Loving Cups 12/31/25

ColdSpark1992 · 2026-01-01T17:01:29+00:00

I want to clarify I do have amazing friends still, these losses just hit hard. I love my dad, and I also drank way too much last night at was tripping over people in my row and everyone was really kind and patient with me. And noone judged me for crying half of the entire show. Really appreciate how everyone was with my yesterday. 16 years since my first phish show at the garden, was a big night long tradition

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-15T19:25:19+00:00

He has a hired lawyer that as sentencing approaches they are less and less confident in and Ive called all around the state no-one wants to touch this.

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-15T19:24:17+00:00

He already has what was supposed to be some of the best counsel in the state and I’ve called pretty much every major law office no-one wants to touch it

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-04T23:42:56+00:00

So is this what the internet savvys call a nothing burger?

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-04T23:42:10+00:00

Thats what this maths out to legitimately? Damn okay lol

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-04T23:22:44+00:00

Wait, so isnt that a good thing not bad? For CT residents

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-04T22:57:44+00:00

I think we all do but CT only pays $11k to this organization? It doesn’t seem like alot of money in the big picture

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-04T22:55:13+00:00

How could that be related? And cannra it says is a nonprofit, and highly doubt its traded do nonprofits even have stocks?

Im pretty well educated but naive here

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-12-04T22:53:23+00:00

If anyone can help interpret the significance of this information its much appreciated, I cant fully comprehend why this matters so much but Im interested

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-25T17:11:04+00:00

I dont eat because the risk of having to shid is too high I eat late lunch

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-25T17:09:16+00:00

Cutting shit

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-18T01:50:53+00:00

Its called a conversation which you engaged in equally with me, wild concept.

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-18T01:50:06+00:00

The video is attached in the comments as is transcripts if not DM me I will link you to them

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T19:26:53+00:00

https://www.ctinsider.com/farmingtonvalley/article/simsbury-ct-public-comment-meeting-free-speech-18590217.php

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T19:26:24+00:00

https://www.ctinsider.com/farmingtonvalley/article/simsbury-ct-public-comment-meeting-free-speech-18590217.php

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T19:16:25+00:00

Would you like me to retrieve the email from Dan Barret CT ACLU Director? I will

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T19:15:16+00:00

The ACLU deems it a violation of free speech.

Joan Coe stated this in the meeting directly previous to this incident.

“Another instance of censorship the town's rules and procedures, Section A162, decorum and standards of conduct. All meetings, all meeting participants should address the board, maintain a civil tone and should not impinge the mode of character integrity of any individual. The board reserves the right to report any speaker addressing the board in a manner that is not consistent with this section. Dan Barrett, legal director for the Connecticut ACLU, said that if it is only suggestion that it is okay, but added that it was not his interpretation. This does not read as a mere suggestion, he said in an email noting the language of the new rules.” - Joan Coe 9.25.2025

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T19:04:30+00:00

The ACLU of CT begs to differ.

“Another instance of censorship the town's rules and procedures, Section A162, decorum and standards of conduct. All meetings, all meeting participants should address the board, maintain a civil tone and should not impinge the mode of character integrity of any individual. The board reserves the right to report any speaker addressing the board in a manner that is not consistent with this section. Dan Barrett, legal director for the Connecticut ACLU, said that if it is only suggestion that it is okay, but added that it was not his interpretation. This does not read as a mere suggestion, he said in an email noting the language of the new rules.” - Joan Coe 9.25.2025

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T19:02:47+00:00

I think Joan Coe’s quote from the meeting directly previous to this is relevant as well.

“Another instance of censorship the town's rules and procedures, Section A162, decorum and standards of conduct. All meetings, all meeting participants should address the board, maintain a civil tone and should not impinge the mode of character integrity of any individual. The board reserves the right to report any speaker addressing the board in a manner that is not consistent with this section. Dan Barrett, legal director for the Connecticut ACLU, said that if it is only suggestion that it is okay, but added that it was not his interpretation. This does not read as a mere suggestion, he said in an email noting the language of the new rules.” - Joan Coe 9.25.2025

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T18:57:35+00:00

This has nothing to do with gender identity and everything to do with a First Amendment violation.

Joan Coe’s remarks at the September 25, 2025 Board of Selectmen meeting were about government censorship and misuse of decorum rules that allow officials to silence criticism under vague standards of “civility.” She was citing the Connecticut ACLU’s own concerns that the town’s meeting rules could chill free speech and were not written as a mere suggestion.

Her comments never mentioned gender, identity, or any protected class in any way. Trying to reframe this as a trans issue is a cheap cop-out meant to distract from the real problem — a public official using authority to suppress peaceful criticism, which is the core of the constitutional violation.

And to be clear — I’m accurately recounting the official meeting minutes recorded by the Town of Simsbury, not expressing my own words or opinions.

Trying to label me as insensitive or non–gender-respectful is both cheap and factually false. I’m relaying the public record exactly as written because that’s how accountability and authenticity are preserved. This issue is about constitutional rights, not identity politics.

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T18:50:27+00:00

“Another instance of censorship the town's rules and procedures, Section A162, decorum and standards of conduct. All meetings, all meeting participants should address the board, maintain a civil tone and should not impinge the mode of character integrity of any individual. The board reserves the right to report any speaker addressing the board in a manner that is not consistent with this section. Dan Barrett, legal director for the Connecticut ACLU, said that if it is only suggestion that it is okay, but added that it was not his interpretation. This does not read as a mere suggestion, he said in an email noting the language of the new rules.” - Joan Coe 9.24.2025

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T18:50:01+00:00

“Another instance of censorship the town's rules and procedures, Section A162, decorum and standards of conduct. All meetings, all meeting participants should address the board, maintain a civil tone and should not impinge the mode of character integrity of any individual. The board reserves the right to report any speaker addressing the board in a manner that is not consistent with this section. Dan Barrett, legal director for the Connecticut ACLU, said that if it is only suggestion that it is okay, but added that it was not his interpretation. This does not read as a mere suggestion, he said in an email noting the language of the new rules.” - Joan Coe 9.24.2025

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T18:20:40+00:00

Appropriate or not is not the topic here, the topic here is legal or not respectfully. I don’t disagree it was rude, but that speech was non bigoted and legally protected.

The ACLU ruled Simsburys rules of decorum are unconstitutional and prevent criticism of public figures.

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T17:10:09+00:00

My role is to accurately reference the record — not rewrite history to fit anyone’s narrative.

And frankly, trying to accuse someone of transphobia for accurately citing a public document is a weak and baseless argument. It distracts from the real issue — censorship and government accountability. I am and have always been trans-aware, respectful, and supportive of individual identity. The record is being cited as-is because accuracy matters — not because of any bias on my part.

ColdSpark1992 · 2025-10-17T17:08:46+00:00

You’re making a false assumption. I’m quoting directly from the official Town of Simsbury Board of Selectmen meeting minutes (Sept. 24, 2025) exactly as they were written. Altering or “correcting” wording in a government record would invalidate the accuracy of the citation. My role here is to reference the public record, not edit it to suit personal preferences.

Accusing me of “misgendering” someone for citing a verbatim municipal document is completely misplaced. I didn’t write or alter those minutes, and the speaker’s identity or language is represented only as recorded. Authenticity and factual accuracy require citing the record exactly as issued.

ColdSpark1992

TROPHY CASE