literally pages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another question: Wallace's deposition seems so obviously to be loaded with falsehoods that it seems crazy to me. Like just for instance, here is a conversation from October 2024 between Melissa Nathan, Jed Wallace, and a redacted entity (a client of TAG and Wallace) discussing work TAG and Wallace are doing for the client: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1043.10.pdf

The conversation clearly shows TAG and Wallace discussing, in some detail, manipulating algorithms on behalf of the client in order to suppress certain info and promote other info. In his deposition, Wallace denies this is something he does, or is even capable of doing, and claims this was entirely "puffery."

If Wallace is telling the truth in his deposition, then he was lying to this client and, as well as Wayfarer, about his abilities and his actual work, while collecting large payments. That's fraud. On the other hand, if he's lying in his deposition, that's perjury. If he's committing perjury, you have to ask why, which raises the strong likelihood that if he is lying, the behavior he is lying to conceal is worse than fraud.

No matter how you slice it, Wallace seems like a bad actor here. And then it's just a multiple choice quiz as to which unethical, illegal activity he engaged in.

Wild.

I’m sure this will turn out to be as accurate as the 1000 bot army that one or more of you claimed Wallace employed and would easily be proven after discovery.

Anonymous wrote:I am the author of 17:22 and 17:36, these were my first and only posts on the subject of potential perjury (which I learned about for the first time upon reading this thread), and I have never reported posts in this thread to Jeff. Feel free to ask Jeff if this is true.

One sign of a troll is when they want to change the subject, they'll start calling people bots or start "boards on boards" discussions in an effort to shift focus off of discussion that is not favorable to the side for which they advocate.

Anonymous wrote:Another question: Wallace's deposition seems so obviously to be loaded with falsehoods that it seems crazy to me. Like just for instance, here is a conversation from October 2024 between Melissa Nathan, Jed Wallace, and a redacted entity (a client of TAG and Wallace) discussing work TAG and Wallace are doing for the client: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.1043.10.pdf

The conversation clearly shows TAG and Wallace discussing, in some detail, manipulating algorithms on behalf of the client in order to suppress certain info and promote other info. In his deposition, Wallace denies this is something he does, or is even capable of doing, and claims this was entirely "puffery."

If Wallace is telling the truth in his deposition, then he was lying to this client and, as well as Wayfarer, about his abilities and his actual work, while collecting large payments. That's fraud. On the other hand, if he's lying in his deposition, that's perjury. If he's committing perjury, you have to ask why, which raises the strong likelihood that if he is lying, the behavior he is lying to conceal is worse than fraud.

No matter how you slice it, Wallace seems like a bad actor here. And then it's just a multiple choice quiz as to which unethical, illegal activity he engaged in.

Wild.