Adrienne

@adrienneleigh

Don’t you see we must either follow one wild possibility or else go home to bed? Also @adrienne@social.treehouse.systems on Mastodon/Fediverse; find me there!

2.495 Folgt6.014 Follower19.529 Posts

Bluesky

Ist das dein Profil?Übernimm es — dann gehört dir adrienneleigh.dirty.social.Profil übernehmen

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jul 13

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jul 11

lol, they've already changed the headline to downplay it.

screenshot of a headline from CNN:

Democratic Rep. Khanna says Israeli settlers and IDF soldiers blockaded him in West Bank for over an hour

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jul 9

@erinbiba.bsky.social i'm gonna block this guy but he needs to be on your list

cjlemontea.bsky.social says

You can’t know. I don’t think he knew at all. The claimant can change her mind about what happened years later and ruin your life over it. Any less-than-excellent sex can get reframed into a crime now.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jun 26

Like the only time i can remember Stout even noting the Jewishness of a character is this passage from THE MOTHER HUNT, which makes me giggle on every reread:

A little before eleven the doorbell rang, and it was Saul. He preceded me to the office, sat in the red leather chair, and said, “I just did something I’m glad my father will never know about. I swore to something with my hand on the New Testament. The Bible was upside down.”

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jun 23

The WHOLE REASON that social media networks including Bsky have this bit of UI on people's profiles is because following is a trust signal! You don't have to like it, but you DO have to understand that it's true. If you want to keep tabs on some loathsome shithead, THAT'S WHAT LISTS & FEEDS ARE FOR.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jun 6

@questauthority.bsky.social @kathryntewson.bsky.social a potentially interesting sentence from the (otherwise not very interesting) latest discovery-related order in the WPE v Automattic case:

Further, Mr. Mullenweg’s response that he does not know the contents of his own Foundation’s tax filings is tantamount to an admission.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jun 3

Like, i want to be clear that i'm still kind of personally stuck on the specific facts here, but i acknowledge that as a web developer, i'm almost certainly living this XKCD comic

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jun 1

oh wow, it's rare that someone really says the "you're already under the bus, but you're still obligated to prevent me from being under it with you" case as clearly as this guy just said it to @sloanelysbeth.bsky.social

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Jun 1

...the modlist doesn't lie:

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 30

@questauthority.bsky.social @kathryntewson.bsky.social just saw this in a judge's order and it made me giggle; thought it might also make you giggle. (Full docket here: www.courtlistener.com/docket/70238... A friend of mine is one of the named defendants.)

District courts generally grant a pro se plaintiff leave to amend a complaint to cure its defects, but leave to amend may be denied if the plaintiff has already been given an opportunity to amend but has failed to cure the complaint’s deficiencies. See Ruotolo v. City of New York, 514 F.3d 184, 191 (2d Cir. 2008); Salahuddin v. Cuomo, 861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988). The Court has already provided Plaintiff with an opportunity to amend. Plaintiff responded to the Court’s conclusion that his 139-page complaint was unduly lengthy and confusing by filing a 386-page amended complaint that is equally confusing. Nothing in the amended complaint suggests that further amendment could cure the deficiencies identified above. The Court therefore declines to grant Plaintiff another opportunity to amend.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 28

that would require him to engage with the literature, though, which he famously does not do!

Screenshot of an old tweet from Will Stancil, saying:

people get mad at me for not engaging with the literature, and it's true, I rarely do, but it's because I trust myself to be able to think relatively soundly about the world from a clean slate but I do not trust myself not to mangle any kind of academic field I'm not an expert in

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 25

A bunch of the folks talking about music (and everything else) probably have you blocked because you follow a notorious scumbag and people use modlists, fwiw.

screenshot saying "Muted by "Followers of Jesse Singal""

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 21

Okay, yeah, something deeply fucked up is in those transcripts:

Defense attorneys continued to push for their disclosure anyway. Straw attorney Christopher Parente urged Perry during a hearing Monday simply to look at an unredacted version, arguing that prosecutors may be hiding something that “could have tainted all of this.”

Prosecutors said they had no objection, so Perry agreed to take a look. She seemed skeptical at the time, though, telling them “if I had to guess, it seemed like those were probably related to IT issues.”

Two days later, the judge demanded the appearance in her courtroom of “any” prosecutor “who participated in the decision to redact portions” of the transcript, “whether on the trial team or at the supervisory level.”

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 17

John Stuart Mill & Harriet Taylor Mill covered this 200 years ago in "The Subjection of Women":

The general opinion of men is supposed to be, that the natural vocation of a woman is that of a wife and mother. I say, is supposed to be, because, judging from acts⁠—from the whole of the present constitution of society⁠—one might infer that their opinion was the direct contrary. They might be supposed to think that the alleged natural vocation of women was of all things the most repugnant to their nature; insomuch that if they are free to do anything else⁠—if any other means of living, or occupation of their time and faculties, is open, which has any chance of appearing desirable to them⁠—there will not be enough of them who will be willing to accept the condition said to be natural to them. If this is the real opinion of men in general, it would be well that it should be spoken out. I should like to hear somebody openly enunciating the doctrine (it is already implied in much that is written on the subject)⁠—“It is necessary to society that women should marry and produce children. They will not do so unless they are compelled. Therefore it is necessary to compel them.” The merits of the case would then be clearly defined. It would be exactly that of the slaveholders of South Carolina and Louisiana. “It is necessary that cotton and sugar should be grown. White men cannot produce them. Negroes will not, for any wages which we choose to give. Ergo they must be compelled.”

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 14

So, uh, if anyone knows who @ecrivaineur.bsky.social is, they just sent me this unsolicited DM. Do i need to be worried for my safety?

You're a miserable fucking cunt and a coward. Human poison.

(Adrienne's reply)
i'm sorry, who are you exactly?

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 14

And here's our other friend; she likes to prop her head up on things, and in this case decided that my bag of chips was a good pillow.

A tabby cat on a couch, with her head propped against a bag of potato chips.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 14

Here is the tiny man, all curled up in his fort (one of his other favorite spots, we built it out of some cheap IKEA tables)

a tabby cat with white paws, curled up in a cat fort

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 12

...oh my god i was correct in DMs. #12 is definitely bringing the hilarity.

A. Jurisdiction and Venue

This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343 because these claims arise under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968), the Whistleblower Protection Act, Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over related state‑law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial part of the events giving rise to these claims occurred in this District.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 10

Average Will Stancil defender:

Jack @kuuga.bsky.social

You need to back this claim up with data. To make a claim that Stancil is disproportionately retaliatory against transgender women, you'd need to audit the proportion of vicious replies above some given level of intensity sent to Stancil by transfemmes versus the general population...

Then you would need to establish, through data, that Stancil's QRTs of transfem people are disproportionately numerous compared to their representation in the above sample.

Until you can do both of those things, your claim is not true.

Even if in 2027 you run this study and it supports your earlier claim your earlier claim was still a lie *at the time* because you had not yet verified it.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 8

Anyway, if you combine this redacted bit from today's letter with the court order from April 28, it's pretty clear that at least SOMETHING has been destroyed

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 7

Lots of mardown files. "CLAUDE.md" is right there; oh, that's a bad sign. What else can i see? "DEV_WORKFLOW.md", oh, that looks interesting... Oh. Well, fuck. I hope Ubuntu keeps AVH in their package tree for awhile, i guess, or someone else makes a fork that isn't COMPLETELY WRITTEN BY SLOPBOTS

Development Workflow
This project serves as an experiment in how much of the development and maintenance lifecycle can be automated with AI-assisted tooling, while also making it easy for contributors to follow a consistent, standardized workflow.

This document describes our structured approach to development tasks, from issue creation through to merged pull requests.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 7

@joolie.bsky.social Hey, i haven't talked to you in like a million years but i just found a cool drawing you did for me on my birthday like 8 years ago and it made me think of you <3

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· May 5

he is, ofc, also a transphobe

Dexter Parker (@ridingtime.bsky.social)

A critical mass of people on this website think surgeons can build men vaginas. I doubt you find this similarly disqualifying. You're conflating your own opinions with some baseline of acceptable thought. It's just naked self-flattery.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Apr 15

@questauthority.bsky.social so quick question: "Counsel of Record" means the primary law firm recommending someone, right? Because if so, it looks like Matt/WP have changed law firms AGAIN, somewhere in here:

Screenshot from a docket item with the following text highlighted:
I am a partner of Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP, attorneys of record for Defendants Automattic Inc. and Matthew Mullenweg.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Mar 18

lmao, Kathryn, ilu

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Mar 18

i read this order yesterday and i am not a lawyer but it was AMAZING. This footnote made me laugh.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Mar 17

She did! This is a description of grooming, from her statement!

Rather than direct my enthusiasm for math to the subject, my topology professor (Daniel Biss) directed it at himself. In her fantastic essay for the New York Times, Amia Srinivasan describes this trope and why it is malpractice for professors. My professor’s responses to my emails got longer and longer, topics extending well beyond mathematics; office hours lasted later and later. Flattered and insecure, I convinced myself it didn’t mean anything - I was a student, after all! - until the quarter ended, and he emailed to ask if I wanted to meet up, socially. He brought a book, with an inscription, which began “On the occasion of an end and a beginning…” It was signed, “With bundles of admiration.”

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Mar 17

Here's the immediately-previous bit of the thread! He is absolutely arguing that it's a "modern lens" to see this as predatory and that there's nothing actually wrong with it!

@fanxioustastic.bsky.social

I guess I feel like she would have been clearer if that’s how she perceived it. She’s being very clear about everything else, including viewing 20 years ago through a more damning modern lens. It’s not like she’s trying to protect his reputation or anything.

---

@adrienneleigh.bsky.social

Buddy, 20 years ago was not the fucking dark ages. I was an adult 20 years ago and i assure you this was considered gross and predatory back then too. At least by women.

---

@fanxioustastic.bsky.social

It pretty common and while it was considered not the best, a 27yo prof dating a 21yo former student was certainly not considered “predatory”. In fact UofC currently still employs a professor who very publicly pursued and ended up with a student.

---

@adrienneleigh.bsky.social

It absolutely was considered predatory by a whole lot of women. Again, i was a grownup 20 years ago. You can lie to yourself, but you can't lie to me.

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Mar 17

i love it when men hate women!!!!!

@adrienneleigh.bsky.social

It absolutely was considered predatory by a whole lot of women. Again, i was a grownup 20 years ago. You can lie to yourself, but you can't lie to me.

---

@fanxioustastic.bsky.social

I don’t appreciate the gaslighting here. There’s people supporting her pointing out how common this was.

---

@adrienneleigh.bsky.social

"Common" and "not predatory" are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Men preying on women in a multitude of ways is, in fact, extremely common! It was also common 20 years ago!

---

@fanxioustastic.bsky.social

Jfc quit contradicting yourself

Adrienne@adrienneleigh· Mar 17

She does in fact talk about both! She even uses the word grooming! You apparently can't read AND are a fucking misogynist?