Profile avatar
aricohn.com
First Amendment & defamation lawyer. Now: Lead Counsel for Tech Policy at @thefireorg.bsky.social Former: Free Speech Counsel at @TechFreedom.org Illini/music junkie/oofnik. “A snarky gay lawyer Jessica Fletcher.” https://linktr.ee/aricohn
6,432 posts 46,749 followers 741 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to post
I don't wear a bra nor am I in a relationship with someone who does, but I want to know where to find the Las Vegas Bra Witch. Whatever that is I want to be a part of it.
comment in response to post
Again, bsky.app/profile/aric...
comment in response to post
I hope you wake up less stupid in the morning
comment in response to post
It's justified because the overall ask was for me to justify it as an employee of the organization. It's really not difficult to follow, including why I structured it that way.
comment in response to post
Did you respond to that thread? Yes. But you know what, fine. You have proven that you are not worth actually engaging with and I will take you out on your offer to simply ignore you. So you'll probably say that's an admission too, right? Because you're just a Twitter shitposter on Bluesky.
comment in response to post
Someone literally asked me to "defend" it. Do you fucking know how social media works? Do you need adult supervision?
comment in response to post
It shouldn't be that difficult to understand "this isn't the org speaking, and even if it was you misread it ." I'm not sure I want to talk to people who can't follow that
comment in response to post
I made the points at the top, where they were called for. Say something new and not stupid and maybe you'll get further points. Otherwise, you can either keep getting called stupid or fuck off.
comment in response to post
Not an answer, honey
comment in response to post
Dishonest it is, then. It's funny if you came here to escape Twitter, considering how similar you are to many of the people still there.
comment in response to post
Are you touched in the head, or just dishonest
comment in response to post
Still having trouble with actually reading, I see. I'm sorry for you, for that. I hope you get the support you need.
comment in response to post
I will never tire of it
comment in response to post
You keep posting stupid things, dipshit
comment in response to post
You're doing great, sweetcheeks lol
comment in response to post
Your name certainly checks out, though
comment in response to post
So you also don't know what a "keyboard warrior" is. Because I was talking about how you're not of mental maturity/intelligence to be able to handle the Internet.
comment in response to post
Or, rather, it's the last time you would have had that tested. You can't honestly be this fucking stupid, can you?
comment in response to post
I take it you got a 0 on the LSAT reading comprehension section
comment in response to post
It's literally not celebratory at all, unless you're actively looking to read it that way.
comment in response to post
Literally ever
comment in response to post
I frankly could not possibly give less of a shit whether you find me credible. The people who need to, do.
comment in response to post
I explained to you why FIRE is different. That you are too stupid to understand it is not my problem.
comment in response to post
And I explained why I certainly will not "walk it back" just because some idiot on the Internet doesn't quite comprehend it.
comment in response to post
Imagine the shock
comment in response to post
Now I don't even think HE knows what he's arguing. bsky.app/profile/snar...
comment in response to post
Then I explained why it IS different, and you tried to say "this isn't about FIRE why are you talking about FIRE" Which is it, dipshit?
comment in response to post
Like what the fuck do you think was even being discussed? You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie...
comment in response to post
Exhibit B: bsky.app/profile/snar...
comment in response to post
The conversation was *originally* about one particular organization only. You're the one who apparently was trying to bring in other employers, which were irrelevant. Indeed, it isn't hard. And yet you still seem to be having difficulty.
comment in response to post
Starting to think maybe reading isn't his thing.
comment in response to post
Yes, because someone was talking about the org being responsible for *other* FIRE employees' posts (hence the "either") Are you reading comprehension challenged?
comment in response to post
I'm not "narrowing" anything. Nobody was talking about anything other than one particular organization. If you were trying to expand it past that, that's entirely a You Problem, because nobody else was.
comment in response to post
Because you seem to have missed the part where it explicitly says that yanking Harvard's funding like that was wrong?
comment in response to post
So what you're saying is that you *didn't* read it...
comment in response to post
When your employer is an organization dedicated to free speech and the right to have and express dissenting opinions, then actually it makes a lot of sense. But I do invite you to complain about me and see how far that gets you lol
comment in response to post
you certainly seem to think so
comment in response to post
If you don't want to read the article and instead wonder why people aren't letting Trump control what they say by virtue of whatever he says, that's certainly a choice.
comment in response to post
This too. FIRE shouldn't have to answer for my "fuck the police" and "post the name and picture of every ICE agent online," posts either.
comment in response to post
If this is your idea of what an "aggressive asshole" looks like, you should probably leave the Internet and never come back.
comment in response to post
I'm not asking you to find it persuasive (but on a side note, I find it questionable to judge someone's work based on who their employer is. Sibarium's reporting may have issues, but if it does, it's not because of who he works for. Attack it on its own merits.)
comment in response to post
also that
comment in response to post
Oh you didn't?
comment in response to post
I mean that's also pretty intellectually dishonest: "you presented why you think I'm wrong and therefore you know I am really correct."
comment in response to post
So don't talk about things that are pervasive in public discussions now? We should shut up because Trump is saying things? That's your argument? That nobody should criticize things Trump is also criticizong? Yea no. Also we've been making these criticisms for many years before Trump was a thing.
comment in response to post
You said "ayo" so maybe you're not one to talk
comment in response to post
"dishonest