Mr. Tact wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 16:45:Starland Vocal Band, a favorite of mine.jdreyer wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 16:42:Some afternoon delight?
You're trying to keep me in a perpetual drunken state. What's your end game here?
jdreyer wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 16:42:Some afternoon delight?
You're trying to keep me in a perpetual drunken state. What's your end game here?
RedEye9 wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 08:07:Why are you bothering? Don't you understand they are nothing, and I mean, nothing but moronic trolls. A) They're too fucking stupid to even comprehend what it is we're saying. B) They don't fucking care. They're just trolling to get a rise from people. I will never understand why Blue hasn't just sent them packing long ago. They're pathetic little no-life basement dwellers and that's all they'll ever be. Be smart, put them on ignore.Cutter, the drinking game.Warning: This game will F*CK you up
Every time he calls someone stupid = Take a sip of the alcoholic cocktail of your choice
Every time he puts another "idiot on ignore" = Have a swig of cold beer
Every time he blows his top = slam a tequila shot
Every time he says Apple is evil = drink a shot of Schnapps, preferably apple flavored
Every time one of his posts gets * REMOVED * = Drink a shot of whiskey
Every time he call a game terrible = Sip a margarita
Every time he cries for Blue to ban someone = drink a glass of wine
Every time he wails SJW or SnowFlake = take a sip of ice water because you earned it
Every time he calls a person a basement dwelling troll = Drink a shot of Rum
Every time he reminds us of how smart he is = Close your eyes and drink the nearest bottle of bleach
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 23:06:Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:44:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:01:given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.
Shooting me would require modifying my property - my flesh. That would require authorization, else it would be a trespass.
On the other hand, if I tell you where I live, that information is now at your disposal.
'Telling everyone else where I live' would be within the list of possible outcomes that I would be aware of at the time that I tell you where I live - and if I make no agreement with you to not share that info, I would not complain if you did.
Under current law, I do not own the metadata about where I live (Unfortunately, IMO, it's public record, and I can't even copyright it).
-scheherazade
I'm not arguing the legality. It was illegal.
California :
"
(4) (A) Any person who intentionally distributes the image of the intimate body part or parts of another identifiable person, or an image of the person depicted engaged in an act of sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, sexual penetration, or an image of masturbation by the person depicted or in which the person depicted participates, under circumstances in which the persons agree or understand that the image shall remain private, the person distributing the image knows or should know that distribution of the image will cause serious emotional distress, and the person depicted suffers that distress.
(B) A person intentionally distributes an image described in subparagraph (A) when he or she personally distributes the image, or arranges, specifically requests, or intentionally causes another person to distribute that image.
(C) As used in this paragraph, “intimate body part” means any portion of the genitals, the anus, and in the case of a female, also includes any portion of the breasts below the top of the areola, that is either uncovered or clearly visible through clothing.
(D) It shall not be a violation of this paragraph to distribute an image described in subparagraph (A) if any of the following applies:
(i) The distribution is made in the course of reporting an unlawful activity.
(ii) The distribution is made in compliance with a subpoena or other court order for use in a legal proceeding.
(iii) The distribution is made in the course of a lawful public proceeding.
"
The man also committed identity theft, and harassment.
I do, however, think the law in this case is B.S..
I disagree with the special case made for this.
Facebook can sell every personal detail they can scrape together about me, and I get no say.
You can follow me around all day taking notes about what I do, and that info belongs to you, because you collected it, and I get no say.
Either fix the ownership of ALL PII (including biometrics and genetics), or leave it alone.
-scheherazade
Why are you bothering? Don't you understand they are nothing, and I mean, nothing but moronic trolls. A) They're too fucking stupid to even comprehend what it is we're saying. B) They don't fucking care. They're just trolling to get a rise from people. I will never understand why Blue hasn't just sent them packing long ago. They're pathetic little no-life basement dwellers and that's all they'll ever be. Be smart, put them on ignore.Cutter, the drinking game.
Warning: This game will F*CK you up
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:44:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:01:given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.
Shooting me would require modifying my property - my flesh. That would require authorization, else it would be a trespass.
On the other hand, if I tell you where I live, that information is now at your disposal.
'Telling everyone else where I live' would be within the list of possible outcomes that I would be aware of at the time that I tell you where I live - and if I make no agreement with you to not share that info, I would not complain if you did.
Under current law, I do not own the metadata about where I live (Unfortunately, IMO, it's public record, and I can't even copyright it).
-scheherazade
Mr. Tact wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:42:
Oh, the irony...
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:01:given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.
Shooting me would require modifying my property - my flesh. That would require authorization, else it would be a trespass.
On the other hand, if I tell you where I live, that information is now at your disposal.
'Telling everyone else where I live' would be within the list of possible outcomes that I would be aware of at the time that I tell you where I live - and if I make no agreement with you to not share that info, I would not complain if you did.
Under current law, I do not own the metadata about where I live (Unfortunately, IMO, it's public record, and I can't even copyright it).
-scheherazade
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:01:Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.
Shooting me would require modifying my property - my flesh. That would require authorization, else it would be a trespass.
On the other hand, if I tell you where I live, that information is now at your disposal.
'Telling everyone else where I live' would be within the list of possible outcomes that I would be aware of at the time that I tell you where I live - and if I make no agreement with you to not share that info, I would not complain if you did.
Under current law, I do not own the metadata about where I live (Unfortunately, IMO, it's public record, and I can't even copyright it).
-scheherazade
Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.
Bodolza wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 16:18:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
By that logic, if you tell me where you live and I come over to your house and shoot you in the head, then you volunteered to get shot.
RedEye9 wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:38:hBeamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:22:Would you expect anything different from the angry white man.Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.Give me a fucking derp.
Man, this is so ridiculously Cutter. It's the fault of women having fun with men, not men being assholes.
Naked photos are healthy and fun. Stop trying to discourage them.
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 15:27:
100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.
The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 14:13:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.
Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.
In one the "victim" participated consequentially, and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.
In the other, the victim participated non-consequentially.
-scheherazade
Ugh. Really? They did not consent to it being shared.
Your analogy is flawed. It's more like a woman agreeing to have oral and being forced for sex. Or agreeing to sex but the man violates her anally without her consenting to that. She consented to one thing, he did another, and therefore it's still rape.
I just don't get why you guys want women to stop being comfortable letting you take naked photos of them. Because that's what your prudeness would bring about. Prudeness, or desperation to defend every man, no matter how shitty he is.
Notice that Cutter always, always sides with the man, with the rate exception of when the man is involved in something unrelated that Cutter feels slighted by. It always comes back to anything that Cutter may do is worth defending, but anything that may be done against him is the end of the world. Anything totally not involving him is something only snowflakes care about.
UttiniDaKilrJawa wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 14:00:Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.
Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.
In one the "victim" participated consequentially, and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.
In the other, the victim participated non-consequentially.
-scheherazade
Here ya go, think ya dropped this.
<leaves “consensually” on the floor and walks away>
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 14:13:
I just don't get why you guys want women to stop being comfortable letting you take naked photos of them. Because that's what your prudeness would bring about. Prudeness, or desperation to defend every man, no matter how shitty he is.
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.
Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.
In one the "victim" participated consequentially, and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.
In the other, the victim participated non-consequentially.
-scheherazade
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:Cutter wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:18:Nice victim blaming. "Date raping is a dick thing to do, but women shouldn't go on dates if they are worried about it happening."Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.
Give me a fucking break. You choose to do something that may come back and bite in you in the ass one day then don't be surprised when your ass starts to sting. I agree revenge porn is a dick thing to do, but stop getting naked on fucking camera if you're worried about it getting out there. And these kind of judgements are way out of line. I still don't even agree with the legality of it. If you gift someone something you don't tell them how they can use it or ask for it back later on. Otherwise don't fucking give it to them/do it for them. It's a problem entirely of their own making, and the law should reflect that.
In one the "victim" participated consequentially, and transferred high-risk property to another. That's a calculated risk, but it is still a risk.
In the other, the victim participated non-consequentially.
-scheherazade