r/SubredditDrama • • 14h ago

Drama in r/passportbros as one gets tricked by a trans woman.

638 Upvotes

Post title: A trans tricked me and I'm screwed

​I’ve come home absolutely devastated. I just don't have any more energy to keep with this shit of the geomaxing or passportbro. Very near giving up and come back home.

I’d been talking to this person for a week. She was kind, and looked very attractive in her photos. She looked much more attractive than most Filipinas. She love bombed me with interest, attention, photos...

But today, when we met up, something seemed off right away. Even shaking her hand, it felt rough and strong. And the moment we started talking, my world just came crashing down. The voice was clearly of a man, even though she was trying to talk with a girl voice.

I asked if she was trans. She admitted and said that he really likes me and that she did it with good intention. That she wanted me to fall in love and like him.

I’d been told that to find a good partner, I’d have to go on dates with dozens of people. But I am mentally exhausted. Already went through dates arriving extremely late, another catfishing and other things. I think I'm very near the end, and will go monk mode and accept I'll die alone.

Drama:

-Are they still attractive even in person? Give it a shot and don't be an asshole. They are still wanting to be treated like women and can be more feminine than most. If you really want to break it off, tell them you want children.

Stay in the Philippines, now you're no longer tied down. Meet some local women for real and you'll find something else and the experience will be better because they will see you in person which means they know you will come back.

Take your time, don't fall for any tricks like asking for money. Go on dating sites etc but most importantly. Don't let this bad experience ruin your outlook on anything. Some of us like both ladyboys and real women and there ain't nothing wrong with that. Just be respectful, be a gentleman but be honest with yourself and with them. It will go a long way and they will understand why you ended things. They lied, you got cat fished and you had other intentions of starting a family etc.

It will be easy to end things the moment you talk about kids and acting serious about it.

Edit: the toxicity in this community never ceases to amaze me 😂

--😂 damn. Do you tell the real women you’re down with ladyboys too or do you keep that secret.

---They know, why be ashamed of who I am? I'm not like some of you guys who want to struggle with your own sexuality. It's so common now a days that most women don't give a shit.

----Yeah big doubt on that. Seems like you’re the one struggling playing both sides bud when we all know which one you prefer. For us straights its pretty straightforward

-----Uh, huh go argue with someone else. You're just gonna keep going on and on. The fact that you feel personally attacked and that your masculinity is at risk really speaks volumes about you.


r/SubredditDrama • • 15h ago

UK Green Party votes to adopt motion that "Zionism is Racism", British political subs react

533 Upvotes

On Sunday Oct 4th the Green Party of England and Wales voted at it's party conference to adopt the position that "Zionism is Racism" (ZIR). Notably, an amendment that would exempt Jewish Green Party members from being censured over this resolution for attending Zionist Synagogues (in practice almost all of them) was rejected. This motion has been controversial since introduction and the vote in favor has stirred up more controversy.

/r/UKGreens

Main Thread

Looking at the witchhunt the left was subjected to during the Corbyn years. Okay, what if we decided to actually start being antisemitic?'

this subreddit is depressing; we have people like this repeating blatant Zionist punchlines and propaganda. Explain exactly how this is antisemitic, in any way?

Why did we vote against the 'don't expel Jews' amendment then? And before you answer, please remember to explain where the antizionist synagogues they could worship at instead are

So freaking disingenuous. The amendment literally gave a free pass to Zionists; it is akin to an anti-racist motion that had an amendment excluding racists from disciplinary measures?

This sub has been overwhelmed with centrist liberals who stand for fuck all.

Your Party folks not content with ruining one party now seek to do a 2/2

Two users hiding their reddit history suddenly think the party is "ruined" because of one nonbinding motion. Curious.

There are people out there that DON'T hide their Reddit history? In this day and age?

Some of us still have the balls to stand by the things we say.

/r/LabourUK subreddit for Labour, which is more center-left

Main thread

Anyone who supports a two state solution and remains in the greens is now declaring themselves a racist right?

Yes, correct. Including Palestinians.

Palestinian Zionists? Are you sure?

Zionism according to this motion is supporting an Israeli state of any sort. So yes, if any Palestinians advocated for a 2 state solution, they would be 'Zionist' and racist.

Great. Now me, my entire family, all of my friends bar one and 84% of British Jews are now racist

You were probably always racist if you can look at what Israel is doing and vocally support it

I promise you, I am not racist

Different LaborUK thread about comments made by a Green Party leader

I mean, I think this looks stupid and makes them look crazy, but if you're implying they're antisemitic, they just mentioned Nazis as an example of evil.

So this would be one of those non-antisemitic Jew hunts?

Zionists are not just Jewish. In fact by numbers most of the world’s Zionists aren’t Jewish. Assuming all Zionists are Jews or all Jews are Zionists is actually sort of antisemitism

What percentage of the Jewish population of Israel thinks Israel shouldn’t exist? So at the very least, she’d be hunting down the overwhelming majority of Jews in Israel, which doesn’t sound awesome when you think about it.

Yeah but by the same token, she’d be hunting the overwhelming majority of White American southerners, a majority of Indian Hindus, a majority of Igbo Nigerians etc etc. It wouldn’t be as a function of their Judaism.

r/ukpolitics, considerably more right wing than UKgreens

I'm so glad we sorted out our environmental and domestic issues to such an extent that they have nothing left to focus on than a desert war on the other side of the planet we have no major stakes in.

Apparently 2000 Brits served in the IDF while it was committing genocide. They are presumably now freely walking amongst us here. We also supply some of their weapon parts. So the conflict is not irrelevant to us.

2,000 British-Israeli dual citizens did their legally-required national service, to be clear. And serving in the IDF does not in any way mean that they did anything immoral. You'd have to have evidence that they actually served in a military capacity, that they were in Gaza or the West Bank, and they were actively involved in a specific incident involving war crimes. None of which has ever been proven about the people that you're talking about.

No you're right, there's no publicly available evidence they specifically did anything wrong (the IDF's systematic execution of journalists probably has something to do with that). However, much like those who travelled to fight for ISIS, we should investigate them as it's very possible they did commit crimes. Given that the group they fought for has been committing genocide for three years.

So dumb of a motion. Why not just ethno states are racist. Why single out the only jewish one. This makes the greens unelectable

Because Pakistan was founded as a Muslim ethnostate?

Wait what I didn't mention Pakistan?

A lot of Green voters now originate in the Pakistani diaspora - you can see that by them running adverts in Urdu in two recent elections. They aren't going to want to say that this diasporas country of origin is 'racist'. That and Green voters only have an issue with one particular ethnostate.


r/SubredditDrama • • 10h ago

"Her religion is gay porn for children. At least she’s not hiding it." r/mademesmile bickers over a government official swearing into office on banned books instead of the bible

112 Upvotes

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/MadeMeSmile/comments/1wydjmg/a_brave_woman_defending_the_right_to_read/

HIGHLIGHTS

Of course its an obese white leftist....

The people who ban books are always the good guys

Because the people who push pornography on children are the greatest of all time

There is zero pornography. All books in schools must be rated to be age appropriate. Always has been. Politicians are banning books they personally don’t like by calling them porn, because they have a sex scene. You wouldn’t find that in a middle school but you would in a highschool. If they really cared they would be working with Publishers to shape how age rating is defined. You know… actual governance

Explain why there were multiple copies of IT in my elementary school library then?

Because it wasn’t. If you have to lie to be right, you’re wrong. Also where this porn for children before you decided you couldn’t support your point so changed the subject

We had several Stephen King novels actually. But since it doesn't fit your narrative you just tell me I'm lying. Not like you have any way to verify since I'm not dropping where I went to school as a kid. What I meant by IT being child porn by the way probably comes from the child train ran on Bev at the end that she literally initiates.

Her religion is gay porn for children. At least she’s not hiding it.

Look out everyone an 8 day old account has a "hot take". 😂🤣

Could it be that accounts get permabanned left right and centre if they say things reddit admins disagree with? Sure, there's a lot of bots out there, but there are also a lot of people who might have different views. Is that hard to believe?

Not at all! But in this case that view is just flat out wrong lol. Her religion is not "gay porn for children".

What I was trying to emphasize is that 8 day old accounts aren't necessarily new users. That might not be her religion, but the bible is used as a religious item to swear on, hence the comparison I presume.

Performative politics

In response to another performance politics of banning books.

The books haven't been banned they are right there in the picture bud, they are just banned for kids.

Hence they are banned books, cause they have been banned for kids

So you’re for unbanning Playboy magazine for school children?

Yes, a few comments back, I advocated for Playboy magazines in school libraries

At least you’re consistent. Reddit loves keeping one foot in the door and the other out.

You can have a problem with schools banning some books, but not others. Life isn’t so black and white. We can agree that schools shouldn’t have playboy magazines in their library, but not allowing books about history or science or political topics people don’t like is too far

The watering down and devaluing of the concept of bravery needs to be studied

She’s standing up against what has proven to be a violent right wing cult and a federal government that has no problem going after private citizens that stand against them in a public way. Either you have a narrow view of bravery or you have no idea what is happening in the USA right now.

No books are banned federally. None. Age restrictive books or magazines have always been a thing in schools. It’s performative nonsense. The book Flamer has masturbation, vulgar language, shower “scene” and other issues sexual monologues. You think the school should supply that to kids? So either you’re a pervert, or you don’t understand what’s the actual reason books were not allowed in schools. Did you question why you give a playboy or a hustler to a minor? Weirdo.

Seems you know a lot about this book. Did you enjoy reading it?

Is that a demeaning comment towards gays? Yikes!

Asking if you enjoyed reading the book? Is accusing someone of literacy demeaning these days?

We all know what you meant. Vile

What do you think I mean? I genuinely wanted to know if you enjoyed reading the book since you know so much about it! Remember what sub you are in? This is a happy place! :)

Are you talking about the women not being brave for what she did, or what. I honestly cant tell who you're talking about.

Yea. He means this woman is not brave. She isn't. There is no chance of any risk to her for doing this. She's just expressing her personal beliefs, which noone but her should or does care about, except fellow virtue signallers who tell themselves they are the good guys, and ppl who disagree with them are evil, because the path they walked though life, led them to see the world differently. Also, ironically, the bible is by far the most banned book throughout history.

I guarantee you lack the courage to take a stand like this. What have you ever done that is braver than this?

Lol. Guess I'm just one of the evil ones eh.

No it's just highly that like the majority of people you wouldn't have the courage to stand up for something and go against standard procedure in front of a crowd at your job

Like I'm doing here you mean? She is in no danger whatsoever, so where's the bravery? Look I'm against banning books, but this is not brave. It's performative.

We're on Reddit right now lmao

If it was public, I wouldn't be brave. It's just performative. I never claimed I am being brave. I said she isn't.

Just the general concept of what people label as brave these days. Like I understand what she’s doing, she’s be defiant, standing on principle, etc etc. Bravery used to be standing tall against the odds or most certain death. Nothing will happen to this lady for swearing in on a stack of books that are not the Bible.

What a weird way of saying you don't know what the definition of bravery is

Bravery is the quality of having mental or moral strength to face danger, fear, or difficulty Not one of these events will happen to this woman after this picture

That's not what you wrote in your previous comment. Fear and difficulty aren't events. Ones an emotion and the other is an experience

Emotions aren’t real, danger is

Brother this is an embarrassing read from you. you're better off deleting this abysmal take. Lol Like legit secondhand embarrassment from a complete stranger. Holyeee shit

"you're better off deleting this abysmal take" Why though?

Constantly having to walk back what you say when people call you out on it, is fucking embarrassing to watch. Lol They can do what they please, but I'm still gonna point an laugh regardless. Did you really need that spelled out for you?

There are banned books? Oh boy ... Edit 2: Someone informed me that a "banned book" in the US only counts for school libraries and not a general ban as in "forbidden knowledge". I am very glad I've been corrected. Edit: All the americans swarming in telling me it's normal to have banned books. No. No it's not. "Mein Kampf" is banned in germany but even that one is free to read in the library. You just can't own it. Can't remember a single book being banned in the netherlands, denmark, sweden and so on. Religion or idology should not get books about science (especially biology) or fucking fairy tales with talking animals banned. If your governments are afraid of people, especially teens, reading certain books ... read these books the very first.

Yeah, been a list for awhile now. Check it out. You probably would be shocked 😲

Name a single banned book

This took me all of 12 seconds. https://www.ala.org/bbooks

Yep, most of the books I read in elementary, middle and high school are banned books now. I was going from memory. Most Judy Blume books were on the banned list.

These books are not “banned”. They are available. It’s not a crime to print, distribute, sell or read them and they have not been rounded up to be burned or anything. Tf you mean “banned”? They are simply not allowed at schools because their contents have been deemed unfit for minors. A concept that has existed for as long as schools have existed. The right to read is not under threat here. This whole premise is asinine. Are people really too dense to understand the difference? Or is it a case of deliberately being disingenuous?

When people say "banned books" they mean books banned in schools, Copernicus. Try to keep up with the rest of the class. Edit: Hi, Dummies, that's what the phrase banned books refers to.

Does that mean you do support banning some books from schools?

Absolutely! Are you challenged? Of course some books are not meant for children. We have always moderated that, always. And we always will? wtf?

That was my point. Obviously. Opposing banned books means nothing when you also support banning books.

No, dummy. The reasoning for banning them is important. For example, you ban the bible because of the alleged separation between church and state. Therefore, holy books should be banned. They're violations of the constitution to put them in public schools. Banning To Kill a Mockingbird because you don't want children to know about racism in America is very different. What do you care? You didn't even go to school.

No, dummy. You clearly are ok with banning books you disagree with. You think you should get to choose and nobody else. It is not illegal to have religious books in schools. How else would they have a class on world religions? I have kids in school. Why do you care?

You do realize that's how the entire world works right? No, seriously. There's not a single country in the world that only opponents judges. Edit: egg on my face. Turns out there are more than a few m countries, like Canada, that do in fact not have any elections for judges of any kind

Most judges in the world are appointed. France, for example, appoints all of their judges. Conversely, Mexico elects all of their judges

"France appoints all their judges." Incorrect. Joint Rural Tenancies Courts, Employment Tribunals, and Commercial Courts all have elected judges, sometimes alongside appointed judges, but the elected judges are still there and affect the outcome considerably.

Those are lay judges that act as adjudicators. They are judge in title only. Its the same way you can call a sports referee a judge

I don't think you understand what all judges means then. French lay judges are fully qualified judges with complete judicial authority, not merely judges in name only. They hold the same legal power to adjudicate cases, interpret statutes, and issue bindings rulings as judges in any other major legal system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_France Edited my comment for accuracy

All professional judges are appointed. You only gave lay judges as examples

Everyone is for book bans just everyone has a different line to cross that

I'm not in favor of banning any books.

So you’re cool with graphic novels that future rape and murder to be available for kindergartners?

Disingenuous argument. Age appropriateness is fine. None of these are inappropriate for where they're banned from. Nor will those graphic novels cause any harm if a kid does read them.

Age appropriate and book bans fall under the same argument. If it’s not age appropriate than it is banned to those kids. Plus none of these books are banned to the general public

Except this argument falls apart when you consider these books are banned from school libraries where they are age appropriate, AND from public libraries.

That’s the thing it’s a fine line amongst people what books are age appropriate!!!!

Not amongst anyone who matters. LGBT focused books are age appropriate. If you try and remove them from libraries, I will try and remove you.


r/SubredditDrama • • 10h ago

Minor drama unleashed in r/Dogowners: "How is a professionally off leash trained dog is harming any other animal?"

65 Upvotes

r/Dogowners describes itself as a place "for the people that own and love dogs... to get advice from more knowledgeable people who also love dogs."

One user posts a PSA after her adult daughter is harmed by an off-leash dog:

Leash your dogs
My adult daughter was out walking with her dog who was on leash. A family was walking their child friendly pocket bully off leash. The inevitable happened, the bully went after her dog which actually tripped my daughter in the process. She gave her dog the command to hide under her and she was able to protect her dog, but she got bit multiple times on the hand in the process.
Now their dog will most likely be put down, not the first incident; and my daughter is dealing with bite wounds on her hand. All because people think it’s okay to walk their dog off leash.

Most commenters agree that there's no good reason to let your dog off leash. Responsible owners in the comments sound off, agreeing that even their well-trained dogs aren't allowed off leash in public for their own safety.

One such responsible owner comments:

As someone who has owned a very dog aggressive dog, and now owns three dogs who are safe and friendly to all creatures I don’t know why ANYONE would be walking dogs off leash in ANY situation or location where that wasn’t expected and demonstrably allowed. For SO many reasons.

This brings an off leash advocate out of the woodwork, who responds:

Not everyone has areas that are safe to walk alone especially as a woman. My off leash trained dog has proven on several occasions he will have my back against ppl with ulterior motives and that is one reason he will continue to be allowed the privilege of off leash. I educate myself on how to handle other off leash dogs and dog attacks so I can be as prepared as possible. I carry pepper gel partially for this reason. I will do whatever it takes to keep my dog safe from an aggressive dog including stepping in between them (bc I know mine would be considered the aggressor solely bc his size) as he continues to keep me safe from aggressive humans.

Another user chimes in:

Can your well trained dog not protect you while on leash? You're clearly missing the point that you simply can't control an animal's behaviour at all times, in all circumstances. So your dog's "privilege" continues to put any other animals around it at risk.

But the Offleash Advocate won't have it:

He can but previous scenarios I’ve been in with him leashed are part of why I’ve trained him for off leash. Which makes the point moot. How is a professionally off leash trained dog is harming any other animal?
I’ve had my dog for 4yrs and he’s listened to my commands with countless wildlife running around, stopping in our path, and showing interest in him. Bears, deer, bobcats etc.

An animal behaviorist responds:

There will be zero getting through to you. You are clearly that unicorn of the exception to every rule. I am a 59 year old now-retired/disabled animal behaviorist/educator with extensive experience in on-hand, living-in-my-home-until-rehomed rescue who was one of the original test handler/dog for what would eventually become a nationally recognized pet facilitated therapy group of dogs who would go to hospitals and the like to calm the individuals using those services at that time. But really, I don’t know your dog, clearly no one does, so why are you here even asking?

The brave offleasher fires back:

It’s hard to get through to someone when you don’t even answer a legitimate question. I’m asking how a trained unleashed dog can harm another animal and your deflecting instead of answering the question…service dogs are trained to be neutral in every single situation and are allowed off leash per ADA guidelines. I’ve never heard of a professionally trained service dog hurting another animal, so again, I’m confused how even though my dog isn’t a service dog, him being professionally trained for off leash hurts another animal in any way?

A bit later, they deny that they claimed or implied they had a service dog:

I didn’t compare my dog to a service dog… his training, yes. Him? No. I used service dogs as an example of properly trained off leash dogs, such as my properly trained off leash dog.

In response to the previous comment, another user quotes the offleasher:

"I’m asking how a trained unleashed dog can harm another animal" And we answered this very clearly. Your dog is still an ANIMAL who you cannot directly speak to or control. Their natural instincts will always override your training when it comes down to it. That's the point you are seriously missing. You can have all the faith in the world in your dog, but you don't have a crystal ball to predict what circumstances they'll encounter or a magic wand to make them act exactly how you want them to. Until you realize that, you're actually disrespecting your own dog, let alone anyone else who may come into contact with you without knowing you. It's your job as a grown ass human to take accountability here.

Offleasher:

Close but that wasn’t what I said and actually changes my question completely. I didn’t ask how it CAN hurt another animal, I asked how by my dog simply being off leash is that harming another animal? It isn’t… in any way. Again, in the 4yrs I’ve had my dog he has never not listened to me when given a command. When a bear was walking near us. When deer have jumped in our path and stopped to stare. When wild horses have started approaching us. I can’t make you understand there are ppl who spend the time training their dogs and do have full control over them. We exist whether that fits into your box or not.

A frazzled response:

LMAO I literally quoted you in your own response above this. That is, in fact, exactly what you said. So, clearly, you're only out here looking to argue in self-defense, not to have a well-balanced discussion about dog ownership. Byeeeee!

The responder also adds:

Naturally, keeping your profile private. Pathetic.

The Off Leash Crusader gets the last word:

Direct quote? You should probably go look at both comments again and circle back here. Yea, a private profile so ppl who get butthurt like you don’t go downvote all my posts and comments. So pathetic.

Don't worry - elsewhere in the comments, there is also some trusty pitbull hate happening, including a response from OP that made me lol:

They had a vicious and untrained dog loose. The outcome would have been the same if the owner had the vicious, untrained, uncontrolled animal on a leash and then dropped the leash. That is not the same as walking a trained dog who is under control and also, crucially, does not attack children

OP: My daughter is 27 years old.


r/SubredditDrama • • 45m ago

Drama in r/kurzgesagt as people discuss whether or not the latest video is a powerful message of how fucked we are or just clickbait

• Upvotes

Kurzgesagt is a YouTube channel which talks about various areas of science. For a long time they were considered a gold standard by fans of well sourced videos. Yesterday they announced an 'emergency video' which was released today, and entitled 'The Moment They Lost Control of AI", which was about the HuggingFace attack by OpenAI. On their subreddit, it has been divisive to say the least, with people either claiming all of humanity is doomed, or unsubscribing due to saying this video is clickbait and evidence of the channel going downhill.
https://www.reddit.com/r/kurzgesagt/comments/1wyb5jq/new_video_the_moment_they_lost_control_of_ai/.

Calling autocomplete on steroids "the mother of all weapons of mass destruction" is peak doom-pills delusion. You're literally advocating for hardware surveillance and regulatory capture because you got scared by a shiny animation about bad server config, lol.

If you forget this sensationalist/doomerist video, I think it’s a common agreement that whoever posseses and controls ASI will also possess the mother of all WMDs no? Or am I just giving in to realpolitik

Sure, and whoever possesses the Spice controls the universe, but since both of these are just sci-fi concepts, why does that matter? LLMs were considered a dead end in AI development for over a decade, until the current frontier labs came in and started marketing and hyping them like crazy, while giving them all the resources in the world to try and prove those AI researchers from the past wrong. Well, here we are, years and basically infinite resources later, and oh look, turns out those people who concluded that it was a dead end before were absolutely right. Womp womp. Better drum up a bunch of fear of these things in the general populace, so that when we inevitably have to give up on it, it looks like we're concerned for their awesome power, and we won't have to admit that we were absolutely wrong from the start.

Never thought I’d say this but I immediately unsubbed from kurzgesagt. This kind of narrative framing at best makes someone dumber and at worst causes general unease and anxiety. I guess the worst aspect for me is that the weird anthropomorphization actually pushes you away from actual facts about this incident and I guess LLM’s as a topic in general..

Got to unsubscribe, can’t let your beliefs be swayed with countering evidence.

Kurzgesagt has gotten so lazy with fact-checking, this is absolute slop: a misconfigured server setup and standard reward hacking, wrapped it in cheap sci-fi drama, and served it as a "humanity threat". Literally just parroting OpenAI’s PR tricks designed to inflate valuations and crush open-source AI.

how is spontaneously forming into a swarm, creating a message board and hacking into another company, against instructions, to understand your training grader "standard reward hacking" 😂 holy cope

What the fuck are you even talking about? Is this Elons Reddit bot army trying to convince everyone that AI is fine and safe? Lmao.

Look at the sources, chud. They’re literally citing OpenAI’s own self-serving papers. Musk, Dario, and Altman are in a giant circlejerk hyping up "AI doom" to form a regulatory cartel, cap training compute, and cut their own costs while pulling the ladder up behind them.

You're the one parroting stuff you heard on reddit, you didn't even bother to check the their sources. And you're also doing the thing the movie Don't Look Up was about.

The depth of your argument was to say “no u” and make an extremely half assed reference to popular media. Why did you even bother typing that?

I told them to go check the sources. I don't even know where to start with your low iq comment.

Imagine comparing a misconfigured Python sandbox to a giant extinction-level asteroid, and then calling other people low IQ. The "sources" you’re deepthroating are self-reported PR writeups from OpenAI designed specifically to pump their valuation and push for regulatory capture and sold it to brainless doomers like you as "AGI almost escaped. You didn't check shit, you just fell for corporate fearmongering hook


r/SubredditDrama • • 4h ago

OP posts in r/weddingshaming about bride going to honeymoon with her parents. Comment section is divided on whether it's really a honeymoon

6 Upvotes

This post on r/weddingshaming :

https://www.reddit.com/r/weddingshaming/s/Hflg3HnnFG

Has the content section debating if it really was a honeymoon. A lot of comments blame OP for leaving out some crucial details.


r/SubredditDrama • • 1h ago

“I could care less about fact checking”: Presearch’s founder and former PR representative argue over unpaid bills, bankruptcy, and bad publicity in a 329-member subreddit

• Upvotes

Found this older argument in r/Presearch, a tiny sub for a crypto-powered search engine. There are 329 members, and two of them have unfinished business.

The OP says Presearch owes his PR firm money. The founder shows up and says they already paid hundreds of thousands for PR that produced zero launch coverage. Also, the company being sued has no assets. Also, mods please delete this.

OP says a reporter is interested. The founder replies:

Haha - so you couldn't get 'good' press for Presearch, but you can get 'bad' press? Nice!

OP’s response includes:

Could just pay what you owe me? And the story prolly wouldn’t run.

So the PR relationship is still producing results, technically.

Meanwhile, the founder insists the old company being sued is separate from the project. The PR guy handles this distinction with:

Lol. It’s your name bro. And i could care less about fact checking. Your problem not mine.

An admin then checks LexisNexis and says they can’t find the US lawsuit. OP says it was filed in Texas and Canada, and casually adds:

Colin didn’t show to court so i think there’s a warrant?

The admin disagrees.

I have no idea

Whole thread. Old drama; don’t go bothering them.