🎾 Tubz Unfiltered - Volume 87
Margot "Mid" Robbie; Wimbledon; CAN-SPAM Act
Happy Monday, y’all!
The inaugural Dumb-Dumb Hall of Fame for Tubz Unfiltered is set to debut in two weeks. The nomination box is still open, so reply to this email or leave a comment at the end of this post with your nomination(s).
Okie dokie, let’s break bread and imagine it is still the weekend.
🛁 EXTRA BUBBLES 🛁
Margot Robbie 'Mid Without Makeup' Post Sparks Furious Backlash
Before I open up a can of internet whoop ass, it is important to define “mid.” The ultra-reputable Urban Dictionary defines “mid” in the following way: “Used to insult or degrade an opposing opinion, labeling it as average or poor quality.”
Example: We waited on that album for 6 months but it was mid!
With that out of the way, I’m not about to turn this into the start of 2023 Horny Online Fest, with yours truly as the chief organizer. No ma’am, no sir. I (obviously) have class and dignity. But I do pride myself on calling a spade a spade, so I will simply acknowledge that Margot Robbie, the star of Barbie and life in general, is a gorgeous woman.
Yet, some idiot keyboard warriors that probably sucked down breast milk for longer than they should have thought that Robbie is “mid without makeup.” If that isn’t the most “those fart-sniffing basement lifers need to touch some grass” statement in recent memory, then I don’t know what is.
🏆 SPORTZ 🏆
New King of the Castle?
Top-ranked Carlos Alcaraz, at the ripe age of 20, dethroned Novak Djokovic — a man who does not like to follow certain rules and who hit a woman with a tennis ball during the US Open a few years back “on accident” — on Sunday for the Spaniard’s first Wimbledon title (second grand slam overall) in a five-set epic thriller — 1-6, 7-6 (8-6), 6-1, 3-6, 6-4 — that lasted just under five hours. Prior to Sunday’s loss, Djokovic had won 45-straight Wimbledon matches.
The Big Three — Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, and Roger Federer — have dominated the grand slams over the last 20 years, so much so that Alcaraz became only the third men’s player to win at least two grand slams since 2004. (Stan Wawrinka and Andy Murray are the other two.)
Following the monumental victory, ESPN play-by-play announcer Chris Fowler said after the match’s conclusion, “Change is inevitable. Today is the day.” The Alcaraz-Djokovic duel sure felt eerily similar to when Federer (then 19) dethroned Pete Sampras, the World No. 1 at the time who was aiming to win his fifth-straight Wimbledon title, in the fourth round of the 2001 Championships. That end result marked the downward trend of Sampras’ reign and Federer’s introduction to the tennis world on one of the biggest stages.
The loss probably does not mark the end of the line for Djokovic, but I hope it does because I dislike that guy as much as I dislike people that don’t use their turn signals. (The reason being? #TeamFedForLife)
Unseeded Champion on the Ladies’ Side
Wimbledon mandates that all players wear white. Markéta Vondroušová1 went against the grain during a hitting session prior to Saturday’s final and wore all black. Makes sense for the owner of a hairless cat and for someone whose body sports some tattoos that appear to be drawn by kindergartners.
She further proceeded to not give an eff in the finals as she upset No. 6 Ons Jabeur in straight sets, 6-4, 6-4. It was her third-straight victory over Jabeur.
Vondroušová’s title also put her in rare air. She became the lowest-ranked woman (42nd) to win the Venus Rosewater Dish at the All England Club and the first unseeded woman to play in the finals since Billie Jean King did so in 1963.
Update on Northwestern Hazing Saga
Hours after I published Volume 86, news broke that Northwestern fired Pat Fitzgerald for cause after the Northwestern student newspaper released nasty details surrounding hazing incidents that occurred during Fitzgerald’s tenure.
On3’s Andy Staples reported that Fitzgerald’s buyout is $42 million, so the big tough, definitely-out-of-touch guy had 42 million reasons to hire one of the country’s preeminent law firms, Winston & Strawn, to represent him in his presumed soon-to-be legal battle with the university.
If Fitzgerald files a lawsuit, it is highly likely that the parties reach an out-of-court settlement for a lot of money that may include a non-disparagement clause. Notwithstanding that, it will be interesting whether the investigation report sees the light of day, either via an intentional leak or the judicial process.
Update on Alabama Baseball Betting Scandal
In a Volume I published during the spring, which was a time when Texas wasn’t hotter than Kenya, I wrote about the firing of the Alabama head baseball coach, Brad Bohannon, who was connected to a large wager placed on a game between the Crimson Tide and the LSU Tigers.
Well, details emerged last week, showing how moronic some people can be. Put another way: Play stupid games, and win stupid prizes.
Bert Eugene Neff Jr., who has probably been tempted to bet on little league baseball and/or tee-ball games while sucking down Bud Lights with a bib strapped around his neck for extra protection, “wanted to bet more than $100,000” on the LSU-Alabama game, sources told Pat Forde of Sports Illustrated.
He indicated that he had inside information on the game—and he did, in the palm of his hand.
Neff was texting with Alabama baseball coach Brad Bohannon via the encrypted messaging app Signal while at the betting window, attempting to place the wager, the sources say. His texting was indiscreet, to the point that the book’s video surveillance cameras were able to zoom in on the details of Neff and Bohannon’s text exchange, making Bohannon’s name visible later in screenshots.
“[Video cameras] can see the [text] conversation back-and-forth,” a source familiar with the incident says. “It couldn’t have been any more reckless.”
The inside information that Neff had received: Alabama was scratching its ace starting pitcher for the game.
The Crimson Tide coach was aware that Neff was placing the bets on LSU and against his team, they say. It’s unclear whether Bohannon was himself wagering on the game through Neff, but Bohannon knew what was transpiring.
🤓 BATH TIME READING 🤓
Know Your Rights
I’m digging into the depths for this section this week, but whatever — hopefully you find it as useful as a back scratcher!
The Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography And Marketing (CAN-SPAM) Act of 2003, enacted by Congress during the good ole George W. Bush era, helps out consumers by regulating commercial emails sent by businesses.
You have likely signed up for an email from brands — not this one, of course —and some brands are beyond relentless with scammy promotion after scammy promotion thereafter. They fill your inbox and your soul with rage.
Luckily, thanks to the CAN-SPAM Act, businesses “must include a clear and conspicuous explanation of how the recipient can opt out of getting email from you in the future,” per a fact sheet from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Further, a business must honor your opt-out request within 10 business days.
The Act specifies other things that businesses must/cannot do when sending commercial emails, but I’m not going to get into the weeds because I’m allergic to pollen.
Anyway, what happens to the business if they violate the Act?
Each separate email in violation of the law is subject to penalties of up to $50,120, and more than one person may be held responsible for violations. For example, both the company whose product is promoted in the message and the company that originated the message may be legally responsible. Email that makes misleading claims about products or services also may be subject to laws outlawing deceptive advertising, like Section 5 of the FTC Act. The CAN-SPAM Act has certain aggravated violations that may give rise to additional fines. The law provides for criminal penalties – including imprisonment – for:
accessing someone else’s computer to send spam without permission,
using false information to register for multiple email accounts or domain names,
relaying or retransmitting multiple spam messages through a computer to mislead others about the origin of the message,
harvesting email addresses or generating them through a dictionary attack (the practice of sending email to addresses made up of random letters and numbers in the hope of reaching valid ones), and
taking advantage of open relays or open proxies without permission.
If you feel that your rights have been violated and want to go on a heater, you can file a complaint with the FTC and also contact the Attorney General’s office in your residing state. Regrettably, there is no legal recourse for you (outside of the two aforementioned avenues) unless your state law preempts the Act.
If you chuckled and/or enjoyed it, make sure to forward it to others and/or share it on social. Any corrections, omissions, suggestions, etc., send 'em my way. Much love. -Tubz
Vondroušová was the No. 1 ranked juniors player back in the day and was a finalist at the 2019 French Open. She reached a peak ranking of No. 14 in 2019 but battled injuries to her wrist in the years that followed, which forced her to miss significant time.
Great article, as usual, Rex!!