#MJS
LightNews LightNews
sebbearva.bsky.social
Saturday night at MJs
May 13, 2025 at 1:34 AM
quasimodox.bsky.social
They are just having curry. Peter has never experienced flavors like this from MJs cooking.
November 11, 2024 at 5:22 PM
michaeljstern.bsky.social
Thank you for your attention to this matter - MJS.
December 19, 2025 at 1:59 AM
blackbearxxx.bsky.social
Michael Burnam and I say HAPPY PRIDE from MJs in Norfolk Virginia.
June 10, 2026 at 9:17 PM
eigenvectrix.northsky.social
Let's not act like there was an actual threat to MJS' safety here
evanurquhart.bsky.social Evan Urquhart @evanurquhart.bsky.social · Apr 1
Expecting a big account to be more concerned about the safety of the people harassing them than their own safety by shutting down or deterring people's harassment is completely unreasonable. I honestly don't know how it's gained the traction that it has.
evanurquhart.bsky.social Evan Urquhart @evanurquhart.bsky.social · Apr 1
I strongly disagree. No one owes someone harassing them the courtesy and compassion of worrying about what might happened if they screenshot the harassment and discuss it. The person's identity doesn't matter, how big an account they are doesn't matter. If you come for someone you get what you get.
April 1, 2026 at 3:24 PM
brentwaggoner.bsky.social
MJS is gay so suggesting this stuff will pass for him is... something.
March 31, 2026 at 7:17 PM
sebbearva.bsky.social
The DurtyBears are hitting MJs in Norfolk for Bear Night this evening!! Y’all come out now, ya hear?
@blackbearxxx.bsky.social
February 15, 2025 at 7:15 PM
hexhomos.bsky.social
mjs are literally going to get ships banned off the entire sub two days of pure ass lmfaooooo
December 21, 2025 at 5:27 PM
christianvanian.bsky.social
Yeah, I don't wanna be disrespectful, but Spike was literally MJs fursona
June 12, 2026 at 11:34 AM
sinisor.bsky.social
[DJ and his MJs] [Re-Upload]

I don’t remember uploading these in 🦋. But here we go! DJ and his MJs!

And also Proto! The baby of the family~ the 31st Mini Jay!

#sinisfw #fnafsb #fnafoc #fnafau #fnafdjmm
March 30, 2025 at 1:54 PM
milk-jug.bsky.social
Shomari is making sure MJs needs are being taken care of.

Who does not love being double stuffed?
#pregnant #pregfur #furry
August 14, 2026 at 4:43 PM
marcy.beneprism.rip
People don't seem to understand that "could the lawless SCOTUS make up an excuse based on intentionally misreading the Constitution" and "does the Constitution allow this" are different questions, and MJS seems to be arguing the latter
December 28, 2024 at 6:52 PM
sebbearva.bsky.social
Someone (me) purchased tickets for Sinners at the wrong theater 😳
Fortunately @blackbearxxx.bsky.social was hungry so I distracted him with brunch at MJs.
April 27, 2025 at 5:17 PM
cgd-2.bsky.social
Justified "MJS" chants.
#MysteryWrestling23 🤼
March 27, 2026 at 4:08 AM
rvbdrm.com
But it’s not about MJS, it’s the implying “real abuse” doesn’t include talk therapy. Even if it wasn’t what he meant, it’s being read that way.
March 31, 2026 at 8:02 PM
zgoldberg.bsky.social
How I'm picturing you in the MJS newsroom, covering the Brewers while others cover <gestures broadly>.
September 25, 2026 at 12:47 PM
pi0.io
🏎️ perf tip of the day:

If your ESM package uses "type": "module" and ships .js files, Node.js must find, read, and parse package.json to determine their format.

Shipping .mjs avoids all this runtime cost.

That’s why UnJS toolchain (obuild) has always shipped .mjs.
August 28, 2026 at 10:25 AM
laurusgrey.northsky.social
This is a loss for the legal reporting community on Bluesky. Anyone who follows MJS on here or elsewhere would know he was reporting on a SCOTUS opinion and not his own and would further know for certain, without doubt, that MJS opposes conversion therapy in all its forms.
mjsdc.bsky.social Mark Joseph Stern @mjsdc.bsky.social · Mar 31
FYI: I am going to stop summarizing Supreme Court decisions on here as they come down. One comment has been plucked out of context of all my reporting, misread, and used as the basis of a mean-spirited pile-on. I am not going to subject myself to this. If this was your goal, then congratulations.
As someone who went through conversion talk therapy I'd kindly like to show Mark to the nearest cliff's edge let's make this bitch so disappointed he leaves the site. fuck him Mark out here thinks that my parents abusing, raping, and killing me in the process of "their talking" is fine because freeze peach or some liberal shit Mark, "really abuse" is gonna be all your known for now. Your epitaph.
April 1, 2026 at 1:33 AM
annabellelecter.bsky.social
No. My reading comprehension is quite good. MJS was explaining, not minimizing the SC decision.

I like his analysis and it's too bad people ruined it.
March 31, 2026 at 8:05 PM
annabellelecter.bsky.social
Trans people deserve loyal allies. White, Black, Brown, male, female, cis, bi, tri....MJS is one.
March 31, 2026 at 8:14 PM
rvbdrm.com
I’m monitoring Ben Ryan’s and Jesse Singal’s tweets (and those who like or quote them).

The consensus right now seems to be to laugh at MJS getting “piled on”—apparently, transphobe twitter doesn’t like him.
March 31, 2026 at 8:56 PM
allaislouise.bsky.social
Les MJs être comme : "Vous êtes dispo le 17 et 24 avril 2026 à 20h30 que je nous booke une session ?"

Ils me fument
November 30, 2024 at 1:26 PM
blackavar-inle.bsky.social
Minor good news, that at this stage, it seems twitter transphobes aren't going after the trans accounts MJS targeted.
rvbdrm.com Rav @rvbdrm.com · Mar 31
I’m monitoring Ben Ryan’s and Jesse Singal’s tweets (and those who like or quote them).

The consensus right now seems to be to laugh at MJS getting “piled on”—apparently, transphobe twitter doesn’t like him.
March 31, 2026 at 9:55 PM
jovidecroock.com
TIL: using mjs is even faster in node 😅
danielroe.dev danielroe @danielroe.dev · Nov 17
is this still true, even for script type=module? 🤯

cc: @chromium.social

… can’t for the life of me find the message but thank you to the person at @perfnow.bsky.social who sent this my way ❤️

web.dev/learn/perfor...
A screenshot of an article from web.dev with the following text: If you want to ship JavaScript modules to production, use the .mjs extension. Whether or not your production JavaScript uses modules, there's no special content type for JavaScript that uses modules versus JavaScript that does not. Where V8 is concerned, you effectively opt out of streaming compilation when you ship JavaScript modules in production using the .js extension. If you use the .mjs extension for JavaScript modules, V8 can ensure that streaming compilation for module-based JavaScript code isn't broken.
November 18, 2024 at 6:48 AM
eleanor.lockhart.contact
oh, is the wittle republican whining that dems finally played the kind of hardball Republicans have been playing in Wisconsin for decades? is the widdle Republican (in the screenshot, not MJS) triggered? awwwwwww
mjsdc.bsky.social Mark Joseph Stern @mjsdc.bsky.social · Nov 25
When liberals secured a majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2023, they changed internal procedures—over the objection of the conservative chief justice, who claimed they were taking away her power. Today the justices released MESSY details about the affair...
www.wicourts.gov/sc/rulhear/D...
BRIAN HAGEDORN, J. (concurring). The Wisconsin Supreme Court is composed of seven justices who are supposed to be members of the same team. Unlike trial courts, when we act, we do so collectively. To accomplish this, over the last 175 years, this court has established various practices and traditions, both formal and informal. These practices ensure all voices are heard, create clear lines of decision-making authority, and establish consistent and neutral processes to govern our case-deciding and administrative work. Some of these are reflected in formally adopted Supreme Court Rules, and some in our Internal Operating Procedures. But the true currency of a court like ours is trust. When trust is broken like it has been here, every aspect of our work suffers. ¶2 This all began in the summer of 2023 when four justices wished to make significant changes to how this court functions. Fair enough. These modifications could have been pursued through a process built on collegiality and mutual respect. Instead, my colleagues pursued a more destructive path. ¶3 The morning our then-newest justice was sworn into office——August 1, 2023——my four colleagues at that time set off to reshape our court and the operation of the court system. They had apparently engaged in significant discussions in the months prior and decided to force through these changes during our summer recess, and to do so via email with or without the input of their other colleagues. They issued a press release triumphantly announcing that these changes were all about transparency, accountability, and inclusivity. This was true in the same way Pearl Harbor was a strike for peace in the Pacific. I will not rehash every detail (Justice Ziegler's excellent writing recounts much of the history), but the reader deserves a taste. ¶4 The first shot sounded when my four colleagues fired the Director of State Courts, who functions as the CEO of administrative matters for the entire judicial branch. Without following any established process, one of my colleagues sent an email proposing that we fire our Director and install a new, preselected interim Director in his place. This happened through email, over the course of two business days, while the Director was out of town on state business, during our summer recess. He never received a performance review indicating concerns; he was simply told his employment was over. This came just months after some of these same colleagues emphasized the importance of having all justices participate in hiring key staff. ¶5 Later that same week, my colleagues proposed dramatic changes via email affecting both our case-deciding and administrative responsibilities. The email invited justices to attend a new, unscheduled meeting of the court later that week to discuss the proposals. One justice said she could not be there; another objected to the meeting as outside our court calendar. The meeting would go forward no matter what, we were told. I implored my colleagues to reconsider, to treat their fellow colleagues with the respect they would want if circumstances were reversed. They refused. The meeting went on as expected, and with only four members present, they voted to fundamentally remake our court. ¶7 Among their changes, my colleagues radically altered the role of the chief justice. They created a new, three-person administrative committee (on which the chief justice would ostensibly sit) to take over nearly all of the chief justice's most important administrative duties. And they did so in the face of serious objections that these changes violated the Wisconsin Constitution, which says the chief justice "shall be the administrative head of the judicial system." Wis. Const. art. VII, § 4. One justice who in the past championed the constitutional role of the chief justice suddenly changed course. Again, these actions stripping the chief justice of powers she had exercised for as long as anyone could remember were proposed via email, and were voted on a few days later during an unscheduled meeting of just four justices during our summer recess. Not exactly transparent, accountable, and inclusive. ¶8 Another significant series of amendments to our internal rules involved modifying the way we consider certain kinds of cases, essentially making it much easier for this court to expedite cases coming to us outside the normal appeals process. Why the change? As everyone understood, my colleagues had the not-sosecret goal of swiftly hearing particular politically charged cases. This was all by design. ¶9 And how did this experiment go? Not well. Administratively, it was not clear who was in charge. We experienced significant breakdowns in communication amidst a lack of clarity about who was doing what. Our staff was often caught in the middle of a court that did not have established lines of communication and authority. And when the Director of State Courts was unceremoniously fired for what many perceived as political reasons, it sent a shockwave through the system. Furthermore, my colleagues' changes were not one and done. Throughout the past two years, they continued to modify the court's procedures in a similar ad-hoc fashion, often after realizing problems with their earlier ill-considered changes. This only added to the confusion. ¶10 Finally, at one of the court's internal conferences this past June, my colleagues shifted course. One of the four announced she was "withdrawing" her prior votes from the past two years (which, by the way, is not a thing) with the idea that every disputed change was now, all of a sudden, reversed. What changed? Again, it was no mystery. My colleagues wanted to take power away from then-Chief Justice Annette Ziegler. Such a move ensured that my colleagues would run the court through the administrative committee. Following the April 2025 election, they concluded they would have the votes to elect a chief justice of their choosing and have a block of votes to support her, so they no longer needed to seize those powers. This is not a cynical take. It is exactly what happened. ¶11 What's past is past, however. I have no desire to hold this against my colleagues, and I am grateful they have changed course. In fact, I was happy to work collaboratively on many operational changes reflected in this order, most of which I
November 25, 2025 at 9:18 PM