DonOld is a Loser

[HisArpy]

He just can’t help himself and will post drivel for days to defend an incorrect stance he’s taken, again.

I’m guessing Harpy has never been involved in running a campaign event, or a nonprofit organization event in his entire life.


Dude, not you Rob, take a hike. <3

Someone threatening to sue doesn't mean they have a viable case.

 

[HisArpy]

For a purported "member in good standing of the California bar" he seems quite ill-informed on copyright issues.

*nods*

For someone who's been on Lit for as long as you have, you seem to be stupid.

 

[HisArpy]

And that is where a Moderator comes in. Repeated posts in bad faith, re-posting information that has been proven incorrect would fall under 'spamming and disruptive behavior' and would be removed.

Censorship for the purposes of moderating content based on "misinformation" is still censorship.

Free speech means that a member can post straight up lies without fear of being censored UNLESS those posts violate the terms of use and/or contain statement on prohibited topics. Lying is not a violation.

You'll also note that rorbags crossposts and no one seems to complain about that, and that IS a rules violation.

 

[Bn2f]

For someone who's been on Lit for as long as you have, you seem to be stupid.

Do not dismiss this as a one off reply by this particular member. He is a supposed lawyer who always has the weakest of responses.

 

[Bn2f]

Censorship for the purposes of moderating content based on "misinformation" is still censorship.

Free speech means that a member can post straight up lies without fear of being censored UNLESS those posts violate the terms of use and/or contain statement on prohibited topics. Lying is not a violation.

You'll also note that rorbags crossposts and no one seems to complain about that, and that IS a rules violation.

Here is also, again, a supposed lawyer who is advocating for misinformation being posted when in a court of law he is obligated and would be disbarred for knowingly misleading the court.

 

[HisArpy]

Here is also, again, a supposed lawyer who is advocating for misinformation being posted when in a court of law he is obligated and would be disbarred for knowingly misleading the court.

No.

What we have here is a lawyer who advocates for FREE SPEECH instead of censorship. As I'm required to do under both the law and my professional code of responsibility.

IOW, I'm not a fascist like you who would censor someone merely because you don't like being exposed for what you are.

 

[Rotadom]

Keep going, HisArpy! You got'em on the ropes!

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

No.

What we have here is a lawyer who advocates for FREE SPEECH instead of censorship. As I'm required to do under both the law and my professional code of responsibility.

IOW, I'm not a fascist like you who would censor someone merely because you don't like being exposed for what you are.

And that is where a Moderator comes in. Repeated posts in bad faith, re-posting information that has been proven incorrect would fall under 'spamming and disruptive behavior' and would be removed.

Not a free speech issue. The owners of a private message board are allowed to ban "spamming and disruptive behavior" like posting deliberate falsehoods to "punk" other members.

 

[Bn2f]

You now play the semantics game. Ok. Let’s play.
You just posted this not more than 5 minutes ago in another thread.

An opinion by one "law professor" can be countered by another "law professor" who has a different take.

That doesn't mean that the one you choose to believe is correct. IMO, you should be listening to the opinion on the issue which was delivered by a sitting SCOTUS justice. Because where's there's one, there are usually others of the same mindset and that mindset isn't the one you or you're preferred "law professor's opinion" are believing in.

Here you defer to a SCOTUS judge as the arbiter to a legal opinion.
For semantics sake - are corporations people?

 

[jaF0]

• We also reserve the right to reject or remove any content or work that the community finds disruptive (or that causes harm to the community or any member of the community) for any or no reason.

The above guidelines apply to all content published on Literotica, including but not limited to – stories, poems, audio, artworks, comments, feedback, and forum posts.

https://www.literotica.com/resources/content-guidelines

• You may not post any content prohibited under our sitewide Content Guidelines in the forum.
• 
  
• Do not threaten other people. Do not post images or words directly or indirectly implying threats or encouragement of physical harm.
• 
  
• Flooding the forum with posts, screen-breaking text, or images - or bumping old threads - and/or any non-substantive activity with the intent of disrupting the forum is prohibited.

https://www.literotica.com/faq/forum/forum-rules


It's pretty vague, but that's intentional to allow Mods to act based on the content.

 

[HisArpy]

This is a hot take and creates an interesting conundrum.

If HisArpy is a troll, that means he knowingly brings lies and bullshit into arguments just to rile people up.

If he's not a troll, that means he really is as misinformed and ignorant as he's appeared for the last decade.

View attachment 2376373

Or you don't actually know what you claim to know.

 

[Lazaran]

• We also reserve the right to reject or remove any content or work that the community finds disruptive (or that causes harm to the community or any member of the community) for any or no reason.

The above guidelines apply to all content published on Literotica, including but not limited to – stories, poems, audio, artworks, comments, feedback, and forum posts.

https://www.literotica.com/resources/content-guidelines

• You may not post any content prohibited under our sitewide Content Guidelines in the forum.
• 
  
• Do not threaten other people. Do not post images or words directly or indirectly implying threats or encouragement of physical harm.
• 
  
• Flooding the forum with posts, screen-breaking text, or images - or bumping old threads - and/or any non-substantive activity with the intent of disrupting the forum is prohibited.

https://www.literotica.com/faq/forum/forum-rules


It's pretty vague, but that's intentional to allow Mods to act based on the content.

So Wat’s thread continues to exist, and the individuals who post implied threats and encouragement of violence in that thread aren’t banned, because???

 

[Bn2f]

My point is that there are folks here who get things wrong and then there are liars. A corporation being a person is only practical to hack judges and is laughable in real world situations. You tend to engage with the liars.

 

[Rotadom]

Or you don't actually know what you claim to know.

You're more than welcome to step up and tell us where I'm wrong in this scenario.

Go ahead.

Do it.

 

[HisArpy]

• We also reserve the right to reject or remove any content or work that the community finds disruptive (or that causes harm to the community or any member of the community) for any or no reason.

The above guidelines apply to all content published on Literotica, including but not limited to – stories, poems, audio, artworks, comments, feedback, and forum posts.

https://www.literotica.com/resources/content-guidelines

• You may not post any content prohibited under our sitewide Content Guidelines in the forum.
• 
  
• Do not threaten other people. Do not post images or words directly or indirectly implying threats or encouragement of physical harm.
• 
  
• Flooding the forum with posts, screen-breaking text, or images - or bumping old threads - and/or any non-substantive activity with the intent of disrupting the forum is prohibited.

https://www.literotica.com/faq/forum/forum-rules


It's pretty vague, but that's intentional to allow Mods to act based on the content.

So when are luk, rubbery, rorbags, rotodom, Bn2f, Bray, Alex Bailey, and more than a few others going to get the boot?

 

[jaF0]

So Wat’s thread continues to exist, and the individuals who post implied threats and encouragement of violence in that thread aren’t banned, because???

Because @Laurel is the only one who can act here on the PB. She is the only one who sees reports and decides what to do or not.

And she has the whole site to run where the story side and contests take priority. She and @Manu run this entire operation on their own. The forum is like an adopted child. Some of us have offered to help.

 

[Rotadom]

Oh my

 

[Bn2f]

So when are luk, rubbery, rorbags, rotodom, Bn2f, Bray, Alex Bailey, and more than a few others going to get the boot?

Here. This is simpler. You claimed Harris was the immigration czar. Is that true?

 

[Bn2f]

So when are luk, rubbery, rorbags, rotodom, Bn2f, Bray, Alex Bailey, and more than a few others going to get the boot?

For???

 

[HisArpy]

Here. This is simpler. You claimed Harris was the immigration czar. Is that true?

When/where did I say that?

 

[Bn2f]

So, how's that border czar assignment working out for her?

Mofo!
Why you test me??!!

 

[HisArpy]

For???

Well, you are disruptive and your siggy is definitely a "threat" or "threatening."

So, when are you leaving? Or are you going to wait to get booted while simultaneously crying about how other people are being "mean" to you and should be banned or censored for it?

 

[Bn2f]

Now answer, dammit!
What type of member are you?
Misinformed or a spreader of lies???

 

[Bn2f]

Well, you are disruptive and your siggy is definitely a "threat" or "threatening."

So, when are you leaving?

I am more than happy to address this. In the time that I have been here, I believe I have become one of the strongest advocates for gun reform and end gun violence. You need to show me where I have threatened another member because I believe that I have never done so other than to tell them that I plan to kick their ass with my words, which I am more than happy to do. You may not remember this, but I have changed my signature a number of times. This particular one shows me hypothetically threatening wat in response to the literal threats that he gives me and other members almost daily. If the owners of this site decide to boot me because of i this image of potential or implied violence over the actual desire to cause harm to other members then I will accept.

 

[Bn2f]

I am more than happy to address this. In the time that I have been here, I believe I have become one of the strongest advocates for gun reform and end gun violence. You need to show me where I have threatened another member because I believe that I have never done so other than to tell them that I plan to kick their ass with my words, which I am more than happy to do. You may not remember this, but I have changed my signature a number of times. This particular one shows me hypothetically threatening wat in response to the literal threats that he gives me and other members almost daily. If the owners of this site decide to boot me because of i this image of potential or implied violence over the actual desire to cause harm to other members then I will accept.

It would be refreshingly pleasant if your outrage and condemnation of my signature would also be told to the people on that thread. But you practice cognitive distance. Now answer my previous question. Are you a liar or are you just misinformed?