Snarf

I think you're misreading the plan. The "prevent, suppress, and punish" is the name of the protocol, not its effect. If I recall, the UN protocol imposes a less demanding standard on victims to prove that they qualify for the T-Visa, which can lead to permanent residence. That's how it lessens restrictions.

"The affirmative must only claim advantages from the hypothetical implementation of the plan rather than its discursive/in round effects."

Same. David's ongoing failure to reply to messages and his generally being unresponsive to the needs of this community is shameful, and he should be embarrassed. He is ruining something built by greater people than him, and it is hard to watch something so good die in the hands of someone so incompetent.

Your ongoing failure to reply to messages and generally being unresponsive to the needs of this community is shameful, and you should be embarrassed. You are ruining something built by greater people than you, and it is hard to watch something so good die in the hands of someone so incompetent.

http://www.rhizomes.net/issue5/poke/pokemon.html This is surprisingly useful and meme-y

Does anyone have David's contact info?

I actually think this is a really thorough articulation of the point. I think we talked a little past eachother - you're talking about your website's functionality, while I'm talking about cross-x's popularity and legitimacy (despite not being as functional). Cross-x has an enormous membership base and name recognition, largely built on its historical luck and legacy, and I'm wondering if you have a specific plan to build your alternative website's base to comparable levels -- and if so, why that plan is likely to succeed relative to c-x's enormous existing base.

I'd love to hear both of you talk a little more about the legitimacy problem - a ton of sites with varying levels of sophistication have tried to new the "new cross-x," and have consistently never attracted a sufficient critical mass to shift the center of gravity from here to anywhere else. The criticisms about CX being poor now could either be a reason to move or a reason to improve here. Since I get that you're both seriously committed to the former option, I think it would be useful to hear your replies to the legitimacy problem.

David paying makes a lawsuit mostly less viable BUT the people David wrongfully withheld from are likely entitled to compound interest (somewhere bt 7-10% per year depending on where we sued) and could quite easily recover for that in small claims. If David really wants to make things right, and means what he’s saying about “cross-x deserving better”, he’ll pay a compound interest from the time that each payment accrued as well as all balance of all payments due. He’d should also reach out to site veterans who have payments due but haven’t logged in for a while, and offer them payments as well. A simple message that they’re entitled to $ would be a good start.