Isn't is somewhat amazing how much Tasha gets things wrong?
Autism or stupidity...hello, coin flip.
Isn't is somewhat amazing how much Tasha gets things wrong?
Autism or stupidity...hello, coin flip.
I get really tired of the fighting and name calling, in Tasha's defense, she is one of the only ones on this site remaining polite and cordial. Most others need to grow up and take anger management classes.
Thank you Tuesday. :) On another Website where Posters were ragging and dragging me, some Posters said something like,"Oh my God, Karen Nathan's calm toleranceQuote:
Originally Posted by theywontpayontuesday
, calm composure, and calm temperament is amazing. If I were Karen Nathan, I would have been snapping hard on everybody attacking me.
I'm her Dutch Uncle on this board and use "name calling" to help promote her personal growth and development.Quote:
Originally Posted by theywontpayontuesday
Come on, MrT. Who needs polite when you've got mind-boggling?Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVI'm her Dutch Uncle on this board and use "name calling" to help promote her personal growth and development.Quote:
Originally Posted by theywontpayontuesday
Say, what is a person who's full of himself actually full of? Ha.
You had one job to do and you couldn't even get here on time!
Thanks Alot... pfft... whatever.
I don't get your post. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
I think the non-sequitur IS the joke….Quote:
Originally Posted by TashaI don't get your post. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
But I’ve been wrong before.
I've been watching some Judge Judy episodes lately and The guy could have SUED his thieving Friend for his stolen part of the money if they had a WRITTEN CONTRACT. The Plaintiff and Defendants who rely on verbal Contracts are usually SOL. Cautionary tale, always make written Contracts and NEVER rely solely on verbal Contracts.
As usual you are completely WRONG in your belief about how the Law really works, Karen.
An oral contract has the same weight and the same penalties for failure to perform as does a written contract.
For example: consider a loan.
If I loan my casino friend eighty bucks via check without a contract I can easily prove the loam based on my testimony and the check itself: no written contract is necessary.
It can be earier at times to prove that a contract was actually made if it is in writing, but once a court believes a contract exists the same remedies are available for an oral contract as for a written one.
Yes but don't forget about the Statute of Frauds.
At common law,
https://i.imgur.com/USx76fM.png
Trolling is fun. Donald Trump trolls people, Tasha trolls and everyone knows they both troll. To say, "omg you're trolling, is to be trolled. Only thing a troll hates is nobody walking over their bridge, so complaints about trolling, make the trolling work and it is not an emotionally intelligent response. I personally think the shitting the pants story may have been a troll itself on Tasha not excluding anyone as a suspect. I certainly do not waste my time consuming every post, I have better things to do.
Wouldn't that be a "Your word against mine?" However? :confused: Let's say my Casino Friend says to me something like,"Hey, Karen, I just lost my money chasing four Bingo cards and I just need $20 to to play for the last Bingo card and you just won $200 from a lucky spin. Could you please lend me $20 and I'll pay you back next Bingo day?" I say something like,"Okay, no problem. I'll still have at least $180 if I loan you the $20." I loan him the $20 and next Bingo day, I ask for my $20 and my Casino Friend says something like," "I already blew the $20 I was supposed to give you chasing Bingo cards. If I wanted to sue him for me $20, in a Court of law, he can just claim there was no loan since it was VERBAL .Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I can claim ,"I loaned you the $20 and you agreed to pay be back on next Bingo day and next Bingo day, you blew my $20 chasing Bingo Cards. He can just say,"You have no proof of that." The Judge can ask me if I have tangible PROOF that I loaned him money and he agreed to pay be back next Bingo day only to blow it chasing Bingo Cards." I wouldn't have proof since it was purely verbal so The Judge would most likely dismiss my Claim(Judge Judy dismissed a claim in an episode that aired this year because it was purely verbal.)
I guess the Casino surveillance would show me handing him $20, but even then Casino surveillance would just show me HANDING him the $20, not necessarily LOANING him $20. For all the Court would know, I GAVE him that $20 as a GIFT and not as a LOAN.
You should have no problem as you lent it to a Casino Friend, not a Casino Welcher.
A freind would readily admit you loaned the money...duh.
If however you are stupid or gullible enough to loan money in a casino to someone you haven't known personally for some time, someone known to be trustwrothy...bwa ha ha ha.
You could consult with an attorney to find out if Florida is a one party consent state, or a two party consent state for wiretapping purposes & then you could try to get him to admit on tape that the $20 was a loan so you have the evidence you need.Quote:
Originally Posted by TashaWouldn't that be a "Your word against mine?" However? :confused: Let's say my Casino Friend says to me something like,"Hey, Karen, I just lost my money chasing four Bingo cards and I just need $20 to to play for the last Bingo card and you just won $200 from a lucky spin. Could you please lend me $20 and I'll pay you back next Bingo day?" I say something like,"Okay, no problem. I'll still have at least $180 if I loan you the $20." I loan him the $20 and next Bingo day, I ask for my $20 and my Casino Friend says something like," "I already blew the $20 I was supposed to give you chasing Bingo cards. If I wanted to sue him for me $20, in a Court of law, he can just claim there was no loan since it was VERBAL .Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I can claim ,"I loaned you the $20 and you agreed to pay be back on next Bingo day and next Bingo day, you blew my $20 chasing Bingo Cards. He can just say,"You have no proof of that." The Judge can ask me if I have tangible PROOF that I loaned him money and he agreed to pay be back next Bingo day only to blow it chasing Bingo Cards." I wouldn't have proof since it was purely verbal so The Judge would most likely dismiss my Claim(Judge Judy dismissed a claim in an episode that aired this year because it was purely verbal.)
I guess the Casino surveillance would show me handing him $20, but even then Casino surveillance would just show me HANDING him the $20, not necessarily LOANING him $20. For all the Court would know, I GAVE him that $20 as a GIFT and not as a LOAN.
If fact the one party consent or two party consent normally on applies to phone calls so if it’s an issue you may be able to record him in a public place admitting the $20 was a loan since there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place.
Things that degenerates say in a casino for $200 AlexQuote:
Originally Posted by TashaWouldn't that be a "Your word against mine?" However? :confused: Let's say my Casino Friend says to me something like,"Hey, Karen, I just lost my money chasing four Bingo cards and I just need $20 to to play for the last Bingo card and you just won $200 from a lucky spin. Could you please lend me $20 and I'll pay you back next Bingo day?" I say something like,"Okay, no problem. I'll still have at least $180 if I loan you the $20." I loan him the $20 and next Bingo day, I ask for my $20 and my Casino Friend says something like," "I already blew the $20 I was supposed to give you chasing Bingo cards. If I wanted to sue him for me $20, in a Court of law, he can just claim there was no loan since it was VERBAL .Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I can claim ,"I loaned you the $20 and you agreed to pay be back on next Bingo day and next Bingo day, you blew my $20 chasing Bingo Cards. He can just say,"You have no proof of that." The Judge can ask me if I have tangible PROOF that I loaned him money and he agreed to pay be back next Bingo day only to blow it chasing Bingo Cards." I wouldn't have proof since it was purely verbal so The Judge would most likely dismiss my Claim(Judge Judy dismissed a claim in an episode that aired this year because it was purely verbal.)
I guess the Casino surveillance would show me handing him $20, but even then Casino surveillance would just show me HANDING him the $20, not necessarily LOANING him $20. For all the Court would know, I GAVE him that $20 as a GIFT and not as a LOAN.
Luckily for us we have 2 actual lawyers here compared to a retard that watches reruns of Judge Judy when not sitting in a casino with no money to play with.
And no, she’s not trolling, she’s actually this stupid. So many people over the years have made legitimate suggestions to her on how to improve her life but she’s too dumb to listen. As someone told her years ago, the best part of her ran down her mother’s leg.
I have to admit, when she goes off on a tangent or even a straight line and starts spouting nonsense based on imprecision, misinformation or faulty conjecture I get annoyed too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLZubB22edw
And there's generally no stopping her.
Two words, Dawg: "Client Control."Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
I thought I was coming off as mature, wise, smart, and insightful when I said that verbal agreements don't hold up in Court, but I came across as a fool. :( Not the first time I tried to come across as mature, wise, smart, and insightful but came across as a fool instead. :(
When I was Kentry on WOV, I was coming across as a joke. A Poster said something like,"I lost more money than I wanted to on a bad Casino run" I immediately thought, "I'm sick of coming across as a joke, here's my chance to come across as mature, wise, smart, and insightful!"
I replied to the guy something like,"You really should stop gambling. You already lost money you NEEDED. If you keep gambling, you'll be a homeless bum living on the streets, begging people for money!"
This "Advice," was meant to make ME stop coming across as a joke and come across as mature, wise, smart, and insightful. I REALLY didn't care about some random Poster losing HIS money in a Casino, I only cared about making myself look good. The "Advice," I gave him was purely for selfish reasons.
The Poster responded something like,"Um, it wasn't money I NEEDED and I REALLY don't appreciate people on WOV speaking to me like I am a degenerate Gambler! Maybe I should leave WOV since WOV seems condescending."
BBB responded something like,"The Majority of WOV Posters don't think you're a gambling Degenerate and only ONE person spoke to you like you were one. Kentry shouldn't have said that to you and was completely out of line and owes you an apology, but I apologize to you for Kentry."
I didn't come across as mature, wise, smart, and insightful, I didn't get praise, brownie points, and kudos, I came across as a condescending Jerk, and the thing I was hoping would happen FOR me, would have pissed me off if it happened TO me. I'd be wondering why Posters were hijacking my thread by giving a random Poster praise, brownie points, and kudos for being mature, wise, smart, and insightful. I would have honestly been better off if I had just said something like, "Happens to the best of us."
Look in the fucking mirror!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasha;177963I