Technically Incorrect offers a slightly twisted take on the tech that's taken over our lives.
Judges are supposed to exercise their imagination, rather than their judgment.
At least that's what I assume from a report in the Dallas Morning News about Judge Bailey Moseley.
Moseley seems to have had an opinion about the anti-Trump Women's March on Washington on Saturday.
So on Monday, his Facebook feed was adorned with words that a right-minded judge might have questioned.
"Just think about this. After just one day in office," the Facebook post said. "Trump managed to achieve something that no one else has been able to do: he got a million fat women out walking."
Your Honor, it's Facebook. People can see it. Especially if you don't have your privacy controls set up right.
The post was taken down, but not before it had been recorded for posterity.
Bailey serves on Texas' 6th Court of Appeals in Texarkana. His Facebook page and website seem to have vanished from view.
The 6th Court of Appeals, the Governor's Office and the judge didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Seana Willing, executive director of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, told me: "Because of strict confidentiality rules governing our agency's investigative functions, we cannot confirm or deny we have a complaint against or are investigating this judge. As a general rule, complaints filed with the agency are resolved within 4-6 months from filing, with some more complicated investigations taking longer depending on the circumstances."
Even then, will anyone know what happened.
"Should a case result in private discipline or dismissal, it remains confidential," Willing told me.
Bailey isn't the only authority figure who's been accused of posting this allegedly amusing idea. As the Indianapolis Star reports, local state Senator Jack Sandlin also offered it to his Facebook faithful. Or at least appeared to.
"Apparently there is an offensive post on Facebook that's attributed to me about women in Washington marching," he reportedly wrote in a subsequent post that is currently unavailable. "Not sure how that ended up on my Facebook wall but that certainly does not reflect my opinion of women." Perhaps the same lack of sureness applies to Judge Moseley.
Other luminaries, such as Chris McDaniel of Mississippi, also offered their own take on the marchers. (Sample: "If they can afford all those piercings, tattoos, body paintings, signs, and plane tickets, then why do they want us to pay for their birth control?")
On Facebook, however, those who have been following the judge's posts have noticed a certain strong political flavor.
His biography describes him as a highly upstanding citizen who's "a leader in his church."
Of course, we're in a new era and the manacles of political correctness let us openly express whatever we want, anywhere and at any time. From that perspective, the judge's post is blessed by a certain progressiveness.
But if we can't trust judges to at least appear impartial -- especially if we appear before them after we've put on a few pounds -- what do we have left?
Update, 10:05 a.m. PT: Adds comment from State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
Technically Literate: Original works of short fiction with unique perspectives on tech, exclusively on CNET.
Solving for XX: The industry seeks to overcome outdated ideas about "women in tech."