The SFWA ghosted Patrick

[guest]

Patrick had free reign of the money*. It was either a loan or gift as per SFWA rules.
SFWA running any of the 'ops' would open them up to massive liability.
you cannot sue someone by proxy, particularly being a charity or company. There are specific laws against that.
If they wanted to sue themselves, they would just have their own name on the suit.
It was such a flimsy premise that the butthurt "victims" had to organise it as a loan/gift to fatty. He was only made a member again just before the lawsuit was launched. They could probably fudge the paperwork to have it be a legal fund for a member but not something that SFWA itself culd bring.

*given to fatty by rambo et al on the provisio of wink wink "its to help all SFWA members you see" (ticks a box for the loan/gift to be approved)

there was like 8-10 people max being made fun of, out of thousands of members. Some of them had the authority to sign off on this vanity lawsuit. I hope CWC does a in depth video of this when we have more information.

You make an excellent point. At a minimum, I do believe Patrick's lawsuit, however the payments flowed from the SFWA to Brinton's law firm, WAS funded by Cat Rambo as a proxy battle against the trolls because she was upset with them.

Didn't Jerry Jen request the SFWA to open up their books, causing the SFWA to immediately lawyer up to prevent that from happening? Or is that an event I imagined in a fever dream? So much has happened it's difficult to recall...

 

[guest]

You make an excellent point. At a minimum, I do believe Patrick's lawsuit, however the payments flowed from the SFWA to Brinton's law firm, WAS funded by Cat Rambo as a proxy battle against the trolls because she was upset with them.

Didn't Jerry Jen request the SFWA to open up their books, causing the SFWA to immediately lawyer up to prevent that from happening? Or is that an event I imagined in a fever dream? So much has happened it's difficult to recall...

@quasi101 not sure if you're able to speak to this, if you're not inclined don't sweat it

 

[PorqueDealer]

You make an excellent point. At a minimum, I do believe Patrick's lawsuit, however the payments flowed from the SFWA to Brinton's law firm, WAS funded by Cat Rambo as a proxy battle against the trolls because she was upset with them.

It was, but it couldn't have SWFA name on it. At that point Pat wanted to be the "troll hunter" man and did have a basis for attempting a lawsuit. That would get round any proxy lawsuit issues. Pat would have happily been the man who took down the trolls with no monetary gain. He just wanted to be heard (and famous)

Didn't Jerry Jen request the SFWA to open up their books, causing the SFWA to immediately lawyer up to prevent that from happening? Or is that an event I imagined in a fever dream? So much has happened it's difficult to recall...

He did and they paid out $10k to say that they only had the last 4 digits of his payment card for his membership and shut anything else down.

 

[Udders]

You make an excellent point. At a minimum, I do believe Patrick's lawsuit, however the payments flowed from the SFWA to Brinton's law firm, WAS funded by Cat Rambo as a proxy battle against the trolls because she was upset with them.

Didn't Jerry Jen request the SFWA to open up their books, causing the SFWA to immediately lawyer up to prevent that from happening? Or is that an event I imagined in a fever dream? So much has happened it's difficult to recall...

The SWFA paid a lawyer $5k to somehow convince a judge that communications and records on one individual within a limited period of time was somehow too broad of an ask. They're terrified of whatever went on behind the scenes there coming out.

 

[quasi101]

The whole thing is very strange; even stranger, I actually believe Patrick here, at least to a certain extent... And even stranger yet, while fuck that FFWBT for filing that ridiculous lolsuit, I actually feel some empathy for him, because over the years it's become apparent he's been getting used over and over and over again by the people surrounding him: Cat Rambo / the SFWA, Brinton, and Jackie.

When discussing the lawsuit in interviews Patrick portrays himself as the tip of the spear -- the big, bad troll hunter. But has Patrick ever not exaggerated himself and his achievements when talking about anything he's done? In reality, I don't think Patrick was involved much at all with the lawsuit apart from putting his name on it*; an angry Cat Rambo saw him as a conduit to lash out at trolls, and Brinton saw him as a way to collect billable hours.

Think about it: presumably, the SFWA didn't wire Patrick $100k to use for the lawsuit; they would've been sending money directly to the lawyers. Lawyers want to get paid, so I'm confident the SFWA and Brinton + Co. signed a payment agreement directly, with the limitations clearly laid out and stipulated (the SFWA wouldn't give them a blank check).

So when Patrick says he wasn't notified he could appeal: I actually believe him. Why WOULD Brinton ask Patrick if he wants to appeal; he would've asked the SFWA, the ones cutting the checks, and the SFWA declined. The SFWA also probably took a closer look at the lawsuit at this point, saw how bungled it was and complained or even asked for a fee reduction, possibly contributing to Brinton's exit from the firm.

In a moral sense, I think the SFWA did Pat kinda dirty by not covering the SLAPP fees, but in a business and legal sense it was to be expected. Cat Rambo was gone at this point, Pat had signed an NDA with the SFWA so he couldn't make a stink on Twitter, and the SFWA's agreement with Brinton's firm was undoubtedly airtight and explicit about the extent of their financial obligations; of course they weren't going to return Patrick's calls, they weren't on the hook to pay the defendant's legal fees.

It seems like a safe bet that prior to the debt being domesticated, Patrick assumed the SFWA would pick up the SLAPP tab and therefore just went back to "no childing" on Twitter. As he has stated before in interviews, he really had no clue what he was getting into when he signed his name on that lawsuit.

*The one factor I can think of that points away from this is the refusal to remove John Doe #1; no lawyer wants to take a L, so it's quite possible that at some point Brinton floated the idea and Patrick turned it down. Then again, Brinton doesn't seem very smart (Stavros Esquire was a total joke), so it's also feasible that they just stuck with the original filing because Brinton didn't understand the issue. It's just as feasible that to the limited extent that Patrick was involved, it was to shoot themselves in the foot, which we all know Patrick is wont to do.

this is putting way to much thought into post hoc justifications to make it a more coherent narrative. It's very stupid and vindictive people making mistakes and not compromising.


The one thing I will agree with is around the domestication part but this is evidence towards my stupidity theory. There was one tweet exchange very early on that clued me into the 1.2-pointing-at-your-fat-head logic. Some troll on twitter had mentioned something about the debt and then posted the court sanction screenshot. Rick did his "don't owe a penny stlaker ahhhchaaachaaa dance". but then I've only seen him reference this once or twice. Something to the effect of "i don't live in California stlaker". Which basically clued me into his retard logic. He likely had no conception that a debt could be domesticated or that the states in , you know, the united states actually respected debt. A few other things he said confirmed that he though it was like the venue jurisdiction. Where as long as he never went to California he could ignore it.

 

[quasi101]

The SWFA paid a lawyer $5k to somehow convince a judge that communications and records on one individual within a limited period of time was somehow too broad of an ask. They're terrified of whatever went on behind the scenes there coming out.

It was a bad ruling , but that shit happens. Unlike Rick I know when to pick my battles. I was going to go for round two in santa clara this month but the payments were coming in already. He ended up having to pay for jerry's time anyway lol.

 

[quasi101]

@quasi101 not sure if you're able to speak to this, if you're not inclined don't sweat it

I don't really know that much more I just have some extra data to extrapolate from. The SFWA was involved but its likely much less than you're assuming. THis was all fatso. THe complaint read just like shit he'd complain about. The call to stavros that was the "i...don't know the proper protocol" all that shit was him. This was his lawsuit. how they paid him and then the attorneys I have no idea, but the creative force behind the shenanigans were him.

 

[Imager]

This was his lawsuit. how they paid him and then the attorneys I have no idea, but the creative force behind the shenanigans were him.

No wonder it was a failure by every measurement.

 

[guest]

@PorqueDealer I think we're mostly on the same page here, but given the SFWA running scared I'm going to go full retard and double down on the hypotheses that some sort of impropriety occurred within the love triangle of the SFWA, Brinton's law firm, and Patrick in the nexus (thanks for this word Jackie, I like it) of direct financial transactions and communications between SFWA <--> Brinton + Co.

My reasoning is as follows:

Here is a link to the SFWA legal fund overview, I don't recall when the lolsuit was initially filed so I arbitrarily grabbed an archived link from 2020, the verbiage doesn't appear to have changed since this on the live webpage today: [URL]https://web.archive.org/web/20200401125248/https://www.sfwa.org/about/benevolent-funds/legal-fund/[/URL]

Here's a screenshot of section 1:

1.1 states that yeah, it can give loans to members... 1.2 states it can fund legal action in the name of the SFWA... but check out 1.3.

1.3: "To fund or contribute to the funding of court actions brought by others in issues which are of importance to SFWA's members and the business of writing and which may help to raise SFWA's profile as a pro-active writers' organization."

...this HAS to be the clause under which Patrick got the lolsuit funded. And the language regarding HOW funds may be dispersed is murkier than stealthygeek's toilet.

Patrick didn't get a loan from the SFWA, he ain't paying them anything back. And if the OP post is believed to be from Nikki, check out this language: "This lawsuit was funded by a professional organization Patrick is a member of."

I also believe it's possible Pat murdered Bernell so take all this with a shaker full of salt.

 

[NoBacon]

Can u FOIA a charity

 

[quasi101]

section 1.3.....1.3.... gpa.....

 

[quasi101]

Can u FOIA a charity

no idea, but you could sue them for damages if you were a member. Or report them to the ir[redacted per request by kiwifarms]

 

[guest]

I don't really know that much more I just have some extra data to extrapolate from. The SFWA was involved but its likely much less than you're assuming. THis was all fatso. THe complaint read just like shit he'd complain about. The call to stavros that was the "i...don't know the proper protocol" all that shit was him. This was his lawsuit. how they paid him and then the attorneys I have no idea, but the creative force behind the shenanigans were him.

Oh man I forgot about Patrick kool-aid manning his way into that Zoom court session!

 

[NoBacon]

no idea, but you could sue them for damages if you were a member. Or report them to the ir[redacted per request by kiwifarms]

That guy on Reddit who isn’t me already reported their suspicions to the IRS a long time ago. I wonder if they looked into it.

Not even sure why I have to say it was the guy on Reddit that isn’t me, it’s a very real concern and I’m encouraged to do so as a good citizen.

 

[NoBacon]

 

[Farmer Brown]

It was a bad ruling , but that shit happens. Unlike Rick I know when to pick my battles. I was going to go for round two in santa clara this month but the payments were coming in already. He ended up having to pay for jerry's time anyway lol.

May I ask how you found your lawyers?

 

[BakersfieldChimp]

View attachment 189502

Maybe you can let that Twitter user know that the IRS would consider money given to someone for legal fees a gift and would also consider it taxable. (Taxable for the receiver, e.g. the Pigman)

Reporting is easy and anonymous: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/how-do-you-report-suspected-tax-fraud-activity

Sometimes they'll even give the reporter a reward!

 

[guest]

May I ask how you found your lawyers?

Yeah I'm curious about this as well, hopefully I never need one but you had sharks

 

[NoBacon]

Maybe you can let that Twitter user know that the IRS would consider money given to someone for legal fees a gift and would also consider it taxable. (Taxable for the receiver, e.g. the Pigman)

Reporting is easy and anonymous: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/how-do-you-report-suspected-tax-fraud-activity

Sometimes they'll even give the reporter a reward!

 

[quasi101]

May I ask how you found your lawyers?

I only had a few days. Piece of shit cloudflare was going to turn over my data. Here's the email i get on

Wed, Apr 7, 2021

To Whom It May Concern:

We received the attached subpoena regarding a domain(s) managed through your Cloudflare account.

The subpoena requires us to provide information in our systems related to these websites. We have determined that this is a valid subpoena, and we are required to provide the requested information. In accordance with our Privacy Policy, we are informing you before we provide any of the requested subscriber information.

We plan to turn over documents in response to the subpoena unless you intervene in the case within one (1) week of the date of this notice. Please know that removing or deleting content will not halt this process. If you plan to intervene in this process, we would suggest that you contact local counsel at your earliest convenience.

Regards,

Cloudflare Legal Department

We have determined that this is a valid subpoena

have you???

we are required to provide the requested information

Actually you're not.


So I had to find an attorney, retain them, explain the situation and have them file a notice to cloudflare to not release any information. That subpoena was sent on Feb 12, so they waited two months to give me a heads up.

So I didn't have much time. As soon as I received that I had to start researching my options. Eventually I came to understanding that I need a motion to quash. I then researched where I was allowed to quash a subpoena and in what jurisdiction or venue. I knew Wisconsin didn't have anti-slapp and was likely not friendly. Turned out , luckily that you can quash in the county where the subpeona was served on. I figured California had better laws for this so I searched for a bit to see how i could get attorneys fees back if possible. If I couldn't I'd have just let the subpeona go through. Cloudflare didn't have my financial information and only had a protonmail address and maybe an ip when i didn't use a vpn or something. But since i could get my fees back, it wasn't worth the risk of them going through that task. At this point I had no idea how much money was backing him.

Once i found the statute,

https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/code-of-civil-procedure/ccp-sect-1987-2/

I knew if the quash went through it would apply

(c) If a motion is filed under Section 1987.1 for an order to quash or modify a subpoena from a court of this state for personally identifying information, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 1798.79.8 of the Civil Code, for use in an action pending in another state, territory, or district of the United States, or in a foreign nation, and that subpoena has been served on any Internet service provider, or on the provider of any other interactive computer service, as defined in Section 230(f)(2) of Title 47 of the United States Code, if the moving party prevails, and if the underlying action arises from the moving party's exercise of free speech rights on the Internet and the respondent has failed to make a prima facie showing of a cause of action, the court shall award the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including reasonable attorney's fees.

This took me about 2 days to research though so I only had 5. I searched online for various firms with keywords around "quash subpeona" and then added that specific statute. i wanted someone familiar with foreign subpoenas and then hopefully also familiar with the sanctions. I called about 5 or 6. Only two called me back. One was just like a mayr single person firm. The other was Kronenberg's firm. Once I talked to Jeff he knew his shit and mentioned the krinsky stuff so I knew he had dealt with this before.


Maybe I got lucky. If I had more time and could do it differently i'd search various cases in the SF portal to find quashes that succeeded and which firms were successful.