iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Oh, for criminal cases, look for suppression motions or Franks hearings. Suppression hearings are about if a search was legal and will discuss LEO conduct and methods. See the order that came out today re flock cameras. Franks are a deep cut- that means they are saying the LEO lied to get a SW.

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Finally, a final judgment or disposition tells you how the case resolved. You might see notices of settlement, but you usually won't see any details of a settlement. Please note that all of this is primarily trial oriented and I only am familiar with a couple of states, so milage may vary.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Also look for any motions regarding sanctions under Rule 11 or Rule 37, especially if the court granted them. This could be lawyers behaving badly or trying to avoid disclosing bad evidence. Also look for Trial Memos or Joint Reports, which may have summaries of evidence from the case.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

They will argue that the evidence is irrelevant or unduly prejudicial. MILs are often about evidence the party does not want the jury to see, so high chance of interesting paydata. If you can find an MIL or a ruling on MILs, that is basically a signal that this evidence is bad for someone.

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

An order ruling on summary Judgment one way or the other is a good choice too, because the judge may summarize the facts and discuss their interpretation of the case. As trial nears, you may see Motions in Limine. MIL are one party trying to prevent the other from using evidence at trial.

200

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Summary Judgment motions are your go-to for getting a picture of the case, if it has gotten that far. It will give you the broadest picture of the facts and both sides positions, and is supported by a statement of facts with cited sources to the evidence.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Next you might see a Motion for Summary Judgment. Summary Judgment is one side arguing that a trial isn't nessecary because the evidence is so clear that no reasonable juror would rule in your opponents favor, or that the facts are undisputed but the law doesn't support the claim.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

The best thing to look for here are Daubert motions or motions to certify or exclude expert witnesses. These motions are about whether or not experts should be able to testify. These motions often involve discussion of what the expert report says, or include excerpts from the report.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

If any claims remain after the motion to dismiss, parties will start discovery and file procedural motions with the court. Discovery issues may have some interesting data- look for special masters or JDD (Joint Discovery Disputes) where the parties if they should have to give evidence to each other.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

As an aside, each of these substantive or dispositive motions may have responses and replies. The non-moving party is typically entitled to a response, and sometimes the moving party gets to file a reply (like a rebuttal of the response). Following this, a court may file an order dismissing the case

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

For a motion to dismiss, the defense assumes the plaintiffs allegations in the complaint are true, but argues that the case should be dismissed on legal or procedural grounds, not evidentiary ones. So usually it's not going to have pay dirt for anyone but lawyers and judges.

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Answers can tell you about a defendants position, but if you are bast the earliest days, not useful. A motion to dismiss will be the defense laying out their reason why, even if everything the plaintiff said was true, they shouldn't win their case.

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Next you might see notices of service to the parties, which isn't useful, then the defendant may file an answer or a motion to dismiss or both. The answer is a point by point answer to the allegations in a complaint, but doesn't usually provide much additional information. It usually just denies it

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Complaints initiate an action and state what allegations the plaintiff is making and why that entitles them to damages. Complaints are one sides claims without the benefit of discovery, so not likely to be useful except to tell you why the party has brought the suit. I wouldn't rely on it for facts.

400

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

I'm not aware of any easy resource, but I will try to help. It depends on what you are looking for. Compounding the issue is that states and courts have different terms for types of filings and what they call their courts. Cases typically begin with a Complaint. 1/X

220

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

It's sort of an on again off again things you know? Gotta keep our options open

020

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 20/09/2026

As you just pointed out, when your enemy is attacking someone on your team, you don't turn on them and join the attack. You defend them. So why not do the same here as you do with your other friends? Your vote is yours, but don't do the fascist's job for them and lash out at your ally.

051

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

Hope that helps clear things up. Let me know if you have any other gifs or comments you want me to break down!

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

My comment was intended to poke fun at Will's rhetoric by using similarity of Frakes declarative "it's false" to Wills recent posts. Its unpersuasive because of this tendency, and using humour to point it out is, theoretically, less confrontational than saying "You sound like a smug jerk"

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

I never said it wasn't. I was trying to point out that in the last few days I have seen him make sweeping authoritative claims, but instead of providing evidence, he just asserts his opponents position is "simply false", or "no economist actually says this". That isn't evidence- it's a conclusion.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/08/2026

Whenever Will just asserts something to be wrong without evidence or attribution, I just imagine that video where they cut up all the times Jonathan Frakes said something wasn't true from beyond belief.

static.klipy.com

You're Wrong Jonathan Frakes Meme

Alt: Johnathan Frakes smugly declares you are wrong, just like Will Stancil

120

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/08/2026

For the most part, obvs. Can't say for certain, see above. That's why I was curious about your take. Where is the line between acceptable analogy or abstraction for education or discussion, and ethically wrong misrepresentation? How do you communicate that it isn't meant to be taken literally?

000

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/08/2026

To me, the boots theory is fine even if it isn't true. It's a fictional anecdote about a fictional world and never claimed to be true, and the people who still talk about it aren't advocating for boot based economic reform. They are using it as an example to educate and convince, in good faith.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/08/2026

On a personal level, I am regularly floored by the overwhelming complexity of our current reality. Given that, I don't really expect anyone to be perfectly true and accurate, and to some extent it's not even possible. I just want people to get as close as they can in good faith.

110

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/08/2026

And to be clear, I don't really have any issue with what Will says about boots. My vibes say he's probably right. His abstraction didn't bother me, in the same way the boot theory didn't- I understand what it's standing in for, and for the purpose of social media, that level of accuracy is fine.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 06/08/2026

But Wills is also wrong, in that sense. He is using a generalization of complex data that isn't strictly true (the relative value of cheap boots to expensive, which in actuality varies significantly by brand and make) to argue that Vimes isn't right. He's doing the same thing but backwards.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

Even Will used abstractions- he doesn't, and can't, know exactly how long expensive boots versus cheap boots last, and that number certainly varies a huge amount based on the boot. But he is certainly right in aggregate. His abstraction was ok, but not Vimes? I contend they are equally valid.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

In that sense, everything we were ever taught about the past was an abstraction of the vast and overwhelming complexity of the world. And that's the tension- a good faith effort to represent the world via an abstraction isn't a lie, it's the only way to effectively communicate.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

As in, the practice of history. History as a discipline is not a out stating the truth, but trying to find it, sorting out false or biased sources and inferring what wasn't written down. Historians are often wrong, and the practice of history is trying to figure out which of our truths... Aren't.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

But instead immediately jumping straight to string theory and quantum foam? These abstractions aid learning, and aren't deceptive- through education, you expand your understanding and put it into context. Look at history.

120

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

And science and education does this literally all the time. In school, you are frequently taught inaccurate or incomplete models of chemistry, physics, or subatomic particles. Imagine trying to teach subatomic particles without starting with basic models like Bohrs...

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

It wasn't meant to be a description of how the footware market works in real life- it was meant to be an analogy to aid people who don't grasp the concept intuitively or from their own life experience. In that sense, it has educational clair without being an accurate description of the market.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

The tension is between what the example is and what it communicates. Vimes's boot theory isn't about boots- it's about poverty. It doesn't advocate for better boots- it advocates for reconsidering how we think about poverty and how it effects people within it.

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

difficult to escape from because poverty itself imposes costs on those within. Will said that this concept was real- his issue was he thought the example wrong, and that cheap goods are cheap. If the misrepresentation that Prachett used doesn't change the ultimate meaning, is it a misrepresentation?

110

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

Please correct me if I am misunderstanding your position, but I think the distinction between a misrepresentation and a simplification is whether the simplification changes the meaning of the concept. That is, the boot example might be wrong, but the theory it describes - that poverty is... 1/x

100

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

Do you believe a bigoted and destructive lie that misled the public and put real people at risk is an appropriate comparator to the opinion of a fictional character in a book? Are you arguing that simplifications should never be used in literature or education, in favor of only purely the "truth"?

151

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

Prachett did it intentionally. He called the tactic "Lies to children" - "a simplified, and often technically incorrect, explanation of technical or complex subjects employed as a teaching method." Per wikipedia. If the concept is real, is it important that the example isn't literally always true?

150

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

As you yourself pointed out, Prachett was using the boot example to describe the concept of a poverty tax. In that sense the boot example is just a heuristic, a generalized analogy for explaining a complicated or unintuitive topic which you concede is real. 1/2

150

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

Why should we join someone who wants to purge us just for being unaligned? Just like an Elf to try to woo us with threats and then intimidate us with argument. At least Saruman offers a future.

020

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

Big talk for a person armed with a seed.

181

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 21/06/2026

Dunlendings are surprisingly well equipped.

110

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

I had the same experience. My first tabletop game was a 2E game. I barely knew how the system worked, but the depth of the world building and all of the things you could do with the mechanics is why I took it up as a hobby.

020

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 31/05/2026

Yep! Assuming that Winnipeg didn't have their own municipal law with different exclusions, all government work was excluded. Also, doctors, people loading freight operating trains, that sort of thing. The law appears to have been primarily directed toward retail activity.

020

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 31/05/2026

Yeah, that's what I gather! Pretty interesting, especially because it seems it didn't work, since The law was overturned judicially rather than legislatively. Although, the ACT allowed for municipalities to create there on Sunday law, so perhaps Winnipeg had their own law that they changed.

020

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 31/05/2026

So, they were intentionally arresting people who weren't excluded to prove the point that the law was unduly burdensome and not practical (I assume). It was eventually ruled unconstitutional as a violation of section 2 of the charter of rights and freedoms. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27...

en.wikipedia.org

Lord's Day Act (Canada) - Wikipedia

130

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 31/05/2026

Actually, it was the opposite! The Lords Day Act excluded a few activities, including "work necessary for divine worship." I can't be absolutely sure with the snippet of the article, but it describes it as a counter action to the Lords Day alliance to make the law odious. So they were against it!

230

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

All I found was some cheap costume jewellery.

030

Aurabek @aurabek.bsky.social · 24/01/2026

Fuck him. I've followed you for years and I see how much you sacrifice of yourself for others. I know how it is to do that time and again and never get it in return. You weren't wrong to do it. He was wrong to reject it and he never deserved it in the first place. And I know you won't let him win.

061