-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
USA Today: Johnny Depp Sues Amber Heard for Defamation Seeking $50 Million
- Thread starter Vonnegut
- Start date
There is a Tweet linked earlier in the thread that covers this. I wasn't necessarily calling anyone out on ERA, just following up on what that Tweet said. I am for waiting for evidence, but on Twitter and other areas of the net where this story is breaking. It's literally all just, "you see! Women can be shitty abusive assholes too," which is news to no one living in reality.
Also I am guilty of shitting on Depp, but to be fair, I don't recall anyone else saying to wait for evidence at the time.
Oh ok. Yeah those people definitely exist on Twitter. Hell, some people on Twitter would probably side with the male abuser even if he was 100 percent proven guilty. Those people are definitely bad news.
hahaha success enhances the pleasure right
imagine getting successfully awkwardly humped by Elon's fresh from the spinning machine Musk
The picture she released allegedly showed the injury she suffered from an incident that night. That's basically the foundation of his lawsuit. That she defamed him in an op-ed about being an abuse victim, and implying he was the perpetrator, but the incident she made public is basically a "hoax." He claims that there is testimony from many people who saw her that night and in the immediate days after that she had no visible injuries. So the implication is that that picture must show an injury she got some other way.
people love fucking successful people
not exactly a shocking revelation about humans
Yeah I'm getting caught up on some things and it's not looking good for Heard.
Jesus.
I really wonder if they do. I mean, they claim that they do, but people lie all the time.
Nah, he says that's the moment when he found out he lost all his money.
Last edited:
There is the potential for a broader and important conversation to emerge from this if it turns out Heard is the monster (which is looking likely) but such a discussion requires people to turn that accusatory finger inward and look at their own actions and reflect on their own behaviors.
Case in point, I thought I understood the Michael Jackson molestation case well enough to be dismissive of the documentary Leaving Neverland but at the urging of a close friend I watched the entire thing and now I am convinced he is guilty.
It's not an easy thing to admit I was wrong and even harder to admit my own bias but if we are operating on the presumption of morality and the pursuit of truth, we have to be willing to go to those uncomfortable places.
A lot of people dogpiled on Depp and if it turns out that he is innocent, I wonder how many of those same people will feel genuinely ashamed and admit their foible instead of post garbage about how Depp is equally bad or they are both trash human beings?
Case in point, I thought I understood the Michael Jackson molestation case well enough to be dismissive of the documentary Leaving Neverland but at the urging of a close friend I watched the entire thing and now I am convinced he is guilty.
It's not an easy thing to admit I was wrong and even harder to admit my own bias but if we are operating on the presumption of morality and the pursuit of truth, we have to be willing to go to those uncomfortable places.
A lot of people dogpiled on Depp and if it turns out that he is innocent, I wonder how many of those same people will feel genuinely ashamed and admit their foible instead of post garbage about how Depp is equally bad or they are both trash human beings?
Just look at threads like the ones about male rape used as jokes and the more recent thread on male domestic abuse. Even the usual suspects that have to chime into every thread stay silent. People don't seem to care. Their minds were made up long ago.
Last edited:
I been saying for a very long time that some people here have a LAPD mentality. Not just here but the internet in general.
You've summed up my feelings on the matter. There is a lesson to be learned from all this, but I'm not sure if people are willing to look inward to actually learn it.
Do they? Or do they just love being able to say that they have?
Lol c'mon. Unless a statement is made by the moderation team there's no reason to believe anyone has learned anything.
It won't happen, moderators will never admit they are wrong but they will for sure give you a warning or a ban if you say something they don't like.
Didn't something similar happen with Jussie Smollett and that whole situation?
Pretty much. Most of the usual folks that got on the bandwagon and attacked other members here for expressing some caution or objectivity to the story slid back into the shadows and never apologised. Same deal here.
So in other words he's lying about his abuse?My guess is that Depp has run out of money and is no longer being offered high-profile roles. I checked his IMDB page and he doesnt have anything promising in the near future.
https://www.usatoday.com/amp/3034593002
The difference here is that this was years of people shitting on Depp and lumping him in with Weinstein.
Yep in spite of all of his previous partners defending him and Heard's history. Pretty everyone else, and not just Era, sided with Heard.
Look at the first page a look at who jumped into the bashing a victim bandwagon.
Ain't happening.
I've put a lot of the people who just want to make the boldest, most reactionary, and condemning posts they can make on ignore, and Era seems like a much better place.
With all the details that have come out, I gotta feel for the dude. No one believed him and was basically by himself, and then to unleash all of this evidence is crazy.
At least from my experience, the #1 most important thing about dating in my late 20's early 30's has been money. I was on a one hour date with a girl recently where half the time she talked about how hard it was leaving her ex who made bank and ended our date by asking in a roundabout way if i make over $100k or not. And then there's several other dates where income was never exactly directly talked about but talked around. I'm in San Diego though, might be different elsewhere, but money and success here seems to far and away be the number 1 concern with looks and attractiveness number 2.
However, if we're talking purely sex, I don't know why money or success would matter at all as long as the person has their own place.
That's actually a great idea and it seems like the first few pages are a great sample size, honestly.
Era will never learn, lol. GAF was the same way until the split. Don't even know what the temperature is like over there now.
Yeah, it must have been truly awful.
Yeah. I definitely remember moderators commenting as more details on the Smollett case came out.
Commenting that people were not justified for being skeptical in the moment and thus deserved their bans?
No? I believe they were saying specifically that they were reviewing bans at the time of the statement
yes it does.
but trying to paint the mods as these autoritarian lords is bullshit
This post is the worst thing. It's the kind of post you see every time someone lies about sexual assault et al.
They're not (entirely). But they are human and they can easily get swept by the currents - and I have rarely, if ever, seen a mod willing to accept their mistakes or even take back previous actions. There may be a few here that you can contact and actually have a productive conversation with, but there's not many of them.
Re: Depp, I'm glad people are finally starting to believe him. Accusations are a powerful weapon, especially with social media being involved. I don't think anyone will learn much from this though - it's going to be forgotten until we have another thing to be mad at.
The moderation on this forum has always been arbitrary. Rules are vague and therefore interpreted to different mods' liking.
The inconsistency of the moderation has been apparent in multiple threads and no doubt leave the impression of mods mostly take actions against opinions they disagree with.
Two posts that are similar can result in one getting banned for 2 weeks and the other receiving a warning.
The vagueness of the rules and the highly varied interpretation and application of these rules just scream totalitarian. There's little openness about the moderation either. You don't ever see a thread discussing the quality of the moderation. It's always been a us and them situation.
The rules need to be seriously reviewed and set specific boundaries on the length of ban. Not just when a mod doesn't like a specific post and dig through the rule book and slap a arbitrary time of ban on it. I can guarantee that a lot of posts in controversial topics can get banned based on one of the rules because the rules are just so vague and arbitrary. It just comes down to whether the mods wanna do it or not.
The inconsistency of the moderation has been apparent in multiple threads and no doubt leave the impression of mods mostly take actions against opinions they disagree with.
Two posts that are similar can result in one getting banned for 2 weeks and the other receiving a warning.
The vagueness of the rules and the highly varied interpretation and application of these rules just scream totalitarian. There's little openness about the moderation either. You don't ever see a thread discussing the quality of the moderation. It's always been a us and them situation.
The rules need to be seriously reviewed and set specific boundaries on the length of ban. Not just when a mod doesn't like a specific post and dig through the rule book and slap a arbitrary time of ban on it. I can guarantee that a lot of posts in controversial topics can get banned based on one of the rules because the rules are just so vague and arbitrary. It just comes down to whether the mods wanna do it or not.
Because it's something that keeps and keeps happening in this forum?
Well this just brings us back full circle. People don't speak out because they know the more vocal group of users will dogpile them for it, which is enabled by the moderators.
That's because threads discussing moderation are literally outlawed. They occasionally get made, but they get shut down immediately every time. Poke around the search results for "moderation" and the like if you're curious.
People will do whatever they can to take advantage of public opinion. It does a disservice to actual victims of abuse when someone tries to frame things dishonestly. I remember seeing people say that when a woman speaks out about abuse we should believe her, and while I support the intent behind that (don't victim blame or marginalize her) that doesn't mean you throw away critical thought and believe them unquestioningly, because situations like this can occur where somebody abuses it.
I really don't want to step into this but the mods that were very vocal in one thread all but dissapeared in the next thread once it turned out that he wasn't really a victim. I won't name names.
She visibly had an injury on her face when she went to the court house. So the implication apparently is that she had an injury in a photo and also an injury on her face days apart but somehow they are not related to each other, not caused by what she says they're caused by, and that she willingly made appearances in front of others in between the two incidents to disprove her own account knowing she intended to file in court.
Is the testimony from other people still based on the photos from a friend's party where her cheek isn't visible that came up when the court filings first happened? Because Depp's people trying to disparage Heard as a unfaithful lying bisexual tramp isn't new, even if a lot of people in the thread seem to think it is.
My understanding is that Depp is claiming that people testified in depos or provided declarations that, either on the night of the attack, or in immediate days after, people who saw her face to face did not see or notice visible injuries. The incident in question is the one which served as the basis of the restraining order, if I am correct. Or maybe I have my facts wrong and there was another incident that was reported in addition to this one. Let me know if that's the case.