As we approach the 10,00 views mark for this thread I would like to thank all you concerned consumers and potential donors for participating on it.

I hope that we can continue to share our online consumer protection insights.

So has anyone written any good letters lately?

Next week I might host a a thread called "Charitable donations in a digital age - The new online paradigm"

II-Neutron  Wrote:

As we approach the 10,00 views mark for this thread I would like to thank all you concerned consumers and potential donors for participating on it.

I hope that we can continue to share our online consumer protection insights.

So has anyone written any good letters lately?

Next week I might host a a thread called "Charitable donations in a digital age - The new online paradigm"

Well, the site involved brings up the past.

When I arrived home this evening
and saw the number of pages,
I knew HIMSELF would be over.

(I never name HIM
or HIS forum,
since the Rumplestiltskin debacle)

I figure this is the ultimate in Forum Success.

HE told me to piss off once.
It felt like victory.

I hope HIS limp dick legal threats
don't f*ck you up.

^TrInItY^Wrote:

I have every legal right to express my opinion about their company and tell them to f*ck off if I so choose

^TrInItY^ (OP)
Forum Administrator
7/23/2010 1:45 PM

Can we spell hypocrite?

I think that pretty well sums it up - he's just a egomaniacal, bitter little boy, who allows his pathologies to manifest themselves in childish threats; when, in fact, he tries the same tactics on others. My 2¢ is he suffers from a persecution complex - but in his case, he brought it on himself.

This one's for you Jason:

Oh - and of course, I archived that thread should he decide to delete it.

Why they did not take the Never Ban II-Neutron Treaty seriously is beyond me.

Well, I don't plan on posting much more, if any, on this topic, as it seems pretty well covered, and the threats of "bringing us down" or "you're going to be sued" is becoming laughable and just plain illogical.

But let's pretend for a moment, that I/we/us did proclaim, "People of earth - do not be afraid - we are here to protect you. Do not, under any circumstances, pay any money to Jason or GLP. They are bad."

Seems to be not dissimilar from sites like Walmartsucks.com or BestBuySucks.com, or maybe even a movie critic who proclaims to a vast TV or Internet audience to, "avoid this movie like the plague. It is terrible, and you'll be wasting your money."

Now of course we all know these sites exist, and are not in litigious jeopardy, and certainly movie critics abound, without fear their First Amendment rights will be abridged.

But Wait!

You didn't think I'd keep it this simple, did you? Hell no. Examine this thread started by Jason entitled:

Quote:Reuters President Responds To GLP Emails...

Located here:

Quote:http://www.don't sue me bro!/forum1/message1141475/pg1

On the first page, Jason says the following:

^TrInItY^Wrote:

So basically he is saying they know full well the tactics Attributor is using and they SUPPORT THEM!!!

f*ck YOU REUTERS!@!@

Never again EVER will we allow ANY reuters content to be used or linked to on this site..

We will purge the entire database of ANY old links / articles of REUTERS..

I recommend EVERY SITE ON THE INTERNET DO THE SAME

^TrInItY^ (OP)
Forum Administrator
7/23/2010 1:39 PM

WTF? He actually suggests that "Every site on the Internet" not use any Reuters content.

In a post a little further down, he states:

^TrInItY^Wrote:

I have every legal right to express my opinion about their company and tell them to f*ck off if I so choose

^TrInItY^ (OP)
Forum Administrator
7/23/2010 1:45 PM

Can we spell hypocrite?

I think that pretty well sums it up - he's just a egomaniacal, bitter little boy, who allows his pathologies to manifest themselves in childish threats; when, in fact, he tries the same tactics on others. My 2¢ is he suffers from a persecution complex - but in his case, he brought it on himself.

This one's for you Jason:

Oh - and of course, I archived that thread should he decide to delete it.

II-Neutron  Wrote:

Why they did not take the Never Ban II-Neutron Treaty seriously is beyond me.

So this really is you grinding your own persoanl axe for being banned. And why your asking for a year's comp membership here?


And what is it you want to make a deal with trinity about back on page 20:


^TrInItY^ - You keep watching.

I have another bomb to drop today. You hear me. You wanna talk and see what we can do for each other use the email otherwise get your sun screen ready.

As you well know I am ready willing and prepared.


So...... what? Are you using LOP to work out some kind of blackmail deal with your sparring partner Trinity?

Looks like that to me Douchetron. You are not to be trusted.

Anonymous Coward  Wrote:

Well, I don't plan on posting much more, if any, on this topic, as it seems pretty well covered, and the threats of "bringing us down" or "you're going to be sued" is becoming laughable and just plain illogical.

But let's pretend for a moment, that I/we/us did proclaim, "People of earth - do not be afraid - we are here to protect you. Do not, under any circumstances, pay any money to Jason or GLP. They are bad."

Seems to be not dissimilar from sites like Walmartsucks.com or BestBuySucks.com, or maybe even a movie critic who proclaims to a vast TV or Internet audience to, "avoid this movie like the plague. It is terrible, and you'll be wasting your money."

Now of course we all know these sites exist, and are not in litigious jeopardy, and certainly movie critics abound, without fear their First Amendment rights will be abridged.

But Wait!

You didn't think I'd keep it this simple, did you? Hell no. Examine this thread started by Jason entitled:

Quote:Reuters President Responds To GLP Emails...

Located here:

Quote:http://www.don't sue me bro!/forum1/message1141475/pg1

On the first page, Jason says the following:

^TrInItY^Wrote:

So basically he is saying they know full well the tactics Attributor is using and they SUPPORT THEM!!!

f*ck YOU REUTERS!@!@

Never again EVER will we allow ANY reuters content to be used or linked to on this site..

We will purge the entire database of ANY old links / articles of REUTERS..

I recommend EVERY SITE ON THE INTERNET DO THE SAME

^TrInItY^ (OP)
Forum Administrator
7/23/2010 1:39 PM

WTF? He actually suggests that "Every site on the Internet" not use any Reuters content.

In a post a little further down, he states:

^TrInItY^Wrote:

I have every legal right to express my opinion about their company and tell them to f*ck off if I so choose

^TrInItY^ (OP)
Forum Administrator
7/23/2010 1:45 PM

Can we spell hypocrite?

I think that pretty well sums it up - he's just a egomaniacal, bitter little boy, who allows his pathologies to manifest themselves in childish threats; when, in fact, he tries the same tactics on others. My 2¢ is he suffers from a persecution complex - but in his case, he brought it on himself.

This one's for you Jason:

Oh - and of course, I archived that thread should he decide to delete it.

^This. Spells it out. The real deal is T-Stock boy is using the SAME tactics as Righthaven, ie, THREATS and strong arm tactics. Righthaven has never WON in court, as websites typically settle out for less then 3 grand a pop-cheaper then going to court.

If T-Stock boy wants to sue guess what?? I know PLENTY of lawyers here that would just LOVE to see T-Stock boys deep pockets and countersue- and likely win as all T-Stock boy has is hot air and a diseased mind. Discovery would be a blast, and the results....put all OVER the Interwebs......within MINUTES.

Quote:The content of posts on this site, including but not limited to links to other web sites, are the expressed opinion of the original poster and are in no way representative of or endorsed by the owners or administration of this website.

Ikaika  Wrote:

II-Neutron  Wrote:

As we approach the 10,00 views mark for this thread I would like to thank all you concerned consumers and potential donors for participating on it.

I hope that we can continue to share our online consumer protection insights.

So has anyone written any good letters lately?

Next week I might host a a thread called "Charitable donations in a digital age - The new online paradigm"

Well, the site involved brings up the past.

When I arrived home this evening
and saw the number of pages,
I knew HIMSELF would be over.

(I never name HIM
or HIS forum,
since the Rumplestiltskin debacle)

I figure this is the ultimate in Forum Success.

HE told me to piss off once.
It felt like victory.

I hope HIS limp dick legal threats
don't f*ck you up.

HOW DO U KNOW HE HAS A LIMP DICK?





GAHAHAHAHAHA

This is what I said before I was banned. Or something to this effect.

Remember old timers when Elaine started asking for money and then she took the money and ran.

Deja vu, perhaps?