StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Oskuro wrote:I always understood the whole "woman to woman" or "man to man" thing to imply settling things with violence.

It can have that meaning, but at least around here it can also mean settling things between two people without the use of lawyers/arbitration/third parties, no violence implied. Context can certainly be important.

Now, saying it in Spanish, mano a mano is much more likely to imply violence.

I really wonder what she truly had in mind for the "woman to woman" meeting. Although (and now I go on about my latest favourite subject) maybe it's just that she can't stand not dealing with Broomstick directly, because it means she's not important enough to put up with. Maybe she just wants to scream and be screamed at to feel she's still the main character in this shitty movie.

I see several possibilities:

- She interprets my refusal to respond directly to her as fear of her and thinks she can use that as leverage. She's wrong on that - routing all communication through a lawyer is actually the proper way to act if you're in a legal dispute with someone, and in addition having him talk to her means I don't have to keep swallowing down disgust and vomit when attempting to speak to her.

- She thinks she can string me along with promises, that is, that I'm more easily manipulated than the court system.

- She's more afraid of the court system than me... which is OK. I mean, I don't have the authority to slam her fat ass in jail, the court system does. In fact, the court system is going to do just that if she keeps on this path.

- she thinks she can convince me to call off the legal system. Which I can't, actually, not anymore. When it was just a dispute between the two of us yes, if I went insane, I could forgive all and call a halt to it, but now evidence is coming to light that she withheld the tax money from my paycheck, never sent it in to the government, but issued forms indicating that she had. Meaning she stole money from the state of Indiana and US Federal government. I leave you to consider the ramifications of that.

Meaning she stole money from the state of Indiana and US Federal government. I leave you to consider the ramifications of that.

*Microwaves a bag of movie theater popcorn, grabs a soda and a lawn chair*

Broomstick wrote:Now, saying it in Spanish, mano a mano is much more likely to imply violence.

More than imply - "mano a mano" = "hand to hand" in Spanish; "man to man" would be, "hombre a hombre."

Broomstick wrote:[snip 4 possibilities]

Yeah, it's one of those. She's screwed unless she murders you (and probably even then), and may eventually realize that; take precautions.

It's much more likely that one of her other creditors - some of whom are, shall we say, somewhat rough characters - will attempt money extraction via violence. If one morning Pumpkin Harpy Parts are found in multiple locations in the area it wouldn't entirely surprise me, such things have been known to happen. I do not, in any way, condone such things (obviously, I play in the legal arena) but I'm far from the only person she has pissed off and jacked around.

Raw Shark wrote:

Broomstick wrote:Now, saying it in Spanish, mano a mano is much more likely to imply violence.

More than imply - "mano a mano" = "hand to hand" in Spanish; "man to man" would be, "hombre a hombre."

Ah, yes, yet another instance of an English dialect mugging another language and appropriating a phrase for its own purposes.

In spain-spanish it's more typical to say "cara a cara" (face to face). "Mano a mano" feels more like you're suggesting cooperation (more like "hand in hand").

Although another phrase is to solve things "como hombres" (like men) which, indeed, can just mean to talk things over, but I can't help feel it means fighting over it.


I agree that routing communications through your lawyer is the right thing to do, no matter how morbidly curious I'd feel about knowing what the Pumpkin would say if confronted.

Thing is, I'm pretty sure she's past the point of no return regarding her trouble with the law, unfortunately that doesn't seem to guarantee you'll get paid (Specially if she ends up as pumpkin pie).

Yeah I agree, I think the best case scenario here is that Ms. Pumpkin will end up in Low Security prison and Broomstick gets paid, how likely that will be I dunno, I certainly would not want this to end in a murder.

More likely the Pumpkin Harpy will wind up in jail and none of us gets paid - except the state and Fed, who will have first dibs if there's tax fraud.

On the other hand, I did get $500 of what I was originally owed, about a third of the total, which means I got at least some of the money and more than most of the people she owes. If I can't have cash I'll settle for her being behind bars and a little schadenfreude.

Broomstick wrote:More likely the Pumpkin Harpy will wind up in jail and none of us gets paid - except the state and Fed, who will have first dibs if there's tax fraud.

Being as how she basically has no money?

I always wonder, when dealing with such a dishonest and miserly person... how do they manage to be that low on money?

I always wonder, when dealing with such a dishonest and miserly person... how do they manage to be that low on money?

Could be, as with many selfish people, she spent a ton of money on herself and wound up in debt or short of cash.

Or, she could just be horrible with finances and can't balance a checkbook to save her life.

Given the history so far, I'm leaning towards an equal combination of the two.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Broomstick wrote:More likely the Pumpkin Harpy will wind up in jail and none of us gets paid - except the state and Fed, who will have first dibs if there's tax fraud.

Being as how she basically has no money?

As she is employed by another company she does, in fact, have money coming in on a regular basis. There is wage garnishment, where they take a slice of that paycheck every time it's issued, and by "take" I mean they get their share before you get yours. There is bank account garnishment, where they seize such accounts - in fact, my lawyer and I did just that and there is a hearing next week where we hope to be finally issued some of that money. She has assets - a house, at least one vehicle, the machinery owned by the business - that can be seized and sold at auction.

I always wonder, when dealing with such a dishonest and miserly person... how do they manage to be that low on money?

Buy shit and don't pay for it, you run up debts into the thousands. If any of that was bought on credit the interest on it will cause additional pain. Oh, and don't pay your employees, then fail to show up in court and piss off a judge thereby multiplying your financial liability by a factor of 7 in less than half an hour, that's a good move, too.

I'm just surprised that she hasn't showed up at your apartment to confront you. I'm assuming she knows where you live.

Yes, yes she does, just as I know where she lives.

If she does show up here I will have her ass arrested for trespassing. It will be even more fun if the landlord is here, as she owes him about $5k.

Broomstick wrote:

Raw Shark wrote:

Broomstick wrote:Now, saying it in Spanish, mano a mano is much more likely to imply violence.

More than imply - "mano a mano" = "hand to hand" in Spanish; "man to man" would be, "hombre a hombre."

Ah, yes, yet another instance of an English dialect mugging another language and appropriating a phrase for its own purposes.

It's probably more that Germanic languages have cognates of "man" meaning person, while romantic languages have "man" ("mano"/"main",etc) meaning hand. It's not English doing the mugging so much as different language families coming up with words that sound the same but have different meanings.

well when you have a word that means "same" in (ancient) Greek, "man" in Latin and is an insult in English (which is why I didn't type it) you can see why people might get confused.

The technical term is "false cognate". My personal favorite is English "embarrassed" and Spanish "embarazada", meaning "pregnant".

The Pumpkin Harpy apparently got an official audit notice and fired off an e-mail to my lawyer, once again saying I'm a horrible, bitter, jealous (WTF?), terrible, awful, woman, and asked what she needs to do to get me out of her life forever.

Oh, really?

PAY ME WHAT YOU FUCKING OWE ME, BITCH!

Then I will go away.

More talk of talking to lawyers blah blah blah bankruptcy going on disability blah blah blah disabled child blah blah blah

I really hope I get a goddamned check after the hearing on Friday.

So she DID get audited! Hurray! IRS is going to eat her alive.

Good thing your lawyer seems competent. He's probably keeping a copy of that message as evidence should it be needed...since it could easily backfire on her.

Oh, the lawyer and I are both sending each other copies of things, just in case.

I'm not sure if she's being audited by Internal Revenue or if it's some other state department in connection with my unemployment claim. On a certain level I don't really care.

Most of this whining on her part is trying to get out of paying the debt. Sorry, I am no longer in a mood to negotiate.

Maybe it's just me, but when you've already released the hounds, so to speak, seems to me that negotiations are officially over.


As for the previous musings on why the Pumpkin is so in debt, she seems like an extremely selfish person, and I doubt she even considers the option of saving money for the future, I'd bet she just spends money on a whim and has virtually no savings to fall back on.

Also, she keeps proving she's a manipulative bully, trying to make you drop your charges by badmouthing you to your lawyer...

Oskuro wrote:Also, she keeps proving she's a manipulative bully, trying to make you drop your charges by badmouthing you to your lawyer...

Not just to my lawyer, I know for a fact that she's bad-mouthed me to other people. Most of whom told her to her face to just pay up already, then came and told me and we had a good laugh over her stupidity.

Am I the only one thinking she's also sending such mails to the judge and the IRS?

If she does it won't do any good.

To the judge? The judge has already made her decision.

To the IRS? They'll want proof, documentation, more than just her word. Which will invite a scrutiny far more likely to hurt the Pumpkin Harpy than hurt me.

I know, I know.
I just thought the idea she would try to is hillarious... I think it would be perfectly within her modus operandi, which makes it even more pathetic...

The way she handled her court appearance makes me think the Pumpkin-Harpy doesn't really understand how the law and government investigators operate. She's used to dealing with private citizens, who in concrete terms have power equal to or less than her own. Most of them were relatively ignorant and had lives of their own that made it hard for them to actually follow up and make her face consequences for her actions.

So she's used to being able to get away with wheedling, stringing people along, and bullying them where necessary. From long experience dealing with people who don't have the power to seriously hurt her she's grown accustomed to that.

Then she starts dealing with judges who have the power to ruin your life in five minutes and IRS auditors who can literally take your stuff and kick you out on the street to freeze. And, for all I know, loan sharks with legbreakers on retainer at the same time.

These are people you do NOT screw around with... but she's spent a long life making her way from year to year by screwing around with people.

I can easily imagine this causing her to make things worse for herself by taking "an attitude" with the wrong people.