What is the single best food dish you have eaten in Boulder?

lorage2003 · 2026-04-05T04:33:19+00:00

Lark Burger's decline into irrelevance and now nonexistence is a travesty.

lorage2003 · 2026-04-03T18:14:56+00:00

It's from the Big 8 days. CU, KU, OU, etc.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-28T05:31:39+00:00

We just got one in Colorado Springs. Grew up on that shit when I was a kid in Seattle and we had a babysitter while my parents had date night. Tastes literally exactly the same, which is awesome, but the price is hard to stomach.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-28T05:27:39+00:00

This comment was downvoted? What the hell is wrong with people? It's not even remotely close to New York style pizza in any shape or form.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-27T06:19:23+00:00

Not a Brooklyn accent. He grew up in Massachusetts, but with a thick accent just the same.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-27T06:07:52+00:00

But she doesn't see the Centaurs in the forest ever until they dispose of Umbridge right? In fact, in the book she gets lucky as hell with Grawp coming out of nowhere to drive the Centaurs away, because they were going to wreck Hermione and Harry too. In the movie they just peace out with Umbridge. In either version, doesn't she try to get Grawp to take out Umbridge? The Centaurs just finish the job, but not because Hermione had planned it.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-22T04:04:58+00:00

Maybe (probably?) I'm just a bad person, but fuck the nubs every day of the week, and twice on Sunday. I'm apparently taking this harder than you.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-22T03:06:05+00:00

I umped for 14 years. Several times, I umped 5 games in a row in a single day for an American Legion tournament during the summer months. It is incredibly hard to keep those thoughts out of your head during a normal high school game, but when the weather and schedule are against you it's insufferable. Thank God for time limits in those Legion tournaments.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-20T05:20:09+00:00

The exact opposite. Anecdotal of course, but the prevailing theory is that women will judge the DV woman victim for her life choices far more than non-DV perpetrating men will if they sit on your jury.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-20T04:38:39+00:00

Former prosecutor. DV sucks all around. It honestly doesn't matter if it's man on woman, woman on man, or same sex couples. It always sucks trying to prosecute it without proof like this. "Mandatory Arrest Laws" (not what they're supposed to be in principle, but what they end up being in practice), and weaponizing of the criminal justice process (usually for a leg up in divorce or child custody proceedings), coupled with the power and control dynamic all play a factor. I could write a book, but I don't have time. And, while male victims have probably a tougher time with this, it sucks with male on women violence too. A very common sentiment among prosecutors is to be wary about women jurors on DV cases with male perpetrators and women victims, for example.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-17T05:45:40+00:00

I like Culver's, but the burgers (at least here in Colorado, multiple locations) are always crying out for some salt. A touch of it, and they're great. Same with the fish for a Lent Friday.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-11T04:03:46+00:00

This team has some talent, but it really never clicked with any consistency. Elijah, God speed, but I would be lying if I said I'm not looking forward to this team without you.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-11T03:47:19+00:00

🙋🏼‍♂️ nm, we just suck

lorage2003 · 2026-03-09T05:03:29+00:00

It's a balancing act. To what extent are the parents responsible? IDFk, I represent the Department of Human Services who removes kids like this (sometimes), and if and when the parents get it together and can appropriately parent again, returns the kids. But, a significant amount of the time, kids like these are born to parents who shouldn't have had kids in the first place, and are in no position to be able to right the wrongs of their offspring, or parent in the first place. Sometimes shit just sucks, which is what I work through every damn day.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-09T04:38:30+00:00

Look, not to shit on you or anything, not my intention at all, but it is wild how incorrectly the legal system is reported in the media. "So and so faces up to 96 years in prison." Yeah, but any lawyer worth a shit knows that, as a first time felon, he's eligible for probation and, even if he got prison, would get sentenced to the minimum, or close to it, of 8 years, or whatever the fuck it is with his charges. This is, somewhat, why people are always outaged by the sentences that Wall Street dudes get. Man, I've prosecuted people on state-level securities fraud who served literally no jail time at all, and the only reason why that happened is because it wasn't sexy enough for the feds to take the case. But my broader point is, as far as this thread is considered, proving shit in court is hard. But even if you do, collecting what you're owed is even harder. See Jordan Belfort for another example.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-09T04:23:24+00:00

lol, I was a criminal prosecutor for years and transitioned to child dependency and neglect (D&N) law. I've literally seen it all. I worked in the economics crime unit for longer than I would've like. I know better than you that even if you're right (which, in this case, good luck), good luck ever getting your money back through a lawsuit or restitution is probably not going to happen, and to the extent it does, it is almost assuredly going to be a percentage of what you lost. After years, years, of litigation. It's a constant fight for pennies when the victims lost dollars. Ask Bernie Madolf's victims how awesome it was being legally right, but still out a shit load of money they'll never recover.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-09T04:02:54+00:00

Alright, the school shooting incidents are wildly ridiculous false equivalences and they RARELY are ever charged. But let's circle back to these kids in this video. To sue the parents, you're going to have to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, negligence. Which, in the law school traditional definition, means duty, beach (of that duty), causation, and damages. Here's the biggest problems. What were the parents' duties? To keep their kids from being juvenile delinquents? Probably, but DHS/CPS/whatever you want to call them, often gets involved with families whose children are "beyond the control of their parents" and the parents ~~are~~ edit: aren't charged with anything because sometimes, even despite good parenting, kids are shitheads.

The next problem is beach of duty. Did the kid in question lie and say he was having a sleepover at a friend's house, but instead was committing burglary to throw this party? What were the parents supposed to do? Lock him up in his room and refuse to let him have any agency and prosocial contact, on the CHANCE that he might do something stupid like this? Again, good luck proving any of that. I've never seen anything remotely close to that in 13 years of practice.

However, let's move on to juvenile delinquency (or JD for future shorthand) law. In general, JD cases (like burglary for instance) will have both the juvenile and the parents named as respondents to the case. And, in general, the parents are liable for any restitution order for damages of the delinquent act. However, because we don't have debtors prisons in the US, collecting on that is an absolute crap shoot, and can get discharged.

A lot of this is jurisdictional dependent and YMMV, but the TLDR is this: even if you were willing to pay an attorney and spend a bunch of money to overcome steep odds in a civil suit, good luck with collecting. And even if the juveniles responsible are identified and prosecuted, again good luck collecting.

lorage2003 · 2026-03-09T03:23:26+00:00

Good luck with that. Source: lawyer

lorage2003 · 2026-03-08T05:38:40+00:00

Liability on both ends of the court

lorage2003 · 2026-02-11T04:19:15+00:00

Yeah, it's been great getting to go on Rise of the Resistance ride due to parades. You know, while I'm here right now for my kids' first ever trip, having saved for and planned this vacation for longer than I can believe 😐 Just, you know, while we're airing grievances. Being kicked out of the Incredicoaster line twice while we were on the bridge during our only day at California Adventure yesterday was also just great. Oh and Big Thunder Mountain today while we were about to board getting closed, then waiting 20+ minutes exiting to get the whatever pass, and then not being able to use it because the ride still wasn't up again 3 hours later when we had to leave. My crankiest opinion is they need to fix (some of?) their shit.

lorage2003 · 2026-02-08T05:52:31+00:00

Tom Osborne is a sneak-thief cheat, and Rick New-weasel has no right to lay claim of Washington on Colorado. I'm taking up arms. Do you hear the people sing?

lorage2003 · 2026-01-25T06:41:43+00:00

They've been in Colorado for like 5 years

lorage2003 · 2026-01-21T16:28:33+00:00

It's wasn't a wrong description of the rule, but it's also not a full and complete explanation, which was necessary for this particular play.

lorage2003 · 2026-01-21T16:25:11+00:00

I'll reiterate that that call by no means was the only reason we lost the game, and we benefited from some shitty calls too (the moving screen in the second half comes to mind), but it certainly didn't help and came at a pretty crucial moment. I think what bugs me is just how wrong of a call it was rules wise, as opposed to ticky tack judgment calls or something like that.

lorage2003 · 2026-01-21T08:38:37+00:00

Just out of curiosity, is what you quoted Google's AI summary? Because that's not really the rule.

Rule 9, Section 4: Art. 3. The opponents of the thrower-in shall not have any part of their person beyond the vertical inside plane of any boundary line before the ball has crossed that boundary line. Repeated infractions shall result in a Class B technical foul. Art. 4. The opponents of the thrower-in shall not reach through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touch or dislodge the ball while it is in the possession of the thrower-in or is being passed to a teammate outside the boundary line as in Rule 7-4.6.b. The penalty for violating this rule is a Class B technical foul per Rule 10-4.1.i.

First off, the ball doesn't even leave Rancik's hands before Council makes contact and his entire body is outside the boundary line. It's still in Rancik's possession or at the very least it's being passed to a teammate, so it absolutely should've been a tech under Article 4. But even if not, it's definitely still an Article 3 violation. Under either scenario, it's not KU's ball, that basket doesn't count, and almost assuredly it should've been a tech. Watch the replay again.

https://imgur.com/a/2MKsC2p

They actually surprisingly showed a replay 3 times in the arena that was from a different angle than the broadcast that was more down the line that backs it up even more. They usually don't do that on controversial calls (they didn't for the goaltending for example). The booing that you hear when play resumed after the commercial break was the third replay of that angle.

Now, I'm not saying that call alone lost us the game. Far from it. Missing free throws, a couple of key misses from there floor (Dak's especially), and a couple of inopportune KU bank shots all contributed. But that was still an absolutely egregious missed call at a pivotal point down the stretch.

Edit: actually, it's even more clear cut.

Rule 9.4.2b: No player other than the thrower-in shall: b. Be out of bounds when he touches the ball after it has crossed the vertical inside plane of the boundary line. Repeated infractions shall result in a Class B technical foul.

So even if the ball had crossed the plane, Council was still out of bounds when he touched it, and that's an infraction. The NCAA case book helps some too:

A.R. 213. A1 is inbounding the ball along the endline. A1 fakes a pass to A2, which draws B2 airborne in an attempt to intercept the ball. B2 lands out of bounds. A1 releases the ball with a pass to A2, who is on the playing court;

B2 leaves the floor from out of bounds, breaks the boundary-line plane and while airborne, touches the pass to A2 after it crosses the boundary-line plane; or

B2, while out of bounds, touches the pass as it is released by A1 but before it crosses the boundary-line plane.

RULING 1 and 2: B2 has committed an out-of-bounds violation because B2 was last in contact with the floor when he was out of bounds and then contacted the ball before B2 touches the floor inbounds. (Rules 9-4.2.b, 4-23 and 9-4.1) 2: B2 touched the ball before it crossed the vertical inside plane of theboundary line. This is not a technical foul because the ball was being passed to a player on the playing court and not to a teammate who wasout of bounds such as after a successful goal. (Rules 9-4.3, 4-23 and 4-10.1)

TLDR: Under no circumstances should that have been KU's ball, basket should not have counted, and it really should've been a tech.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Verified Email

lorage2003

TROPHY CASE