sorry for the ancient reply. Sorry for the ancient reply. So much has happene since then. jake2b on twitter under handle @sboho is who did this though. wont seem to let me reply in full the post. ill try half here. and half.

I owe credit to u/theorico for a great post today providing analysis for the Cohen defendants counter claims in the pump and dump lawsuit. It made me revisit Docket 29, the Lazard engagement and the Kurtz declaration, which I had been looking back on periodically. As I have said before, I firmly believe Lazard is the epicentre of planning for this company. Today I want to present what I had been working away at with Docket 29.

In essence, legalese is like a secret language that lawyers use to confuse the average reader. Part linguist, part magician, they turn simple ideas into complex incantations that only they can fully understand. I joke of course, but it is with merit to bring it up as a good lawyer will use language to communicate specific requirements, outcomes, and only those things. Truly, you could say that interpreting the language can tell you more with what it does not say, rather than what it does. And so this brings me to Docket 29. I have a feeling I cannot shake that Lazard is intimately involved with the company’s efforts to revitalize and restructure and I have been relentlessly looking for ways to disprove myself and put the obsession to rest. But the more I look into it, the more obsessed I become. Let us look through some key points I have highlighted in Docket 29 and break them down with surgical precision.

Either this is the ultimate expression of obfuscating any logical anything, “the ultimate bear trap” as some have said, or I am losing my marbles.

r/BBBY - Lazard and Legalese: The ultimate bear trap? The most artistic use of the English language and tinfoil-level plausible deniability. Kurtz declaration

So this docket aims to convince the Judge that he should allow Lazard to remain BBBY’s investment bank and financial advisor throughout bankruptcy. As such, you would think that the onset of the document and background information would be related to the services they are providing the company, so that the Judge would approve them.

So Mr. Kurtz states his role with Lazard, what they are and what they do. Again, you are asking the Judge to approve you providing services to the company and in this document you are beginning by saying you provide merger and acquisition services, raising money and providing consulting and advisory services on restructuring. Then in point 4 he really does not want to confuse anyone by again stating they assist with corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions, divestitures (when a company disposes of some or all of its assets by selling, exchanging, closing them down, or through bankruptcy), restructuring, …wait. Special committee assignments?

Like when in the cooperation agreement, the company and Ryan Cohen agreed to form a Strategy Committee with two of his added board members?

“Immediately following the execution of this Agreement, Ms. Bowen and Mr. Rosenzweig shall be appointed to serve as members of the Strategy Committee of the Board (the “Strategy Committee”)…”

Maybe.

Thanks for sharing. I posted to the Beyond Uranus sub on Reddit today. Very well done doc. Glad I started watching it.

https://www.youtube.com/live/BtqbwxGhpoQ?feature=share&t=25m02s

Unbelievable . And the hypocrisy. I was going back and for with Spark on a twitter space. After she said Superstonk encourages others to make communities elsewhere, but she didn’t respond to why mentioning other places is not allowed in Super (specifcally LemmY) which could have no brigading possibility, or voting for that matter. So somehow I guess you’re supposed to reach out to others who may be interested in similar topics but not where they go to discuss those topics outside Super, and at the same time you’re banned for participating in that community from then on. Unfreakinbelievable really.

Hey, do you know what kind of browsing behavior is tracked and if it’s in Lemmy source code itself? If so I would wonder why it is there and/or what it is used for. Is the user behavior scrapable by third parties without necessarily any contracts in place? I thought I heard Twitter’s data was regularly scrapped for instance, but not sure if that was more restricted to verifying a Twitter account to use other website services like the popular Google login for other sites. I imagine the right 3rd party could scrape data from any website, maybe the question is how effectively.

As far as the backups go, would private messages be hidden from an admin as long as the password is not known? If so, what kind of protections are there, assuming there’s not a high level of protection there, or is there some level of encryption that protects those messages preventing display without the password known? Unlike browsing behavior?

And am I understanding correctly that the server admin doesn’t have access to each individuals password unless it was cracked?

Lol your lemmy name. Hmm, I haven’t dug into the Twitter files too much but I think I caught the gist of it. Will have to revist. Thanks for the props. Good to have places to go that can’t be so easily shut down by a few peoples say so. The lack of transparency is the thing that really gets me.