Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
26 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

26. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 13, 2018, 18:47 RedEye9
 
Mr. Tact wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 16:45:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 16:42:
You're trying to keep me in a perpetual drunken state. What's your end game here?
Some afternoon delight?
Starland Vocal Band, a favorite of mine.

 
Avatar 58135
 
Nullity's Law
There's an easy and fool-proof way to tell if anything related conservative/right-wing/Republican politics is true or not. If anyone calls it "fake news", you can be sure it's the solid truth.
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 13, 2018, 16:45 Mr. Tact
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 13, 2018, 16:42:
You're trying to keep me in a perpetual drunken state. What's your end game here?
Some afternoon delight?
 
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 13, 2018, 16:42 jdreyer
 
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

You're trying to keep me in a perpetual drunken state. What's your end game here?
 
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 13, 2018, 08:12 Beamer
 
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 23:06:
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:44:
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
given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?

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

You don't think there's a difference between aggregated information that treats you as a number and naked photos, attached to your name, sent to your friends, family, and coworkers, with your face clearly visible?

Do you not understand what was done here, or not understand the information that Facebook has and how it has it? For the record, Facebook has nothing you didn't give it. Nothing you didn't authorize it to have. Nothing you didn't authorize it to share (Cambridge Analytica did not have authorization for the information, but Facebook did not give it. Someone who users authorized sold it. And it's being investigated by numerous governments, so not sure what you want to happen.) And all of it identified you as a number, not an actual person. When my company runs ads on Facebook and wants to target video gamers who are likely also sovereign citizens, we will end up serving an ad to you, but we have no clue who you actually are. In the case of these photos, lots of people know who she actually is.

Facebook uses the information to serve you ads you are more likely to enjoy.
The guy in this case deliberately tried to ruin her life.

Oh, let's treat it the same, the men scream!
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 13, 2018, 08:07 RedEye9
 

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
 
Avatar 58135
 
Nullity's Law
There's an easy and fool-proof way to tell if anything related conservative/right-wing/Republican politics is true or not. If anyone calls it "fake news", you can be sure it's the solid truth.
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 13, 2018, 02:47 jdreyer
 
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:45:
No one has half the removed comments he does.

Space Captain! Space Captain does!

Oh, wait...
 
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 23:06 Scheherazade
 
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:44:
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
given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?

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

This comment was edited on Apr 12, 2018, 23:16.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 21:45 Beamer
 
Mr. Tact wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 21:42:
Oh, the irony...

He's asked me to commit suicide at least thrice. But we're the trolls. And somehow he does not get banned. No one has half the removed comments he does.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 21:44 Beamer
 
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
given your obsession with current law, why are you agreeing with Cutter, when what this man did is illegal under current law?
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 21:42 Mr. Tact
 
Oh, the irony...  
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 21:29 Cutter
 
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

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.


 
Avatar 25394
 
"I like oak myself, that's what's in my bedroom. How 'bout you Jimmie? You an oak man?"
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 21:01 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.

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
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 18:51 Beamer
 
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.

Right? He volunteered to let you into his house, so he's responsible for what you did in there.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Origin Access Free This Week Apr 12, 2018, 17:12 {PH}88fingers
 
RedEye9 wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:38:
Beamer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 11:22:
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.
Would you expect anything different from the angry white man.
h
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 16:18 Bodolza
 
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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 15:27 Scheherazade
 
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:
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.

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."

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.

Nobody in this case was forced to do anything. 100% voluntary action in every regard by every party.

The sender voluntarily sent nudes. The receiver voluntarily posted them online.

She was not forced to take nudes and send them. He was not forced to post them online.

The person who sent the images simply did not expect the receiver to share the pictures online.



But if you read the article, there is more to it. The case didn't revolve around him simply sharing pics.


The man impersonated her on dating sites, using her pics, name, address, twitter handle, etc. (identity theft)

The man sent the pics (unrequested) to her friends and coworkers. (harassment)



Personally, I wish the law was changed so that all information belongs to the subject of the information - and the collector of the information has zero ownership.

So any image of you belongs to you, forever and in all cases.
Any info about your name, address, favorite food, height, pet's name, etc, belongs to you, forever and in all cases.
etc.
Automatic copyright on all personal metadata, with a licensing requirement (from the subject) to store, duplicate, share, any of the subject's personal metadata.
Criminal otherwise.

Government exception carved out only for recording name, address, UIN.

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 15:06 Scheherazade
 
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:
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.

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."

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>

Lol. Good catch. Got autocorrected by my browser.

Thanks

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: GeForce Experience 3.0 Released Apr 12, 2018, 15:00 Gojo
 
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.

Well said. I sort of saw Cutter's side until I realized you're exactly right.
 
=-Gojo-=
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 14:13 Beamer
 
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:
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 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.

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."

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.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Apr 12, 2018, 14:00 UttiniDaKilrJawa
 
Scheherazade wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 13:09:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 12, 2018, 12:25:
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 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.

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."

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>
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo