Tom, Fuck off and leave me alone!

[Goofy Logic]

stay stupid , mush head milt. that's not what i'm coming after anybody for. laugh all you like, but libelous incitement are not protected speech and by allowing it to happen , the site is in violation of it's own TOS. prove me wrong with an actual rational argument boy, put a sock in it or persist in looking like a fool for all eternity, as you wish.

Where does it say that in the TOS? Get lawyering and prove it, chucklefuck!

 

[NerdShamer]

Fact of the matter is that I've filed two federal actions; one as a class and the other over the death of my dog . both failed. i've filed three times in small claims court and won all three times, have filed four restraining orders and won three and have defeated a restraining order.

What's the case number?

 

[Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg]

What's the case number?

what the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg]

Where does it say that in the TOS? Get lawyering and prove it, chucklefuck!

You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which violates any laws. You are entirely responsible for the content of, and any harm resulting from, that Content or your conduct.

We may remove or modify any Content submitted at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice. Requests for Content to be removed or modified will be undertaken only at our discretion. We may terminate your access to all or any part of the Service at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice.

@Null is going to argue that by the way it's worded, removal is at his discretion, but failing to remove criminal postings is violating his ISP's TOS and the domain name registrar's TOS and federal communications laws. By allowing these things to go on , it is easily proven that he's guilty of negligence and fraud.

 

[MediocreMilt]

Requests for Content to be removed or modified will be undertaken only at our discretion.

Seems cut and dry that according to the TOS they don't have to do jack shit.

 

[BlueArmedDevil]

but failing to remove criminal postings is violating his ISP's TOS

How is reposting the videos you put up on a public website and offering commentary on them illegal?

 

[RadioactiveMonkeyMan]

You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which violates any laws. You are entirely responsible for the content of, and any harm resulting from, that Content or your conduct.

You (the signee) is responsible for their posts and the legal repercussions. You'll have to find and charge each of us as individuals, moron.

We may remove or modify any Content submitted at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice. Requests for Content to be removed or modified will be undertaken only at our discretion. We may terminate your access to all or any part of the Service at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice.

May means exactly that. Requests for Content removal at their (The Company) discretion qualifies that statement. Lern2reed.

 

[NerdShamer]

what the fuck is wrong with you?

I could say the same thing about you.

 

[blackboots]

I heard back in the 70's Tom sharted so bad in a suburb of Niagara Falls they had to seal the whole place off as an environmental disaster and build a landfill to contain it.

So THAT'S what happened! I saw the aftermath, but no plaque. It should be commemorated. As a pokestop.

What illegal things have been posted? Your threats to CDG and others are left up in case they want to sue you, or if you escalate, they can point to it as documented evidence. But it goes both ways, it would protect you, if CDG or others threaten you with IRL violence.

 

[Boom Boss]

You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which violates any laws. You are entirely responsible for the content of, and any harm resulting from, that Content or your conduct.

We may remove or modify any Content submitted at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice. Requests for Content to be removed or modified will be undertaken only at our discretion. We may terminate your access to all or any part of the Service at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice.

@Null is going to argue that by the way it's worded, removal is at his discretion, but failing to remove criminal postings is violating his ISP's TOS and the domain name registrar's TOS and federal communications laws. By allowing these things to go on , it is easily proven that he's guilty of negligence and fraud.

I'd love for you to go into a courtroom and admit to the judge that you had sex with a child and a dog. We'll just see how that turns out.

 

[Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg]

Seems cut and dry that according to the TOS they don't have to do jack shit.

You (the signee) is responsible for their posts and the legal repercussions. You'll have to find and charge each of us as individuals, moron.

May means exactly that. Requests for Content removal at their (The Company) discretion qualifies that statement. Lern2reed.

Except their discretionary endorsement of illegal content
violates TOS of their providers
and laws that they need to uphold, mushmouth malt and sociopathic monkey moron.

How is reposting the videos you put up on a public website and offering commentary on them illegal?

taking clips out of context is a huge no-no, as is incitement with libelous hate speech.

I'd love for you to go into a courtroom and admit to the judge that you had sex with a child and a dog. We'll just see how that turns out.

I'd love for you to go into a courtroom and try to convince a judge that I had sex with a child and a dog. You realize that in libel the burden of proof is on you, not the injured party.

I could say the same thing about you.

hey hon, if you want to believe the words of an insane queer who has been programmed with lies and doesn't really understand things they claim to have heard me say, that's entirely up to you.

So THAT'S what happened! I saw the aftermath, but no plaque. It should be commemorated. As a pokestop.

What illegal things have been posted? Your threats to CDG and others are left up in case they want to sue you, or if you escalate, they can point to it as documented evidence. But it goes both ways, it would protect you, if CDG or others threaten you with IRL violence.

learn the difference between a threat and a warning. CDG is speaking of me with extreme dehumanizing language based on libel with the intention of inciting violence against me. This video is in no way protected by the first amendment and when i bring it to the city court, they will grant a restraining order. Ask somebody about the one i got on gary perdue and the evidence that was presented. he wasn't nearly as off the rails as this hysterical raving.

 

[MediocreMilt]

Except their discretionary endorsement of illegal content
violates TOS of their providers

Which providers??? Not 1776 I hope!!!

Null, you bastard, follow the TOS of that totally unrelated company!!!

I'd love for you to go into a courtroom and try to convince a judge that I had sex with a child and a dog. You realize that in libel the burden of proof is on you, not the injured party.

*hem hem* Sabrina Post

 

[RadioactiveMonkeyMan]

Except their discretionary endorsement of illegal content
violates TOS of their providers
and laws that they need to uphold, mushmouth malt and sociopathic monkey moron.

Null has clearly stated on multiple occasions illegal activity and using KF to organize trolling gets your info sent to relevant authorities and doxed on the site. What the heck is a mushmouth malt? Last time I checked, I wasn't a toasted germinating seed used for beer. I'd love a beer right now though, so I might just go out and get some.

 

[BlueArmedDevil]

taking clips out of context is a huge no-no

Show me the legal statute where this is a crime.

 

[NerdShamer]

hey hon, if you want to believe the words of an insane queer who has been programmed with lies and doesn't really understand things they claim to have heard me say, that's entirely up to you

The jokes just write themselves, at this point.

 

[AnOminous]

I'd love for you to go into a courtroom and try to convince a judge that I had sex with a child and a dog. You realize that in libel the burden of proof is on you, not the injured party.

That's completely wrong you dumb fuck. That isn't how any of this works. The defendant doesn't even need to prove the statement is true. It can be false if not made negligently, and the burden is on the plaintiff to prove both falsity and negligence. If the plaintiff, which would be you, has barged into a public argument and made a spectacle of yourself, then you'd have to prove actual malice. Read New York Times v. Sullivan and Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. you fucking retard.

The defendant has not had the burden of proving truth since 1974.

 

[FujiWuji]

Imagine being worse at law than Melinda Scott. The absolute state of tommie.

 

[BlueArmedDevil]

1974

We all know Tom hasn't learned a damn thing since 1970

 

[Just Another Apocalypse]

how close to the midlands are you, scouser? Barristers are cheap there and i have somebody who would happily serve you and beat the living shit out of you if you were stupid enough to try something with him

You fucking nonce idiot. That's because they are shit and will rip you off.

Midlanders are notoriously thick and lazy. Used to live there.

Aren't you ashamed that you're still wasting resources? You should be.

put a sock in it

Oh dear, did your bum fall out again? Your chalfonts must be a living hell.

 

[blackboots]

Mushmouth is an actual insult I've heard before, usually referring to someone's accent sounding like they have no teeth. Malt is also chav (Londoner wiggers) slang for chicks. Maybe Tommie is confused about who is who again? It definitely doesn't make sense to reference accents where there are none, but maybe we are being associated as such through our avatars?

Transylvania for me please.