EPTUS Politics Feedback Thread - Page 177
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 07 2018 01:34 opisska wrote: Falsely threating to sue someone is actually against the law in Czech Republic, is there a similar clause in the US? Anyway, this thread is one of the few hidden gems of TL that continue to absolutely deliver. Is there a list of people that hold that xDaunt is a Nazi where I can sign up to make sure I am not excluded from a possible lawsuit? Sounds like tons of fun, especially imagining him trying to go after me outside the US! Nah, It’s totally legal in the US. We are lame like that. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44256 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On August 07 2018 01:36 Plansix wrote: Nah, It’s totally legal in the US. We are lame like that. To be fair, afaik the clause is from the new Civic Code which is only a couple of years old, first big reform after 50 years, so we are un-lamifying ourselves rather slowly  | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On August 07 2018 00:45 tofucake wrote: This is feedback, not the "is xDaunt nazi thread". Knock it off. The main thread had individuals teasing with Nazi accusations, and this is the website feedback thread where RvB asked if that was allowable discourse. No mod has responded to this question about the thread. People are defending the use or misuse of Nazi-related accusations in the mod team’s absence. And tofucake, it’s a mod’s posting habits that bring it up ... exactly something you can’t report the posts of. I’m sure people would love to report the posts and wait for a moderation team to determine if they’re tame or justified in context, but quite simply silence is identical to ignorance of behavior and also intense behind-the-scene discussion. I’m hoping for a response greater than “don’t call xDaunt a Nazi in the website feedback thread” because a handful of people think it’s fair game in the us politics thread (and one member of the moderation team obviously thinks it is). Fair, tofucake? | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On August 07 2018 01:19 Nebuchad wrote: It's weird to see you refuse to engage with what is being said like this. kollin's is the only interesting post in that whole line of discussion. calling people nazis for using the word globalist is about as lazy as calling people who criticize israel anti-semitic. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
I used the word globalist in the thread, yet so far I have managed not to be called a nazi. What do you think the difference is? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Normally I would say you are right. But saying the CIA, FBI, NSA are all working towards globalist interests come dangerous close to my anti Semitism line. I said in the thread that I didn’t think he meant it that way. But this is not the first time Dauntless has broken out language that that is easily mistaken for xenophobic rhetoric. At some point any reasonable person would make a good faith effort to avoid making that mistake. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On August 07 2018 00:53 xDaunt wrote: Honest question for TL: y’all realize that Kwark is defaming me and creating liability for you, right? I don’t have any intention coming after TL, but it is important that you understand just how far off the reservation Kwark is while flying under TL’s banner. This post will be remembeted for a long time | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
brian
United States9643 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
If people could get claims against websites all the way to a motion for summary judgment, 4chan would have died long ago. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On August 07 2018 03:04 Plansix wrote: Please, that shit wouldn’t make it past a rule 12b motion to dismiss. The communication decency act of 1995 grants TL almost complete liability protection. Just like the rest of the internet. If people could get claims against websites all the way to a motion for summary judgment, 4chan would have died long ago. CDA protection doesn't apply to vicarious liability situations. This would be a question of fact as it applies to Kwark's relationship with TL, which is why it would be resolved at the summary judgment stage. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On August 07 2018 02:56 xDaunt wrote: Let’s get real for a moment. The reason why I have no intention of going after TL (other than the fact that I like TL) is that I understand as well as anyone what litigation entails, I have better things to do with my time, and, most importantly, I’m not a crazy person. As we all know, there is no shortage of crazy people who might perform a different calculus. Just look at that guy who shot up that newspaper office earlier this year over what he claimed was defamatory stuff. A properly motivated individual could bring a claim, at which point TL would be stuck with, at a minimum, a five-figure bill making it go away on summary judgment. And for what? Because some low level staff member had a penchant for recklessly running his mouth off? Lord knows that TL has refused to take any action against Kwark on basic decency and decorum grounds. Perhaps some practical considerations will be more persuasive. WTF, xdaunt just threatened to shoot TL staff, as an alternative to TL taking action on Kwark. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States44256 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States44256 Posts
On August 07 2018 03:12 Dangermousecatdog wrote: WTF, xdaunt just threatened to shoot TL staff, as an alternative to TL taking action on Kwark. Just implied that if they didn’t then someone, not him of course because he’s sane, but someone, who was tired of being called a Nazi, who isn’t him, because the person would have to be crazy, and he’s definitely not crazy as anyone can tell from these posts, may shoot up a newspaper office. He made it clear throughout that he was not a crazy person in the repeated and reassuring way that people talking about shooting places up do. Nothing to see here. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
I don't see the difference really, except in possibility. Kwark doesn't seem too fazed by the death threat, so I'll leave it. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9959 Posts
On August 07 2018 03:32 KwarK wrote: Just implied that if they didn’t then someone, not him of course because he’s sane, but someone, who was tired of being called a Nazi, who isn’t him, because the person would have to be crazy, and he’s definitely not crazy as anyone can tell from these posts, may shoot up a newspaper office. He made it clear throughout that he was not a crazy person in the repeated and reassuring way that people talking about shooting places up do. Nothing to see here. Although its pretty clear that if he was the kind of crazy person to shoot people for calling him a nazi,it would be their fault for calling him a nazi. | ||
| ||
