Liberal Forum

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

It wasn't his place, ****...

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.

he instructed the jury to review all testimony and evidence and to come to a unanimous verdict based on current law...

Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"


What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts

an "after the fact" opinion is just that....worthless...

As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.

pick up your limbs and take the L...
 

Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.

Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"

What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts

As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.

Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...

Cry to Deezer.
Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:

Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.  His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.

Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"

What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts

As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.

Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...

Cry to Deezer.
Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:

Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.  His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 5:03 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 5:03 pm

  

This is a case...

Cry to Deezer.
Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:

Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.  His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

I am one pathetic coward.

Cry to Deezer.
Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:

Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.  His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 5:03 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 5:03 pm

This is a case...

You can always ban me...so I can bypass it.         


Cry to Deezer.
Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:

Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.  His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.


Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"


What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts



As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.



Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...

There are two ways the show called humanity can end? By choice or extinction and it only exists by choices made and secrets kept.

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.

Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"

What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts

As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.

Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...

If a professional rape victim / story teller had you convicted of rape without a shred of any evidence you would cry like a little baby non stop until the day you died.
Yet here you are celebrating the same exact scenario.
Hypocrisy is a form of dishonesty...you being the one who is dishonest with yourself.
you see yourself as some sort of Beacon of Virtue but you are actually a very wormy, double standard loving  piece of ****.
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.

Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"

What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts

As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.

Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...

brown, **** your peanut gallery ****...go buy some balls and have a real discussion...
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 9:02 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 9:02 pm

Shut up, Ghetto.

If a professional rape victim / story teller had you convicted of rape without a shred of any evidence you would cry like a little baby non stop until the day you died.
Yet here you are celebrating the same exact scenario.
Hypocrisy is a form of dishonesty...you being the one who is dishonest with yourself.
you see yourself as some sort of Beacon of Virtue but you are actually a very wormy, double standard loving  piece of ****.

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 5:03 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 5:03 pm

NB @Huey  

This is a case...

Another PG call out thread.  I’m out.   

Huey » 10 Feb 2026, 5:57 am » wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2026, 5:57 am

Another PG call out thread.  I’m out.

It is what a "case" looks like...

For future reference. 
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

your nature will end up placing this post in PG. but I will post it anyway in NHB.

Oh the priority of objective facts leading to a planned tomorrow's outcome worked into fruition today current population working against the natural rhythm of evolving in plain sight as genetically positioned one at a time ancestrally here since conception living as an ever changing form balancing by heartbeats added now.

Your subjective behavior patterns fit exactly in your social behavior cradle to grave regardless which ancestral lineage you came from or current generation gap residing time lived since conceived.

You use contextual facts to box a brain into serving an ideology cradle to grave. My brain uses actual time evolving to put you back into your time displaced since inception of your ancestral lineage so far regardless you are still a biological great great grandchild, parent, grandparent, great grandparent.

Subjectivity vs objectivity both mislead ancestors into believing social arguments win something more than equally alive from now on?

Every intellectual reality is a fool's paradise of anything else is socially possible governed by 7 days a week with the idea time is money.

Johnny You » 10 Feb 2026, 11:30 am » wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2026, 11:30 am

Start over...

youtu.be/Wp8UlgvCVlI?si=1fVJ-ViR7xfA39i6[FROM THE BEGINNING]
 

eternally changing form since conception doesn't offer do overs. Change of habits sure, but you have to choose to stop pretending nobody know s the natural algorithm of genetic compounding of chromosomes in series parallel positions here now.


the show that never ends is governed by rule(directing human behavior cradle to grave) of law.

My civil war with humanity is debunking power of suggestion not eliminating people that won't surrender their natural time alive to my wishful thinking.

I stand my time self evidently adapting to the moment here since conceived. I lived as an ever changing form within thermodynamic principles since a fertilized cell my body never stays what it was since, each heartbeat forward now. That is all I have been since birth. Equally inhabiting space now.

Johnny You » 10 Feb 2026, 1:39 pm » wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2026, 1:39 pm

So what's your favorite brand of toilet paper?   Does yourr Golden Toilet ever get clogged?

So you deflect rather than discuss the common human error intentionally never corrected for everyone's social consensus reality manifested into saving humanity 24/7 progress every generation added since dawn of civilization.

that contextual highway to heaven paved with promised better economic tomorrows 7 days a week paving a path to a living hell cradle to grave daily here.

ROG62 » 09 Feb 2026, 11:14 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 11:14 pm

brown, **** your peanut gallery ****...go buy some balls and have a real discussion...
 

 

Only reason I even bothered to click on it is because he tagged me.  

Huey » 10 Feb 2026, 2:52 pm » wrote: ↑

10 Feb 2026, 2:52 pm

Only reason I even bothered to click on it is because he tagged me.

   

Blackvegetable » 11 Feb 2026, 10:29 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2026, 10:29 am

there was one amount for defamation and a second for sexual.assault.

resolved.

because it is not at their discretion....it is at the client's. 

You really don't have any idea how this **** works, do you...

where?

And don't pull another JuCo, JuCo. 

 Your "if/not" failed....you dropped your micropeepee....

the judge projected on something the jury didn't state...

game over, clinger...stick a fork in your leg...yer done...

Blackvegetable » 11 Feb 2026, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2026, 11:56 am

You, quite predictably, ran from the question...

                                                                                                             

Blackvegetable » 11 Feb 2026, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2026, 12:06 pm

It's already proven kaplan is an activist judge who hates Trump...where?   And don't pull another JuCo, JuCo. 

do the right thing....

You accusing others of evading questions?