13245 pts ยท June 27, 2014
https://imgur.com/ggW5cFS
See, this is where I'm not sure. The one closest to the thumb definitely looks like the extra one. But in my (limited) experience, the middle finger is longer than the index finger, and the two in the middle seem to be the same length. They also appear identical. So to me, it looks like he has an extra middle finger, and the extra middle finger caused the placement of the pointer finger to shift and appear more like a thumb.
The point is to send a message. If the message isn't sent CLEARLY, then the company can try to explain it away as some accident and ignore the point. This cannot be ignored or spun in a different light. Now....they could have taken precautions about recording it in a way without identifying information to avoid getting caught, but that kind of thinking takes time to work out the logistics, and this sounds less like premeditated crime and more like "ok I've fucking had it, today is the last day."
This is also the kind of stuff where I would start telling people "Get your phone out, we're going to video chat so you can prove to me that it's turned on."
Had a DirecTV customer saying that their set-top box wouldn't turn on. Got them to confirm it was plugged in, went through a few more steps, then suggested they try a different outlet."Oh, it's plugged into a power strip, not the wall.""Ok, the power strip should have some type of light that comes on when it's plugged in, does it have anything that's lit up?""Well no, cuz the power strip isn't plugged in."
#6 I'm assuming she means if the call is answered somewhere else. For example, let's say it's late at night and the employee is in the office doing paperwork. Maybe there is an option to 'intercept' front-desk calls on the office phone? So the employee could answer the call within 2 rings, but because they answered on the office phone instead of the front desk phone, technically the front desk shows it as a missed call (even though it was answered within 2 rings).
the squARe hole
You sound like that one celebrity who told poor people to "quit being poor".
Al Asad. Back in 2005 and 2007.
As someone that deployed twice, we had surf and turf every Wednesday. Hopefully, this is genuinely just good food.
We had surf and turf every Wednesday back when we deployed to Iraq, so this might simply be a good meal.
I was Food Service back in the Marine Corps. We deployed to Iraq twice (2005 and 2007). For us, we had US contractors that handled the food in the mess halls at the larger bases (we were at Camp Ripper in Al Asad). Our mess halls had surf-n-turf every Wednesday - some type of steak and usually crab legs or lobster tails. I genuinely hope this picture is just good food, rather than a type of "last meal" like people are making it out to be.
Because repo assholes are repo assholes.
No, it's not miscommunication. Let's say that her love language is "quality time". Let's say that he likes baseball games, but she can't stand them. By your definition, if he takes her to a baseball game and spends time with her at the game, he is properly communicating love, because he's using her love language and spending time with her, even though it's a subject that she doesn't enjoy.
This was actually a really sad arc IIRC. The girl holding the camera was a bully and manipulated the girl into doing the videos by pretending to be her friend, then posted it to get the whole school bullying her.
I noticed something about the links for the files. The links will get taken down from the main site, but the actual files do not get removed. So for example, Data Set 10 has files where the names start with "EFTA012..." And data set 11 has files where the names start with "EFTA022...". But the files for data set 10 SEEM to stop around number 1,264,xxx. However, if you click on one of those files, and change the file name in the address bar, it will still pull up the "removed" file. (cont.)
She reminds me of Sophia Vergara (I think that's the right name? From 'Modern Family')
Came here to say this.
#6 Saw this muted at first and, for some reason, I just expected it to be Bad Touch from Bloodhound Gang.
Wait seriously???
This sounds like an insane rush. I want to try it so bad.
Repo work is a sugar-coated version of an ICE agent. Same goes for the assholes who take "visitor's" vehicles from apartment complexes.
I need a banana so I know how big those craters are.
Hear me out...Imagine this was a bunch of women. They wouldn't pick on Mom about the thermos - they would say something nice and ask about it. Then Mom would explain her daughter picked it out, and all the women would "awwww".Now...Imagine the other guys find out the story behind the thermos - they would make sure nothing ever happened to Dad's thermos.The end result is the same. But guys think that we have to make fun of someone if we want to know more about something.
Lmao thank you! Genuinely thought I was losing my mind when I couldn't see the difference.
Can someone clarify for me? Is this picture supposed to be the "original un-redacted" version (meaning the DOJ added more), or is this what it looks like AFTER the DOJ redacted it? Because the link currently shows the document looking exactly the same.
Direct from the DOJ site:s/Giuffre%20v.%20Maxwell,%20No.%20115-cv-07433%20(S.D.N.Y.%202015)/1332-16.pdf">https://www.justice.gov/multimedia/Court%20Records/Giuffre%20v.%20Maxwell,%20No.%20115-cv-07433%20(S.D.N.Y.%202015)/1332-16.pdfFrom CourtListener (you'll have to download it):https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355835/1332/16/giuffre-v-maxwell/
I scraped the entire DOJ Epstein Library on Saturday. The files I have match those screenshots exactly. But the file currently on the DOJ site ALSO matches them. So if they tried to redact it after-the-fact, they they must have reverted back to the un-redacted version? And for what it's worth, the same exact version of the file can be found on CourtListener. I'll post the links below this so you can check for yourselves. The Case Number is 1:15-cv-07433-LAP, and is Exhibit 16 for Document 1332.
You sound like you've never used a tape measure before.
It's from Internet Archive, I haven't seen any viruses from anything yet. I just ran a script and finished downloading all 561 files. I'm going to go through it in a little bit and she was actually in there.
This video, and the one of the skeleton telling the spare ribs joke, are probably my two favorite videos to rewatch.
See, this is where I'm not sure. The one closest to the thumb definitely looks like the extra one. But in my (limited) experience, the middle finger is longer than the index finger, and the two in the middle seem to be the same length. They also appear identical. So to me, it looks like he has an extra middle finger, and the extra middle finger caused the placement of the pointer finger to shift and appear more like a thumb.
The point is to send a message. If the message isn't sent CLEARLY, then the company can try to explain it away as some accident and ignore the point. This cannot be ignored or spun in a different light. Now....they could have taken precautions about recording it in a way without identifying information to avoid getting caught, but that kind of thinking takes time to work out the logistics, and this sounds less like premeditated crime and more like "ok I've fucking had it, today is the last day."
This is also the kind of stuff where I would start telling people "Get your phone out, we're going to video chat so you can prove to me that it's turned on."
Had a DirecTV customer saying that their set-top box wouldn't turn on. Got them to confirm it was plugged in, went through a few more steps, then suggested they try a different outlet.
"Oh, it's plugged into a power strip, not the wall."
"Ok, the power strip should have some type of light that comes on when it's plugged in, does it have anything that's lit up?"
"Well no, cuz the power strip isn't plugged in."
#6 I'm assuming she means if the call is answered somewhere else. For example, let's say it's late at night and the employee is in the office doing paperwork. Maybe there is an option to 'intercept' front-desk calls on the office phone? So the employee could answer the call within 2 rings, but because they answered on the office phone instead of the front desk phone, technically the front desk shows it as a missed call (even though it was answered within 2 rings).
the squARe hole
You sound like that one celebrity who told poor people to "quit being poor".
Al Asad. Back in 2005 and 2007.
As someone that deployed twice, we had surf and turf every Wednesday. Hopefully, this is genuinely just good food.
We had surf and turf every Wednesday back when we deployed to Iraq, so this might simply be a good meal.
I was Food Service back in the Marine Corps. We deployed to Iraq twice (2005 and 2007). For us, we had US contractors that handled the food in the mess halls at the larger bases (we were at Camp Ripper in Al Asad). Our mess halls had surf-n-turf every Wednesday - some type of steak and usually crab legs or lobster tails. I genuinely hope this picture is just good food, rather than a type of "last meal" like people are making it out to be.
Because repo assholes are repo assholes.
No, it's not miscommunication.
Let's say that her love language is "quality time". Let's say that he likes baseball games, but she can't stand them. By your definition, if he takes her to a baseball game and spends time with her at the game, he is properly communicating love, because he's using her love language and spending time with her, even though it's a subject that she doesn't enjoy.
This was actually a really sad arc IIRC. The girl holding the camera was a bully and manipulated the girl into doing the videos by pretending to be her friend, then posted it to get the whole school bullying her.
I noticed something about the links for the files. The links will get taken down from the main site, but the actual files do not get removed. So for example, Data Set 10 has files where the names start with "EFTA012..." And data set 11 has files where the names start with "EFTA022...". But the files for data set 10 SEEM to stop around number 1,264,xxx. However, if you click on one of those files, and change the file name in the address bar, it will still pull up the "removed" file. (cont.)
She reminds me of Sophia Vergara (I think that's the right name? From 'Modern Family')
Came here to say this.
#6 Saw this muted at first and, for some reason, I just expected it to be Bad Touch from Bloodhound Gang.
Wait seriously???
This sounds like an insane rush. I want to try it so bad.
Repo work is a sugar-coated version of an ICE agent. Same goes for the assholes who take "visitor's" vehicles from apartment complexes.
I need a banana so I know how big those craters are.
Hear me out...
Imagine this was a bunch of women. They wouldn't pick on Mom about the thermos - they would say something nice and ask about it. Then Mom would explain her daughter picked it out, and all the women would "awwww".
Now...
Imagine the other guys find out the story behind the thermos - they would make sure nothing ever happened to Dad's thermos.
The end result is the same. But guys think that we have to make fun of someone if we want to know more about something.
Lmao thank you! Genuinely thought I was losing my mind when I couldn't see the difference.
Can someone clarify for me? Is this picture supposed to be the "original un-redacted" version (meaning the DOJ added more), or is this what it looks like AFTER the DOJ redacted it? Because the link currently shows the document looking exactly the same.
Direct from the DOJ site:
s/Giuffre%20v.%20Maxwell,%20No.%20115-cv-07433%20(S.D.N.Y.%202015)/1332-16.pdf">https://www.justice.gov/multimedia/Court%20Records/Giuffre%20v.%20Maxwell,%20No.%20115-cv-07433%20(S.D.N.Y.%202015)/1332-16.pdf
From CourtListener (you'll have to download it):
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355835/1332/16/giuffre-v-maxwell/
I scraped the entire DOJ Epstein Library on Saturday. The files I have match those screenshots exactly. But the file currently on the DOJ site ALSO matches them. So if they tried to redact it after-the-fact, they they must have reverted back to the un-redacted version? And for what it's worth, the same exact version of the file can be found on CourtListener. I'll post the links below this so you can check for yourselves. The Case Number is 1:15-cv-07433-LAP, and is Exhibit 16 for Document 1332.
You sound like you've never used a tape measure before.
It's from Internet Archive, I haven't seen any viruses from anything yet. I just ran a script and finished downloading all 561 files. I'm going to go through it in a little bit and she was actually in there.
This video, and the one of the skeleton telling the spare ribs joke, are probably my two favorite videos to rewatch.