FILING DEADLINES, forward or backward?

[meganproser]

What was I wrong about RMET? Please elaborate.

OP had already figured out her answer on her own and the thread became a bit more conversational, as these threads sometimes do. Perhaps you should be asking Paradise what SHE is trying to prove, why SHE feels the need to challenge me, etc.?

Go to bed? MOM? Is that YOU????

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Asked and answered.
Yes, your mom said to go to bed, hours ago!
And to quit playing on the internet until you have something positive to contribute.

 

[meganproser]

I see you've been to the Paradise school of avoidance. You really crack me up. You just go around proclaiming people “wrong” without a word to support it.

You can’t be my Mom in disguise. She would never treat people the way I’ve seen you treat others.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

(QUOTE)You wrote: ”Read it Megan, God just read it.” and gave the following link:
http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/cmecf/ecffaq.html

The site you gave includes the following question and incorrect answer:

Can any member of the public use CM/ECF to file documents with the court?

No. Access to the filing portion of CM/ECF is available to authorized attorneys only. Authorization and training is provided by the practicing CM/ECF court.

I sent them an e advising them of the error. While it does provide SOME excuse for your ignorance, I am curious as to how you decided that the info on that site was correct rather than the site for the USDC for the Northern District of California? You had conflicting information before you; why not find out WHICH ONE IS CORRECT instead of choosing the one you liked? (QUOTE)
__________________
*I am NOT an attorney.

Let us know how this went Megan, after all, you did write the "Administrative Office of the United States Courts" to tell them they were wrong.

Can hardly wait for your sequel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by meganproser : Today at 07:52 AM.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Do you understand what "Asked and Answered" means?
Ever heard that objection in court?
I already called you on the fact that your whole argument was based on a false assumption because you were not addressing the correct jurisdiction, and rathrer than admit you were WRONG you continued to run onnnnnnnnnnnn.

Yes, your mother knows how stubborn and oppositional you are, that is why you don't listen to her or any wisdom or experience, because you think you know it all but don't know what you don't know?

You have some obsession for "helping people" by totally avoiding the problem and runing off on a tangent. You have severe ego issues that you should address in therapy not here! Please take your meds and go to bed and call your shrink in the morning.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

Megan,
Just what is it you are trying to prove?

I don't have to prove a thing Megan. Your posts are proof you do alot of google searches, yet fail.

You proved yourself Megan.

Don't forget to enlighten us with the response you get from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. You know, the one you wrote to tell them they are WRONG!.

 

[meganproser]

Rmet, you and your friend Paradise have severe anger issues and are to be pitied more than anything else.

You are both afflicted with the mistaken belief that you can judge a person’s character, intelligence, education, and knowledge by the few lines they write to explain their legal concerns. This causes you to often make fools of yourselves but you are the only ones who don’t recognize this.

You are both very insecure and that is why you are horrified by the sudden participation of someone who knows about areas of the law you have no clue about. Secure people welcome the presence of more knowledge; insecure people act the way you two do.

You in particular Rmet, are letting the title of “expert” go to your head. You have some bizarre need to “diagnose” everyone who dares to argue with you.

I could go on and on with completely asinine assessments of both of you. Apparently, that’s the way it’s done here. If anyone disagrees with you on a point of law, you merely launch a personal attack and hope it diverts the attention away from the real issue. No matter that you have no foundation at all for your diagnosis, it’s not like anyone can prove you wrong.

Your game is lame ladies. I just can’t get into it.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

You and your friend Paradise have severe anger issues and are to be pitied more than anything else.

You are both afflicted with the mistaken belief that you can judge a person’s character, intelligence, education, and knowledge by the few lines they write to explain their legal concerns. This causes you to often make fools of yourselves but you are the only ones who don’t recognize this.

You are both very insecure and that is why you are horrified by the sudden participation of someone who knows about areas of the law you have no clue about. Secure people welcome the presence of more knowledge; insecure people act the way you two do.

You in particular Rmet, are letting the title of “expert” go to your head. You have some bizarre need to “diagnose” everyone who dares to argue with you.

I could go on and on with completely asinine assessments of both of you. Apparently, that’s the way it’s done here. If anyone disagrees with you on a point of law, you merely launch a personal attack and hope it diverts the attention away from the real issue. No matter that you have no foundation at all for your diagnosis, it’s not like anyone can prove you wrong.

Your game is lame ladies. I just can’t get into it.

Just get into the fact that you wrote the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

You set them straight remember?

Stop acting like a baby ok?

 

[meganproser]

Paradise claims:
“No other court will even consider a pro se person to use the ECF at this time.”

Megan wrote: At present, I know OFFHAND of at least 7 USDC’s that process a PS application for the ECF without involving the court. I know of at least 7 other USDC’s that allow a PS to register as long as they have court approval.

Megan writes: I see that Paradise has ceased to insist she was right and she has not asked me to name the courts I refer to. This tells me that either she or a "friend" already did some checking and they finally KNOW that Paradise is wrong.

Paradise has reverted to the, "I don't have to prove a thing" stance when it was SHE who started this challenge for the third or fourth time.

It seems like just the other day she was insisting that she has no problem admitting when she's wrong. Hmmm. Guess she doesn't know herself very well.

BTW Paradise, it is the PACER people I wrote to. The information comes from them, not the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. YOU are the one who posted the link, didn't you LOOK to see who was presenting the info? Oh that's right, you wouldn't have looked because you were relieved to find something that might support your claim. Too bad it was faulty info huh?

PFFFFFTTT!

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Megan, I'm not angry, I'm tired of you abusing people on this forum. What you did to another recent poster with admitted, disabling mental illness is abuse and without excuse,

On this thread OP had her answer fairly quickly, the rest and been a selfserving discourse, totally aimed at filling your deflated ego.

Go to bed!

 

[meganproser]

>>Just get into the fact that you wrote the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

>>You set them straight remember?

I fear you have a terrible reading comprehension problem P. I try to talk slow for you but maybe I need to use smaller words.

The PACER stuff that’s on the site for the place that runs the Federal Court system, says that only lawyers can use the court’s computer filing system.

Even though it says this, there are Federal Courts all across the country that are very happy to let people who talk for themselves, do their own computer filing. People have been doing this for almost two years now.

I sent the PACER people an email to let them know the words on their site are not true. Maybe they already know that and maybe they don’t care. I do not think it will make them mad at me.

I hope they change their words because there are some people who think that the words on that site can never ever be wrong about anything. They are the kind of people who do not have common sense and do not know how to think for themselves either.

These kinds of people believe whatever they read if it is written by someone they like. Sometimes we call these kinds of people sheep. Sheep don’t know how to think for themselves and they just follow, follow, follow. I don’t think the bosses of the court system want to send any sheep to the wrong place, but maybe they do.

We will see. I will sure let you know if the bosses or the PACERS write back to me.

 

[meganproser]

>>Megan, I'm not angry, I'm tired of you abusing people on this forum. What you did to another recent poster with admitted, disabling mental illness is abuse and without excuse,

WHAT do you know about his capabilities? HOW do you know he can't represent himself or at least have the satisfaction of trying? WHO ARE YOU to decide what HE should do? What’s best for him?

What's the name of THAT mental illness? Isn’t it called having a "God complex" or something like that?

You are taking yourself WAY too seriously woman. It's one thing for you to judge an OP and decide how YOU may or may not answer him. It's another, when you deem yourself so capable of deciding what's best for an OP, that you start telling OTHERS what they should or should not do for him. Who died and left you to decide what is best for everyone?

Get OVER yourself.

You REALLY need to step back and consider what I am telling you. YOU cannot decide what is best for a person who comes here to ask questions. If you don't want to answer then don't. But you have no right to condemn others because they didn't follow YOUR advice. Do you honestly believe you are THAT superior to me, when you know NOTHING about me?

Man, Paradise is not too smart but she’s fairly harmless. You are kind of scary.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Megan,
OP on the other thread, claimed his mental disability and claimed ADA accommodations, you exploited his mental disability, he needs an attorney, not a wannabee.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

>>Just get into the fact that you wrote the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

>>You set them straight remember?

I fear you have a terrible reading comprehension problem P. I try to talk slow for you but maybe I need to use smaller words.

The PACER stuff that’s on the site for the place that runs the Federal Court system, says that only lawyers can use the court’s computer filing system.

Even though it says this, there are Federal Courts all across the country that are very happy to let people who talk for themselves, do their own computer filing. People have been doing this for almost two years now.

I sent the PACER people an email to let them know the words on their site are not true. Maybe they already know that and maybe they don’t care. I do not think it will make them mad at me.

I hope they change their words because there are some people who think that the words on that site can never ever be wrong about anything. They are the kind of people who do not have common sense and do not know how to think for themselves either.

These kinds of people believe whatever they read if it is written by someone they like. Sometimes we call these kinds of people sheep. Sheep don’t know how to think for themselves and they just follow, follow, follow. I don’t think the bosses of the court system want to send any sheep to the wrong place, but maybe they do.

We will see. I will sure let you know if the bosses or the PACERS write back to me.

You are in need of some serious help.

 

[meganproser]

Rmet wrote: OP on the other thread, claimed his mental disability and claimed ADA accommodations, you exploited his mental disability, he needs an attorney, not a wannabee.

Megan writes: Can you be any more presumptive or condescending towards the OP? He is disabled, not dead.
Of course he needs an attorney but how many times does he have to tell you he can’t get one? He HAS NO ATTORNEY thus he has nothing to lose by TRYING to represent himself.

He HAS a shrink and he did not ask you to determine whether or not he is competent to represent himself. He is competent enough to know he has a mind of his own and to choose to use that mind.

You repeatedly gave him your ignorant opinion that he does not have what it takes to speak on his own behalf. He has been polite enough not to blast you for your superiority complex; rather he has thanked you for your input and proceeded on the course of HIS choice. Is that OK WITH YOU?

For all of your education, have you not learned that you are a mere human being? You do not know this guy well enough to think you know better than he, what is best for him. Nor do you know him well enough to determine whether his effort to stand up for himself will harm or help him psychologically.

You do not know how he would react to this situation if he were not focused on pursuing legal recourse. You have not considered the possible ramifications for him if he is left feeling helpless about the situation.

You have the audacity to accuse me of abusing him, because I gave him the information he is looking for. Is it your contention that unless people meet certain standards, those with knowledge should refuse to share with them?
I rarely lower myself to engage in a pissing contest but responding to your obnoxious attitude towards the OP is worth the cost of a little self-respect.

I will try now to raise myself back up from the lower level where you and Paradise reside. Please feel free to respond to this...or not. You are welcome to the last word.

I see no reason why all cannot co-exist here peacefully. We merely have to refrain from making disparaging remarks about each other in the future. None of us have gained a thing by this exchange over the last few days so why not work towards a more pleasant existence for all by keeping our opinions of each other to ourselves?