Liz Fong-Jones / Elliot William Fong / @lizthegrey - 'Consent accident' enjoyer, ex-Google employee, nepotistic sex pest, Robert Z'Dar look-alike who wants authority over the Internet

Yeah. to give you an idea what kind of company Honeycomb is, here are some stickers:
View attachment 3926352 View attachment 3926346

View attachment 3926376
View attachment 3926367 View attachment 3926370
View attachment 3926373

Edit - moar.
Notice the one at the top "THE ENGINE OF CAPITALIST PATRIARCHY RUNS ON THE DIRTY FUEL OF WOMEN & SHAME"
Who doesn't want to do business with such a company?
View attachment 3926499
View attachment 3926502
*yawn* Anybody using the word "snark" in 2022 probably still writes fanfic mst3ks and tvtropes articles.
 
Totally agree on that.
People overshare at the point of keeping their phone's geotags on all the time, so you can always see where they are. And at the same time they share quotes about Orwell's 1984 to appear smart, lol.
Because of this oversharing, doxxing people has become trivial. Back 20 years ago, doxxing someone needed some serious detective work, including tracing IPs to see the person's approximate location, etc. Today, all it takes is just enough patience, a Facebook and Twitter account, and Google: you find everything on the table. And the most difficult ones are dots that don't take too much effort to be connected.

I highly doubt that what happens to them can be considered doxxing, too: according to Cambridge Dictionary, doxxing means "to publish private information about someone on the internet, without their permission and in a way that reveals their name, where they live, etc.:"
To publish private information on the internet means that the info were NOT on the internet, I got them by offline means (i.e. by knowing that person IRL), and I posted them somewhere. But if the info were already on the internet, can it be considered doxxing, if even the average joe can get them with minimum effort?

It’s another of these things which kids who have grown up with the internet don’t get.

They seem to think that permission has to be sought for everything like that, despite the fact that if it’s already public, even if not publicized, permission is implied.
 
Yeah. to give you an idea what kind of company Honeycomb is, here are some stickers:
View attachment 3926352 View attachment 3926346

View attachment 3926376
View attachment 3926367 View attachment 3926370
View attachment 3926373

Edit - moar.
Notice the one at the top "THE ENGINE OF CAPITALIST PATRIARCHY RUNS ON THE DIRTY FUEL OF WOMEN & SHAME"
Who doesn't want to do business with such a company?
View attachment 3926499
View attachment 3926502
These are some of the most ugliest stickers I have seen. It looks real cheap and designed for children you hate.
 
These are some of the most ugliest stickers I have seen. It looks real cheap and designed for children you hate.
In the mean time we found out it's a blatant copy of Lisa Frank drawings + some cringy text added to it.
And you're right, it looks real cheap and it is designed for children you hate.

If Honeycomb is allowed to create their stickers then so am I.
1669328771771.png
Edit - one more
1669329055305.png
 
Last edited:
Wait. What the fucking fuck? LMFAO. How are these pictures real life. This is a gold mine.

635D0E41-BEFE-47B8-ADC0-452851AE4754.jpeg
BFA2744D-1D7D-460F-AA38-47D5B4CA9C76.jpeg D1A6DDA2-C3AE-474C-95F7-DB0FE1DC67E6.jpeg
What do you even say. LMFAO. A rapist furry chinky eunuch with autism in a piss-stained dog outfit.
6E2B8EDA-9302-4103-A6A5-F7DA1451EF11.jpeg
Get a load of this guy (?). These are the people dictating who gets a platform online in America.

7315493B-EE06-4CEE-AE43-B91132FFF8D1.png
This is unironically like something I would draw to make fun of him. What the fuck?

8C3CB65E-0EA0-4EC6-BDC5-26B4B2BB8CE0.jpeg
TFW you raped your co-worker in Zurich and admitted it publicly, yet are still employed as Field CTO by Honeycomb.io.
 
Wait. What the fucking fuck? LMFAO. How are these pictures real life. This is a gold mine.

View attachment 3929868
View attachment 3929874 View attachment 3929877
What do you even say. LMFAO. A rapist furry chinky eunuch with autism in a piss-stained dog outfit.
View attachment 3929889
Get a load of this guy (?). These are the people dictating who gets a platform online in America.

View attachment 3929895
This is unironically like something I would draw to make fun of him. What the fuck?

View attachment 3929898
TFW you raped your co-worker in Zurich and admitted it publicly, yet are still employed as Field CTO by Honeycomb.io.
President Xi Jinping looks more feminine and healthier than this gargantuan freak. Look at him.

Imagine waking up bound to the bed with a plastic bag over your head and through that you see this face.
 
When did the seething retards in this thread start unironically claiming he's a rapist? It's fucking hilarious that he's being accused of rape for getting dog hair on somebody, and it's even more hilarious that he called it a 'consent accident' when he addressed the claims with all the seriousness and dignity they absolutely don't deserve, but he's clearly not a rapist and it reflects poorly on us to keep saying he is.
 
When did the seething retards in this thread start unironically claiming he's a rapist? It's fucking hilarious that he's being accused of rape for getting dog hair on somebody, and it's even more hilarious that he called it a 'consent accident' when he addressed the claims with all the seriousness and dignity they absolutely don't deserve, but he's clearly not a rapist and it reflects poorly on us to keep saying he is.
We only have his side of the story, and someone else claimed sexual assault. Given all of the blatant lies he's told about us why should we give him the benefit of the doubt and buy his dog hair story?
 
When did the seething retards in this thread start unironically claiming he's a rapist? It's fucking hilarious that he's being accused of rape for getting dog hair on somebody, and it's even more hilarious that he called it a 'consent accident' when he addressed the claims with all the seriousness and dignity they absolutely don't deserve, but he's clearly not a rapist and it reflects poorly on us to keep saying he is.
He admitted to the consent accident and claimed another with some google creep manager was rape, so by his own admission, he's a rapist.

No one should believe that dog hair story, it's contrived and I'm supposed to believe the dog that he euthanised 18 months ago had leftover hair to "trigger" his victim? Really?
 
This dude is so fucking ugly I was inspired to paint for the first since high school.
I call it “Liz Fong-Jones, consent accidentist and field CTO of honeycomb.io after sexually assaulting an acquaintance in Zurich on Nov 3 2019” mixed media (acrylic paint and dog hair on eva foam)
C540406F-3393-4F4D-A55F-E1DFDDD5F373.jpeg
 
We only have his side of the story, and someone else claimed sexual assault. Given all of the blatant lies he's told about us why should we give him the benefit of the doubt and buy his dog hair story?
Because nobody would make that up to try and cover an actual rape, it's literally retarded. All it takes is for the victim to come out and say "Dog hair what the fuck is she talking about?" and your entire defense is ruined.
He admitted to the consent accident and claimed another with some google creep manager was rape, so by his own admission, he's a rapist.
By his own admission he's also a beautiful woman but I don't see anybody taking that one seriously.
 
When did the seething retards in this thread start unironically claiming he's a rapist? It's fucking hilarious that he's being accused of rape for getting dog hair on somebody, and it's even more hilarious that he called it a 'consent accident' when he addressed the claims with all the seriousness and dignity they absolutely don't deserve, but he's clearly not a rapist and it reflects poorly on us to keep saying he is.
I believe all women (and fur-friends) you bigot.
 
Totally agree on that.
People overshare at the point of keeping their phone's geotags on all the time, so you can always see where they are. And at the same time they share quotes about Orwell's 1984 to appear smart, lol.
Because of this oversharing, doxxing people has become trivial. Back 20 years ago, doxxing someone needed some serious detective work, including tracing IPs to see the person's approximate location, etc. Today, all it takes is just enough patience, a Facebook and Twitter account, and Google: you find everything on the table. And the most difficult ones are dots that don't take too much effort to be connected.

I highly doubt that what happens to them can be considered doxxing, too: according to Cambridge Dictionary, doxxing means "to publish private information about someone on the internet, without their permission and in a way that reveals their name, where they live, etc.:"
To publish private information on the internet means that the info were NOT on the internet, I got them by offline means (i.e. by knowing that person IRL), and I posted them somewhere. But if the info were already on the internet, can it be considered doxxing, if even the average joe can get them with minimum effort?
Inspired by @AltisticRight 's informative mild PL above, I'd like to add on to this through my professional experience.

How do you think credit card companies, banks, eCommerce merchants, etc. figure out if it was actually you who ordered that expensive piece of tech for your folks that live across the country? Or when you place an order online while vacationing, perhaps sightseeing in a different country?

Of course, some of it comes from readily available public information, such as who lives at what address, what is their phone number, etc. Some of it also comes from the information you provide the merchant, such as your IP address, phone model, and maybe even something advanced like your "digital fingerprint" - how fast you click on buttons, what your scrolling habits are, whether or not you used copy+paste and autofill, etc.

However, the decisions which can't be automated by well-trained ML AI, have to be handled by hand. Who do you think does that, and how do they do it?

The answer to the first part is literally thousands upon thousands of people in hundreds of different businesses and offices around the world. The answer to the second part is they can just look at the socials of the average oversharing idiot and find out. Oh, a photo from yesterday in Tokyo with your partner? This JP IP is good. Someone liked your photo on Facebook and they are sending you an item from your online wedding registry? Easy. Strange email behind an order going to a person with a different name? A few clicks and they've found your degenerate fursona, which explains why your Skype handle location is "Equestria".

It's too fucking easy, because everyone except the technologically-inclined and the wise old people who use VPNs and email anonymizers, are putting all of their information online in an easy-to-connect web. It's honestly absurd sometimes, just how much depraved shit you can find just by clicking a few buttons and doing the right Google searches based on information people willingly share online.
 
No one should believe that dog hair story, it's contrived and I'm supposed to believe the dog that he euthanised 18 months ago had leftover hair to "trigger" his victim? Really?
I believe that some retarded freak would accuse people of rape because of a dog hair phobia more than I believe somebody would get sexually assaulted by him, come forward about the sexual assault, watch him tell everyone 'yeah nah I just got some dog hair on her and that's why she's upset" and then just quietly give up and disappear without another word.
 
When did the seething retards in this thread start unironically claiming he's a rapist? It's fucking hilarious that he's being accused of rape for getting dog hair on somebody, and it's even more hilarious that he called it a 'consent accident' when he addressed the claims with all the seriousness and dignity they absolutely don't deserve, but he's clearly not a rapist and it reflects poorly on us to keep saying he is.
Lmao if you believe his story about the doghair I've got a nice sea front property in Montana you might be interested in.
He's a got a fucking history of bullying coworkers to cover up sexual assaults going back to his time at Google, he's into "risk aware kink" and all kinds of fucking degenerate shit.
That "consent accident" phrase he used wasn't something he came up with, he just borrowed it. The guy that came up with the term used to to by his own admission to try and downplay and gaslight someone he sexually assaulted.
Liz Fong Jones is a fucking BDSM sicko that walks around wearing a fucking gimp collar and assaulted one of his co workers and tried to minimize it as a "consent accident."
A consent accident is a sexual assault.
Liz Fong Jones is a self admitted rapist.
 
I believe that some retarded freak would accuse people of rape because of a dog hair phobia more than I believe somebody would get sexually assaulted by him, come forward about the sexual assault, watch him tell everyone 'yeah nah I just got some dog hair on her and that's why she's upset" and then just quietly give up and disappear without another word.
He can say he's a beautiful woman, that doesn't matter, it's just his delusions. We're on the same wavelength if he claims he's a beautiful woman and start to go on about all the features that makes him a beautiful woman.

The way he responded to the rape accusation was completely contrived and needlessly specific, it's like he's trying to fluff everything up to make it more believable by sharing more detail, which often indicates the opposite.

He's a rapist. That term is some loosely established BDSM freak jargon, his victim was probably tied up or something.
 
Because nobody would make that up to try and resetcover an actual rape, it's literally retarded. All it takes is for the victim to come out and say "Dog hair what the fuck is she talking about?" and your entire defense is ruined.

By his own admission he's also a beautiful woman but I don't see anybody taking that one seriously.
The guy is able to bully tier 1 BGP providers into breaking the internet, you'd think he'd be above intimidating a rape victim and threatening to tar her as a transphobe? We don't even know her name, that's how much he's covered this up. I 100% do not buy blockhead's story. There's more this sexual assault accusation we're not hearing about .
 
Last edited:
Back