I didn’t say you called me a liar. Once again, the only one who’s got a reading comprehension problem seems to be you. I insisted you not accuse me of conflating things I wasn’t conflating, and made a separate point about how you shouldn’t just assume someone who’s interpreting something differently is being…

And I’m sorry that you stand by misinformation. I can’t do more than point out where you’re wrong; if you presist in ignoring reality after that I can’t help you. I can only hope other readers see the several places you have gone wrong, as you’ve made it clear you don’t want to discuss this with anything based on…

Actually, I didn’t say or suggest it would require lying on his part. If someone is seriously wanting to kill themselves and the only barrier is that they don’t think they can do it themselves, it would not be unreasonable to sign an affidavit that you think they’re at risk for self-harm, any more than it would be to…

Your original post was sweeping, implying generally that he wouldn’t. That’s false. It may be true in your jurisdiction, but unless that jurisdiction is Ohio, I’m not sure what the relevancy is, and your generalization would still hold as false. It’s also worth noting that in some jurisdictions, “72 hour hold” is a…

Unfortunately, you are mistaken. I don’t know Ohio’s laws, but in many jurisdictions all you need to do is sign an affidavit attesting likely harm to self or others to get an initial petition filed. I speak both from professional experience and because it was done (not by me) to my wife.

I used to own one of those “looks old” CD player/Record player/Radio boxes, but it was always overpriced garbage (I paid like 250 for it over a decade ago). Now I use the Sylvania one that Amazon has for 28 bucks that works off battery or USB power. Works better, is portable, and if anything goes wrong it’s not hard…

When a high school teacher is sleeping with his student, it’s not a plotwise shock he’s a killer too.

There was a pretty big clue in...the first episode, I think? If you listen in on a phone conversation he was having with someone, he says something that made me assume they were sleeping together—obviously, there’s more goin’ on than that, and it might not even be that, but I figured he was sleeping with her; I’ve…

Only if the developers sue. You. ..do know the police don’t enforce contracts, right? And so the only way to get any kind of adjudication is through a civil suit (or theoretically arbitration)?

So you’re just assuming, then, despite the plain meaning of the words being different. Given that they have a vested interest in that interpretation now (and might not have before), your confidence seems very misplaced. They want out. ...even within that clause they didn’t follow the rules (nothing in writing), so…

How precisely do you know that was the point of it? Because the language does not say that, and it’s just as plausible they didn’t want to have to pay out to some company that changed hands.

Did your sources give you the same language Paterk provided? Given that language, there’s SEVERAL possible problems with how Ouya handled this, and the developers should be talking to lawyers. Heck, if they can hit a milestone before they wind up getting written notice, that’d be something at least. It would be…

Based on that language, Ouya is in the wrong; it says “other party”:

Here’s going the meaty ones use fake meat (unlike the bacon ones last round) so I can actually try them

Refusing to let the police search is not grounds for probable cause (it would defeat the purpose of the concept), so they couldn’t use that against him. Neither is it being his employee, on its own, sufficient. That said, there’s a multitude of things and reasons it could be, from his own involvement to simple…

I’ve recently been going through something relatively similar with my wife. Except the health issues were psychological, and the “distance” was “cheating”. We’re getting separated now, but it’s fucking heartbreaking and, to be honest, the reasoning behind it is maddening, because she thinks her issues will magically…

You don’t consider putting knowingly baseless information in your complaint to be abuse of the complaint system? Generally speaking, I would. I would say that any time you aren’t acting in good faith (and putting information you know to be baseless meets my standard for not acting in good faith), you’re abusing the…

So, it seems you’re okay with them abusing the process of Title IX complaints because you support their cause? And you feel that if an administrator DOESN’T support abusing the Title IX process, that they should just shut up about it and not note that?

Didn’t they force a response by filling a title IX complaint? If so, then, given that the complaint seems to be premised on obvious falsehoods, I don’t see why he’s wrong to say so...how else should he respond?

Not to be that guy, but as a heads up I’m fairly certain you mean University of Arizona, not University of Tucson.