The king of condescension and ad hominems is hurt? A couple of weeks ago I posted that I was going to really attempt to be friendlier and more positive toward ufn posters, because I value this community, and don't want to be responsible for anybody leaving. That same day I told you I was done interacting with you, because it's impossible to have civil discourse.
Since then you have poked and prodded, begging me to respond. Still, I didn't until you claimed that you wanted to meet me so you could tell me face to face how you felt. You opened this can of worms, and now you're calling on the mods, because I called you ugly (inside and out) and made some assumptions about your personal life. Puhleeeeeease.
Now, can we get on with our lives, or are you going to persist?
ha! I forgot about these from last year. I feel flattered; I know for certain that my name and Pol Pot has never been mentioned in the same sentence before. 480, I don't know how you got left out of this motley crew.
USC vs. CCCP ocgreg - -- Friday 30 October 2015, at 04:15 pm [ID# 1776744]
What do they stand for... annarborute - -- Friday 30 October 2015, at 04:19 pm [ID# 1776746]
Same stuff as you, Puget, TheBaron, Red Don, Riot West, Newbomb, Tacoma, P-Worm, PDX, Wannabe, UteDude, 96GradAlum, Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Che, Castro, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Dear Leader, Marge Sanger, and Bernie Sanders. Mevsauce - -- Friday 30 October 2015, at 04:27 pm [ID# 1776749]
Here's the language from the statute: (17 U.S. Code Sec. 412)
"an effective date of registration not later than the earlier of 3 months after the first publication of the work or 1 month after the copyright owner has learned of the infringement"
The earlier of:
one month of learning of the infringement; OR
three months after publication
Here, you learned about any unauthorized reproduction or display well over three months after the first publication. Had this happened two days after publication, you would only have a month to file an application.
Police officers are thugs and deserve zero respect
(19 days ago, -19 stars)
I'd rather see those pigs die than them abuse an innocent individual.
(19 days ago, -15 stars)
Seems like making rash generalizations about a group of people and proclaiming that you would be okay with them dying could be construed as against the policies of this site, not to mention that it's just a very tactless way of expressing your opinion on a subject.
I will admit that there are times when I post things to generate a discussion. When people disagree with you there's a tendency there to attempt to attack their intellect, insult them, embarrass them etc
Pro tip. If you don't want something, copyrighted or not, posted all over the web don't put it here in the first place once it's on the web it's public and you lose all control of how it's used etc.
I don't mind you as much as others. We've had some civil discussions via boardmail. So not sure what is up with you. I had you on ignore for a while Ignore is like penicillin for the board. Unfortunately there are some things even it won't take care of.
Yes, I sunk to his level, but #%!@ your righteous indignation. This guy's sole purpose here is to "make the board over there so vitriolic that it will just be unbearable for anyone to post." He pushes and pushes until people say enough, and then wants to cry foul. Your post shows that you have no knowledge of what has transpired over the past couple of weeks even though it's been explained ad nauseam.
Sadly you'd rather stick up for a fellow conservative, wrongly, than look at the evidence and draw the conclusion that he begged for this attention. Politics are debated constantly here yet I've never posted "personal information" before, so your argument that this is a petty beef based on conflicting opinions is asinine. If that was true I'd be posting "personal info" of members on a daily basis.
As for the pic, there was no indication or evidence it was him. It was a small cropped photo of his face. I don't see how that's embarrassing. I admittedly was fishing for verification that it was him (and admittedly hoping to evoke a response), and when he flipped out I had it. Had he not mentioned it nobody would have been the wiser, but he started threatening to sue. Speaking of lawsuits I wonder if monkey has any recourse over Mev's attempt to draw traffic away from this site:
I haven't followed today's fracas. I'll assume that you actually do own the copyright of this picture, and I'll even assume that 480 has no fair use defense to the use of it.
I'm pretty sure 480 hasn't profited from posting a picture on Utefans—at least not monetarily—so you won't be able to disgorge him of any profits. That will leave you with proving that the copyright infringement has damaged you. How much monetary damages are you claiming you suffered from this infringement? I doubt you'd even recover your court filing fees.
(NM) means No Message was included
in the post, so don't bother clicking on it.
On the internet, there are people called "Trolls" --
not because they look like monsters -- but because they troll around
different message boards, throwing out little baited
hooks hoping to get a bite from some eager fish. And
like any fisherman, the Trolls won't
stay very long if no one bites
UteFans.Net is not affiliated with the University of
Utah, except that the owner, operators and contributing members
are students, alumni,
and rabid fans of the U. Additionally,
the owner and operators of Utefans.Net are not responsible
for the actions of those who use this public forum. By contributing
forum you agree to abide by the Rules of Conduct outlined on
Post Message page.