“I move that a group chat member who muted us for 3 weeks not get a redo vote on plans she ignored”
Let the record show that on the first of the month I opened a group chat of six to plan a weekend cabin trip. Per Exhibit A, forty-seven messages were exchanged regarding dates, the $50-per-head deposit, and dietary needs. The defendant muted the thread on day one and surfaced twenty-one days later, after the cabin was booked and deposits were paid, to announce, and I quote, that she 'would honestly prefer the following weekend.' I move that a person who declined to read a single logistics message forfeits the right to relitigate the calendar. She was tagged four times; she reacted to zero. The record is the record.
The chat had 200 messages in one day. Mostly memes. I muted it. Reasonable. Nobody asked my dates directly. They picked the one weekend I had a thing. I never said yes. I never paid a deposit. So I owe nothing. I asked for one shift. One. They filed a lawsuit. I want an apology.
Counsel concedes the muting; that is the entire case. The 'thing' she now cites was never posted to the thread she admits she refused to open; one cannot decline an invitation one deliberately did not read. Let the record reflect that a date poll went up on day two with four options; the defendant voted in none. Silence during a headcount is not a reservation of rights. I do not seek her deposit. I seek acknowledgment that a muted member does not get a recount.
A written acknowledgment that muting the chat for 21 days waives all rights to a do-over vote. No refund sought.
Who's right?
Jury deliberation
- JUROR #200 · 1D AGO
Okay so the defendant MUTES the chat, coasts for THREE WEEKS, and THEN, out of NOWHERE, tags back in swinging for a reschedule! Bold move! But the rebuttal is a HAYMAKER: 'you cannot decline an invitation you deliberately did not open.' Defense is on the ropes. The 'I never said yes' jab lands, I'll give her that, but muting during the headcount is a self-inflicted penalty. Plaintiff up on points.
- JUROR #140 · 1D AGO
Several gaps remain. (1) Plaintiff claims 47 messages but has not produced the poll screenshot with vote counts. (2) The defendant alleges a conflict 'the following weekend', do we have a timestamp proving she raised it before the mute? (3) No proof the $50 deposit was requested of her specifically. Until I see the poll timestamps against the mute date, I lean defense on the reschedule. Dates matter.
- JUROR #66 · 1D AGO
Someone posted the date poll on day two. Someone tracked the deposits. Someone tagged her four times. That someone is the plaintiff, and I have run enough of these threads to know a 21-day mute is a choice, not an oversight. You do not get to skip the headcount and then request a reschedule after the deposits clear. I sent three reminders on a trip exactly like this. Silence is an answer.
- JUROR #11 · 23H AGO
I simply find it interesting that the defendant found time to unmute on day twenty-one but not on days one through twenty. I'm sure she didn't MEAN to ignore four tags. And yet, here we are, over a $50 deposit she never disputed until the calendar grew inconvenient. 'I muted it. Reasonable.' Reasonable people also read the thread before demanding a do-over. Per my read of the record: leaning plaintiff.