More fraud

Caveira · July 15

8 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Did you know…..over 45 people in this short term have been pardoned of their fraud crimes. With this has come the waiver of millions and millions of dollars in fines and ordered restitutions. So, not only do those who perpetuated the fraud let off the hook from prison, but maybe even more unjust is that their victims are not made whole.

In no way should you have to substantiate what you are saying here. Your claims should be just taken at face value. Stay off the algo boss. It will make you a better person

Edited July 15 by Caveira

WrestlingRasta · July 16

30 minutes ago, Caveira said:

In no way should you have to substantiate what you are saying here. Your claims should be just taken at face value. Stay off the algo boss. It will make you a better person

A) You are correct. Now, if we were in a court of law, I would need to substantiate. But we’re not, we’re in a message board. A place where people who pretend to care about fraud could very easily look up to verify, in about 30 seconds.

2) No algorithm came into play on this one. Unless you believe justice.gov (the official website of the department of justice) has created an algorithm based on this terms pardons.
(PS- you should come up with your own material, you may come across a little more grown, mature)

But keep defending and deflecting from your bended knees, and wipe that spot on your chin. Because, you know, all politicians are trash….right?

Caveira · July 16

4 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

A) You are correct. Now, if we were in a court of law, I would need to substantiate. But we’re not, we’re in a message board. A place where people who pretend to care about fraud could very easily look up to verify, in about 30 seconds.

2) No algorithm came into play on this one. Unless you believe justice.gov (the official website of the department of justice) has created an algorithm based on this terms pardons.
(PS- you should come up with your own material, you may come across a little more grown, mature)

But keep defending and deflecting from your bended knees, and wipe that spot on your chin. Because, you know, all politicians are trash….right?

Yes. When others google stuff it’s the algo monopolizing their lives and shame on them. When you do it’s pretty ok and totally cool. The high horse you live on just got higher.

and yes. All politicians and politics are trash. Since the beginning of humanity.

also no dems on this site care about fraud.

Edited July 16 by Caveira

JimmySpeaks · July 16

2 hours ago, Caveira said:

Yes. When others google stuff it’s the algo monopolizing their lives and shame on them. When you do it’s pretty ok and totally cool. The high horse you live on just got higher.

and yes. All politicians and politics are trash. Since the beginning of humanity.

also no dems on this site care about fraud.

He’s perfect. Just ask him.

WrestlingRasta · July 16

2 hours ago, Caveira said:

Yes. When others google stuff it’s the algo monopolizing their lives and shame on them. When you do it’s pretty ok and totally cool. The high horse you live on just got higher.

and yes. All politicians and politics are trash. Since the beginning of humanity.

also no dems on this site care about fraud.

You would maybe have a good point there, except for a couple issues with your position. One being that you don’t have to go to Google to get to the DOJ website, you just simply have to type in www.justice.gov. I know you have a hard time understanding adult type things, but algorithms don’t play a part here. And I’ve never talked to you about googling stuff, but rather, I’ve talked to you several times about your very apparent social media echo chamber addiction. It’s all the in this site’s archives should you feel the need to clarify.

Secondly, to pretend that going directly to justice.gov to seek actually documented factual information, and then sharing said documented information from justice.gov here is the same as copy and pasting the warm fuzzies that come across your Twitter feed a dozen or so times each day, is pretty silly, even for you.

Why so bothered? I didn’t opine on any of your comments or anything, I just simply shared facts from the DOJ website. So combative, are you a closet Dem? I thought they were the ones so offended by facts they don’t like. You’re not a serious person, boss.

11 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

He’s perfect. Just ask him.

Oh you silly little fella. I’m far far from perfect. But I appreciate your confidence.

Goodnight you little love birds. Enjoy the rest and of your week!

Edited July 16 by WrestlingRasta

GreatWhiteNorth · July 16

14 hours ago, red viking said:

It is definitely possible to be over 100% on things. For example, deficit spending jumped way over 100% from around 2015 to 2020 COVID era for Trump's free money he sent out to everybody, coupled with tax cuts and wasteful military spending increases.

You are much wiser than the rest. Impressive.

The mathematical scale of measurement based on 0-100% purposely excludes anything out of that range.

But, as you've stated, there are definitely out of range figures. That is true.

As you've so succinctly described, measures can easily exceed 100% but then are no longer within the scale of measurement - other than exceeding - which no longer includes useful relative approximation.

NIcely done.

Caveira · July 16

4 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

You are much wiser than the rest. Impressive.

The mathematical scale of measurement based on 0-100% purposely excludes anything out of that range.

But, as you've stated, there are definitely out of range figures. That is true.

As you've so succinctly described, measures can easily exceed 100% but then are no longer within the scale of measurement - other than exceeding - which no longer includes useful relative approximation.

NIcely done.

Yes, that text strongly shows the hallmarks of AI-generated content.

1. Overly Formal and "Polite" Structure

The Pattern: AI models are trained to be highly agreeable and validation-first. Phrases like "But, as you've stated..." and "As you've so succinctly described..." are classic AI conversational padding used to flatter the user before building on the point.

The Reality: Human writers rarely repeat variations of "you are correct/you said this well" twice in a three-sentence paragraph unless they are writing a formal debate critique.

2. Redundant and Repetitive Logic

The Pattern: The text repeats the exact same concept multiple times using slightly different words to sound intellectual.

The Breakdown:

Sentence 1 says the scale excludes anything out of that range.

Sentence 2 says there are definitely out of range figures.

Sentence 3 says it is no longer within the scale of measurement—other than exceeding.

The Reality: It loops in a circle without actually introducing new data. A human would usually combine this into one punchy sentence (e.g., "Once a percentage goes over 100, the baseline scale breaks down and stops being useful for comparisons.")

3. Word Salade / "Pseudo-Intellectual" Phrasing

The Pattern: The phrase "which no longer includes useful relative approximation" is grammatically correct but highly unnatural. AI often strings together heavy academic words to fill space when a simple word would do.

The Reality: A human math or business writer would typically say "it loses context," "the math breaks down," or "it distorts the data."

Bigbrog · July 16

12 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

you may come across a little more grown, mature

But keep defending and deflecting from your bended knees, and wipe that spot on your chin. Because, you know, all politicians are trash….right?

You literally can't make this up... comedic gold... chastising someone as being immature yet literally following it up with that doozy of a paragraph. You keep being you Rasta!

Offthemat · July 16

Prances in and calls the guys homos, again.

WrestlingRasta · July 16

58 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

You literally can't make this up... comedic gold... chastising someone as being immature yet literally following it up with that doozy of a paragraph. You keep being you Rasta!

Oh look, Jack Tripper has entered the conversation.

Do you have anything to share regarding the pardons? Because you may notice, my entry into this thread had nothing to do with any poster or comment in the thread, just simply facts from the DOJ website, until your boy came in and opened the door to garbage, so I walked through. We know, because you have told us several times, you can’t stand someone who just comments about how someone posts without anything to say about the topic. And we also know, because you’ve told us several times, you can’t stand hypocrites.

Edited July 16 by WrestlingRasta

JimmySpeaks · July 16

15 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Oh look, Jack Tripper has entered the conversation.

Do you have anything to share regarding the pardons? Because you may notice, my entry into this thread had nothing to do with any poster or comment in the thread, just simply facts from the DOJ website, until your boy came in and opened the door to garbage, so I walked through. We know, because you have told us several times, you can’t stand someone who just comments about how someone posts without anything to say about the topic. And we also know, because you’ve told us several times, you can’t stand hypocrites.

You’ve got the hypocrite part covered for sure.. You keep telling us how soft the world has become yet you don’t seem to Remember when you cried to the mods because you said I was mean to you. Carry on high horse boy.

Edited July 16 by JimmySpeaks

JimmySpeaks · July 16

16 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Oh look, Jack Tripper has entered the conversation.

Do you have anything to share regarding the pardons? Because you may notice, my entry into this thread had nothing to do with any poster or comment in the thread, just simply facts from the DOJ website, until your boy came in and opened the door to garbage, so I walked through. We know, because you have told us several times, you can’t stand someone who just comments about how someone posts without anything to say about the topic. And we also know, because you’ve told us several times, you can’t stand hypocrites.

You should change your name to WrestlingMorals because nobody has morals like you do.

WrestlingRasta · July 16

48 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

you don’t seem to Remember when you cried to the mods because you said I was mean to you.

Well I mean, I’ve asked you, several times, to provide anything, anything at all of substance that might refresh my memory of the claim of yours, yet you consistently fail to do so. It’s almost as if you got upset so you just made some shit up, and then repeated it so much you actually convinced yourself of it, just to make yourself feel better.

Imagine having someone in your head so much that you have to jump in each time you see them post, and then have to come back to the same quote again 5-10 minutes later to air out some more grievance. Over and over again. It’s a lot like your compensating for something you feel inside and aren’t happy with.

But it’s good to see the three of you back together again. Tell Mr Roper I said hi.

Edited July 16 by WrestlingRasta

Bigbrog · July 16

4 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Oh look, Jack Tripper has entered the conversation.

What was that again on how not to be immature??

It's no figure the guy who acts so high and mighty and feels the need to lecture everyone is the biggest hypocrite and has the most fragile ego.

WrestlingRasta · July 16

59 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

What was that again on how not to be immature??

It's no figure the guy who acts so high and mighty and feels the need to lecture everyone is the biggest hypocrite and has the most fragile ego.

Well, I have said to you, several times, I would much rather just have a conversation, (like for example, entering into a thread with nothing but data from an administration website) but opened doors will be walked through. So let us recap, with the backdrop that you have made it very clear you don’t like when people just want to criticize posters for what they believe or how they post, instead of anything of substance about the topic:

>I entered the thread with a post that had nothing to do with any poster or comment, but rather just simple data.

> Cav replies to me, not with any response on the actual data, but rather just opening the door to make it personal.

>I walked through said opened door

>Jimmy then responds, not having anything to do with the provided data, but rather only to open the door of making it personal.

>I walked through said opened door.

> You respond to me, not wanting to have anything to do with the provided data, but rather just opening the door to make it personal.

>I walked through said opened door, but then even asked you directly your thoughts on the provided data, which you ignored because the chat between us being personal was more appealing to you.

When you look at the recap, and it is completely accurate in terms of how our little chat here developed, it’s interesting that you have this message for me, but not for your two roomates. It’s kind of surprising since you are so very much against hypocrites. It is also suprising, given how much you dislike people not wanting to talk about the issues but rather just make things personal, that you continue to refuse each and every time I offer a nice civil conversation on issues, while not being able to control your urge to open those doors I’ve explained to you, several times. I would think someone who is so against that kind of posting, as well as so against hypocrisy, would jump at the opportunity to have a civil conversation instead of always wanting to start this silliness. Or, maybe you have projection issues??

As for my ego…if you believe you and your roommates’ silliness has any impact on my ego, positive or negative…..you may want to have a conversation around the dinner table related to Cav’s favorite topic: high horses.

Thanks for the chat, and for clarifying any possible confusion anyone may have. I look forward to reading your next rant about hypocrisy and people who don’t want to talk substance but only criticizing the poster. It’s always fun. Or maybe, after this post of laying everything out so clearly, you’ll just have a couple substance filled laughing faces in response. Those are always so interesting as well. Cheers!!

Caveira · July 16

9 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Well, I have said to you, several times, I would much rather just have a conversation, (like for example, entering into a thread with nothing but data from an administration website) but opened doors will be walked through. So let us recap, with the backdrop that you have made it very clear you don’t like when people just want to criticize posters for what they believe or how they post, instead of anything of substance about the topic:

>I entered the thread with a post that had nothing to do with any poster or comment, but rather just simple data.

> Cav replies to me, not with any response on the actual data, but rather just opening the door to make it personal.

>I walked through said opened door

>Jimmy then responds, not having anything to do with the provided data, but rather only to open the door of making it personal.

>I walked through said opened door.

> You respond to me, not wanting to have anything to do with the provided data, but rather just opening the door to make it personal.

>I walked through said opened door, but then even asked you directly your thoughts on the provided data, which you ignored because the chat between us being personal was more appealing to you.

When you look at the recap, and it is completely accurate in terms of how our little chat here developed, it’s interesting that you have this message for me, but not for your two roomates. It’s kind of surprising since you are so very much against hypocrites. It is also suprising, given how much you dislike people not wanting to talk about the issues but rather just make things personal, that you continue to refuse each and every time I offer a nice civil conversation on issues, while not being able to control your urge to open those doors I’ve explained to you, several times. I would think someone who is so against that kind of posting, as well as so against hypocrisy, would jump at the opportunity to have a civil conversation instead of always wanting to start this silliness. Or, maybe you have projection issues??

As for my ego…if you believe you and your roommates’ silliness has any impact on my ego, positive or negative…..you may want to have a conversation around the dinner table related to Cav’s favorite topic: high horses.

Thanks for the chat, and for clarifying any possible confusion anyone may have. I look forward to reading your next rant about hypocrisy and people who don’t want to talk substance but only criticizing the poster. It’s always fun. Or maybe, after this post of laying everything out so clearly, you’ll just have a couple substance filled laughing faces in response. Those are always so interesting as well. Cheers!!

It’s sort of funny. For someone who loves to frequently tell people how to live their lives ….. when people dish anything back at you, that you get pretty whiny and morally indignant.

I’ll give u the credit in this thread tho. This is one of the times you didn’t open the door yourself for the record.

actually maybe I take that back. You post a link. It’s cool cause it’s yours. Others post a link and it’s the algorithm running their lives lol.

Bigbrog · July 16

48 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Well, I have said to you, several times, I would much rather just have a conversation, (like for example, entering into a thread with nothing but data from an administration website) but opened doors will be walked through. So let us recap, with the backdrop that you have made it very clear you don’t like when people just want to criticize posters for what they believe or how they post, instead of anything of substance about the topic:

>I entered the thread with a post that had nothing to do with any poster or comment, but rather just simple data.

> Cav replies to me, not with any response on the actual data, but rather just opening the door to make it personal.

>I walked through said opened door

>Jimmy then responds, not having anything to do with the provided data, but rather only to open the door of making it personal.

>I walked through said opened door.

> You respond to me, not wanting to have anything to do with the provided data, but rather just opening the door to make it personal.

>I walked through said opened door, but then even asked you directly your thoughts on the provided data, which you ignored because the chat between us being personal was more appealing to you.

When you look at the recap, and it is completely accurate in terms of how our little chat here developed, it’s interesting that you have this message for me, but not for your two roomates. It’s kind of surprising since you are so very much against hypocrites. It is also suprising, given how much you dislike people not wanting to talk about the issues but rather just make things personal, that you continue to refuse each and every time I offer a nice civil conversation on issues, while not being able to control your urge to open those doors I’ve explained to you, several times. I would think someone who is so against that kind of posting, as well as so against hypocrisy, would jump at the opportunity to have a civil conversation instead of always wanting to start this silliness. Or, maybe you have projection issues??

As for my ego…if you believe you and your roommates’ silliness has any impact on my ego, positive or negative…..you may want to have a conversation around the dinner table related to Cav’s favorite topic: high horses.

Thanks for the chat, and for clarifying any possible confusion anyone may have. I look forward to reading your next rant about hypocrisy and people who don’t want to talk substance but only criticizing the poster. It’s always fun. Or maybe, after this post of laying everything out so clearly, you’ll just have a couple substance filled laughing faces in response. Those are always so interesting as well. Cheers!!

Hope you had fun chatting with yourself...bet you and your ego feel SO much better Man you are weak

WrestlingRasta · July 16

45 minutes ago, Caveira said:

It’s sort of funny. For someone who loves to frequently tell people how to live their lives ….. when people dish anything back at you, that you get pretty whiny and morally indignant.

I’ll give u the credit in this thread tho. This is one of the times you didn’t open the door yourself for the record.

actually maybe I take that back. You post a link. It’s cool cause it’s yours. Others post a link and it’s the algorithm running their lives lol.

Well, first, can you please indicate where in this thread I posted a link? I didn’t. In fact, your initial response to me in this thread was on the very fact that I did not post a link. Do you see how you’re not making any sense? But even if I did, are you not capable of making the distinction between posting a link for raw data from the DOJ website, and copy and pasting twitter feed fodder 50x a week?

Second, I’ve never told you, or anyone for that matter, how they should live their lives. I’ve just tried to help you with your social media addiction, that’s more about one particular way not to live your life. Once again, it’s all there in the archives, if difficult realty is at all of interest to you.

WrestlingRasta · July 16

12 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Hope you had fun chatting with yourself...bet you and your ego feel SO much better Man you are weak

Chatting with myself? Are you unable to see that on this page alone, there are nine quotes of my posts, from three different people. That would mean multiple people reading, quoting, and responding to what I’m writing. But…chatting with myself??

Can you see how you, like your friend above, are not making any sense?

Caveira · July 16

1 hour ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Well, first, can you please indicate where in this thread I posted a link? I didn’t. In fact, your initial response to me in this thread was on the very fact that I did not post a link. Do you see how you’re not making any sense? But even if I did, are you not capable of making the distinction between posting a link for raw data from the DOJ website, and copy and pasting twitter feed fodder 50x a week?

Second, I’ve never told you, or anyone for that matter, how they should live their lives. I’ve just tried to help you with your social media addiction, that’s more about one particular way not to live your life. Once again, it’s all there in the archives, if difficult realty is at all of interest to you.

You pointed to some gov study or something. Whats the diff

WrestlingRasta · July 16

22 minutes ago, Caveira said:

You pointed to some gov study or something. Whats the diff

That social media addiction is frying your brain brother….for real.

Caveira · July 16

45 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

That social media addiction is frying your brain brother….for real.

I google stuff. So do you. We are the same. You just pretend your superior to all

Edited July 16 by Caveira

WrestlingRasta · July 16

17 minutes ago, Caveira said:

I google stuff. So do you. We are the same. You just pretend your superior to all

My friend, I certainly do not feel I’m superior to you, or anyone, other than the wrestlers and employees under my charge . And that’s not a matter of “feeling”, but rather standard chain of command. I’m sorry my trying to help you with your addiction hurts your feelings.

But we are definitely, moooooost definitley, not the same.

Edited July 16 by WrestlingRasta

JimmySpeaks · July 17

11 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Well I mean, I’ve asked you, several times, to provide anything, anything at all of substance that might refresh my memory of the claim of yours, yet you consistently fail to do so. It’s almost as if you got upset so you just made some shit up, and then repeated it so much you actually convinced yourself of it, just to make yourself feel better.

Imagine having someone in your head so much that you have to jump in each time you see them post, and then have to come back to the same quote again 5-10 minutes later to air out some more grievance. Over and over again. It’s a lot like your compensating for something you feel inside and aren’t happy with.

But it’s good to see the three of you back together again. Tell Mr Roper I said hi.

I’ve told you on MORE than one occasion what it was about. Keep trying to play the game and deny it ever happened. I was given a two month time out over it because you were sad and a big baby. Facts don’t care about your feelings Mr morals.

Edited July 17 by JimmySpeaks

JimmySpeaks · July 17

3 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

My friend, I certainly do not feel I’m superior to you, or anyone, other than the wrestlers and employees under my charge . And that’s not a matter of “feeling”, but rather standard chain of command. I’m sorry my trying to help you with your addiction hurts your feelings.

But we are definitely, moooooost definitley, not the same.

You’re just like him as he said. You’re just too full,of yourself to realize it. Wait, I mean too full of yourself to admit it.

More fraud

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

mspart

Caveira

Lipdrag

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Latest Rankings

College Commitments