P.S. Checking the link to the old blog, turns out Repsac3 was commenting way back then. He wasn't banned. He might still be a commenter here had he not freaked out and turned stalker. I'll welcome progressives if they're cool. Repsac3 once was, but no longer. Too bad too. I had to go to moderation and all that.
Offered in reply (though it's likely Dr. Douglas won't allow it to appear):
I never changed, Douglas... You just ran out of talking points and ran for cover behind moderation. (And Don, if you're so afraid that too many folks will read my comments that you prohibit all from commenting at AmPow without your prior approval, that kinda shows what even you yourself believe about the value and virtue of your ideas.)
If I were really the eeeeevil so-n-so you claim I am, wouldn't my own words prove that? So why do you hide my words, and instead paraphrase what you claim I've said (or what you think I may mean), rather than letting the readers see my comments as written?
You're a coward, Dr. Douglas...
But I'm glad you're standing up for the little pizza joint, this time... In that older post, it was "anti-capitalist" for the folks in the neighborhood to complain about the franchise running the mom 'n' pop shop out of the neighborhood. Glad to see you've come around to supporting the little guy, for once...
---
Since there's no permalink, here is the text of my 2007 "Burkean" comment. At the time, Donald was decrying the fact that a longstanding local pizza joint circulated a petition against a Papa John's moving into the neighborhood:
repsac3
"the circulation of the anti-Papa John's petition is not only anti-capitalist, but probably unnecessary."
I hope it's unnecessary... But I've seen a whole lotta independent (put type of business here) run out by franchises & big boxes with inferior products &/or service, but the financial backing lose money by selling below cost & whatnot until they're the only game in town...
While it may be anti-captialist*, I'm all for citizens/consumers petitioning & otherwise speaking up.
*I'm not sure it is anti-capitalist. I see it more as negative advertising, making PJ look bad for "forcing" themselves into this community against the community's wishes, and trying to run "the little guy" out of business. Now, should these citizens try to pass some kinda law against PJ's, I'd be more inclined to agree.
August 8, 2007, 6:35:15 PM EDT – Like – Reply
![[photo]](http://rimstation.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/IMG_0501_2.220102653_std.JPG){kind=link}
34 comments:
Actually, you have changed, for example, from my thread, you asshole stalker:
'Not afraid, obviously.
You're a stalker, RACIST = REPSAC3. You're banned and you continue to comment here against my wishes, because you have no values. Your obsession is sick and just too much. You don't get an American Power platform for your hate. Nothing sinks in for you, because you have no common sense, morality, or reason. And you're a liar. You created at hate blog that launched attacks on my livelihood. YOU are a sick man.
STOP. COMMENTING. HERE.
YOU. HAVE. YOUR. OWN. HELL. HOLE.'
And duh, nothing in my latest pizza post even remotely relates to what I wrote in 2007. Ray's is closing because of internal issues, changes in the family, etc., not because a Papa John's chain is opening.
You're desperate. A desperate asshole, Costanza.
NOW. STAY. AWAY. FROM. MY. COMMENTS. PRICK.
YOU'RE BANNED.
We have a pizza place that opened not too long ago called Firehouse. Pizza's a bit pricy but it's real good so we go there alot.
If Donald ever comes here he should try it. Unless he's afraid.
And Don, Reppy is probably the only thing keeping you from being just another obscure little blogger wishing his blog penis extended beyond the 1 to 75 regulars most bloggers get. If anything, you should encourage resac, Kevin, me, JBW and any other lefties to visit your site more. This is the capitalist in me speaking buddy. You get all the traffic from folks wanting to read us insult and berate each other and in keeping with your right wing ways of exploiting us little guys, keep all the profits from monetizing your blog yourself.
Surely a guy with three degrees could figure that out.
Am I still banned?
I left this comment at Don's post on the dominatrix prosecutor chick: "I think I'm still banned but even you have to see the good in having a dominatrix as a prosecutor Professor Douglas.
I say train all of them in dominatrixing and put some fear into these criminals. Give em a cane like they use in Singapore also.
You hear thug rappers rapping about how proud they are of prison time. You'll never hear one rapping about how proud they are they got caned by a dominatrix prosecutor."
I don't see the problem with her. Unless she's not spanking republicans hard enough.
"Actually, you have changed, for example, from my thread,"
Sorry, Douglas... But all that post shows is that YOU'VE become more unhinged, and are willing to write some really ridiculous posts in reply to having someone tell you to fuck off... (Posts that most folks would be embarrassed to publish, but you seem quite proud of...)
I'm the same lovable guy I've always been, respectful to all who deserve it, and less so to those who don't.
If you really didn't want me posting comments at AmPow (regardless of whether you publish 'em or don't), you wouldn't keep mentioning me in posts... ...and yet you keep doing so, and then keep flying off the handle yet again when I respond.
You ought to think about changing that dynamic, Dr. Douglas... All these mentions in posts about other subjects say more about who's acting the creepy stalker than do your words. You bitch when we talk about you... ...but you bitch a whole lot louder when we ignore you for too long.
Is it me, or does our little Donald have some kinda weird Seinfeld fetish? (NTTAWWT!!!)
His thing for Constanza is more than a little creepy...
'All these mentions in posts about other subjects say more about who's acting the creepy stalker than do your words ...'
Wrong. Projecting. You are by definition a stalker, and commenters here and at my place have repeatedly pointed it out. And I have repeatedly told you not to comment at my blog, and to stop sponsoring workplace intimidation, but you have refused even basic decency. You are by definition a stalker:
'A form of harassment generally comprised of repeated persistent following with no legitimate reason and with the intention of harming, or so as to arouse anxiety or fear of harm in the person being followed. Stalking may also take the form of harassing telephone calls, computer communications, letter-writing, etc.'
'Repeated, unwanted, intrusive, and frightening communications from the perpetrator by phone, mail, and/or email ... Posting information or spreading rumors about the victim on the internet, in a public place, or by word of mouth.'
'Someone who: 1. Literally follows a person's every move, on Facebook or otherwise. 2. Is way too obsessed with someone to the point of being a creeper.'
W. James "Costanza" Casper = RACIST = COBAG = Repsac3!!
You're a stalker!
STOP. THE. HATE.
STOP. THE. STALKING.
GET. SOME. HELP.
Believe as you will, Douglas...
As long as you keep posting about me on your blog, I'll keep replying to your nonsense. (And needless to say, as long as you keep posting about stuff I find interesting, I'll reply to your posts with thoughts of my own, as well.)
You're the one who keeps claiming you wish to be left alone, but by posting about me, you're inviting my replies... So do as you will, Dr. Douglas, but whatever you choose, for God's sake stop whining about it, and LEARN. TO. PROPERLY. CAPITALIZE. AND. PUNCTUATE.
Thanks for stopping by, Douglas... The more you talk, the more you expose your nasty ol' self.
'You're the one who keeps claiming you wish to be left alone...'
Another lie.
You're a massive denialist. You ignore the substance of my comments to spew your bullshit justifications. Again, for the umpteenth time, I never claimed I don't want interaction, as you strangely allege. What I do say is that you have no morals. You don't respect normative boundaries, and you have endorsed, sponsored, recruited and distributed the hate. You are the admin of this blog where it's either gone down or was organized. As I said previously:
*****
'I intended for American Nihilist to be a one off joke on the silly "nihilist" meme you created. I sent invites to all the "nihilsts" I could find, thinking we'd all just have a quick laugh at the expense of the silly little meme, & that'd be it... But some of 'em wanted to sign up, and once they did, and started writing--in character--it became something better than the one off joke I intended...'
YOU CROSSED THE LINE!!!!!
These are your words. They are posted at your own blogs. You thought it be just a laugh, but quickly escalated into workplace intimidation and outrageous campaigns of harassment. THAT IS ILLEGAL. YOU HAVE LEGAL LIABILITY AND YOU ARE ON RECORD. Your very words show you ORGANIZED a conspiracy. And you have people currently in your threads making threats, issuing taunts, and spiking the football.
YOU've not denounced a bit of it. Why? Answer that. Why? Because I blog and "attack" people. That's what you say repeatedly. Because I blog and "attack" people you decided to round up a lynch mob. YOUR words. This is what you have done and continue to do. YOU are on record.
YOU are the administrator of this blog and YOU thought it perfectly fine to publish this.
When that was posted you didn't reject it. YOU didn't repudiate it. YOU endorsed it and clapped about how my my college administration should "be aware of his antics." Then later you pulled the post when your lackey left you hold the bag of sh*t. YOU f**ked up. It was never the right thing to do. Always an evil act. It's done. It's on record. YOU are the accessory to make this happen. That sucks you got used. But you recruited people who then f**ked you up. Sucker!! You deserve it. It's you who organize the hate. Make it right by apologizing.
And YOU continue to promote the hate. YOU consort with criminal progressives who continue their campaigns. YOU are doing this. YOU sponsor it right here in this thread. THIS thread.
YOU pledged an intimidation campaign: "As long as Donald Douglas is posting a public blog that accepts comments, I'm going to continue to comment on what he posts, whenever and wherever I choose'...
I banned YOU. But you publicly admitted my wishes were to be disrespected and that you would taunt, harass, and intimidate "whenever and wherever I choose."
*****
Stop. The. Hate.
Stalker. Cobag. Asshat.
Donald, you couldn't sound more like a paranoid asshat if you were actually trying...
Call it what you want, but whether I comment at American Power, post here, or comment at another blog where you sprayed your mark in any way, shape, or form, you bitch and moan like a stuck polecat asshat. So you can claim that you don't have a problem interacting, but your behavior whenever we do--wherever we do--shows your claim to be pretty disingenuous... I'm "banned" there, you want me to TAKE. THIS. BLOG. DOWN., and you whine like a baby when I respond to something you've posted or commented about at any third party blog... So I have to ask you, Douglas... Exactly what kinda interaction are you NOT opposed to?
The whole "endorsed, sponsored, recruited" meme is bullshit that's been repeated and "refudiated" so often it deserves it's own blog (not that you'll ever stop repeating these lies, of course), and if there were any legal liabilities to anything I've ever posted, I'm sure I would've heard from your legal team by now... (I'm relatively sure you tried, but the lawyer told you the same thing I did... It's just blogging, son... Grow up, and get over it. I don't KNOW that, of course, but given that this "legal liability" thing never goes any further than your endlessly repeating it in blog posts and comments, that is the guess I'm going with...)
I let the authors and folks who comment on this blog (including you, Spanky) speak for themselves... I am no more responsible for the words others write here than they are responsible for mine. Just as I let you rant and rage here, I let Octo say his piece... I don't agree with either of you--and honestly think you have more in common with each other than either of you do with me--but I let both of you make fools of yourselves here, and am in no way responsible for what either of you choose to say. You don't have to agree or approve, but them's the rules here, nevertheless... Learn to cope.
I responded (and "refudiated") the rest of that nonsense the last time you posted it, and it was a waste of pretty much everyone's time for you to drag it out yet again (those interested can find the reply in the sidebar.)
Stop making a fool of yourself, Dr. Douglas... If you invite me to comment by mentioning me in posts, stop whining when I actually reply... Or stop inviting reply by posting about me, especially in posts that really have nothing to do with me, like this "pizza" post... The ball's in your court, Don... I'll be here, either way...
Donalde wishes the prosecutor who is investigating him was a dominatrix. This way, he could have his cake and get kicked in the ass by it, too.
Papa John's is shitty pizza: it's two dimensional, cardboard, and has little to no flavor apart from grease. We put the local outlet out of business in one ovation by pointedly walking into the next door pizzeria and buying from them. They had lines out the door for six months before we kicked that fascist asshole out of the area.
Sort of like Donniebaby...
Wai....Donnie, the bastion of free speech and public comment is now BANNING people??
What would my buddy Eloy think!? I wonder how many students have been downgraded because they dared speak heretical views too often in his classes?
In Don's defense he did allow my comment to be posted. I thought it was reasonable and dominatrixes as prosecutors is a darn good idea.
I commend the Professor for this.
But all that post shows is that YOU'VE become more unhinged, and are willing to write some really ridiculous posts in reply to having someone tell you to fuck off... (Posts that most folks would be embarrassed to publish, but you seem quite proud of...)
Yeah, you know, I write some pretty stupid posts but I don't have a dozen dozen doctorates like Don does. Only gots two associate's. But even my stupidest (and occasionally drunkest) posts don't approach the stupid thats Don's do.
And Reppy, is there any kind of software that will blot out the phrase "workplace intimidation" whenever Don comes here to use it. Or can we maybe get Dewey, Cheatem and Howe to work on a restraining order for it. Starting to get a migraine every time I see it.
Oh, and I second the dominatrixes as prosecutors. Thank you ma'am, may I have another.
BORING CORRECTION: It's "dominatrices"
It would make swearing a witness in much more interesting...
'Stop making a fool of yourself, Dr. Douglas... If you invite me to comment by mentioning me in posts, stop whining when I actually reply... Or stop inviting reply by posting about me, especially in posts that really have nothing to do with me, like this "pizza" post... The ball's in your court, Don... I'll be here, either way...'
Right.
More stalker proof.
You have no "right" to comment on my blog whether I write about you or not. I've closed comments to you and you couldn't give a fuck, obviously, being a no-values dick-suck asshole.
'A form of harassment generally comprised of repeated persistent following with no legitimate reason and with the intention of harming, or so as to arouse anxiety or fear of harm in the person being followed. Stalking may also take the form of harassing telephone calls, computer communications, letter-writing, etc.'
'Repeated, unwanted, intrusive, and frightening communications from the perpetrator by phone, mail, and/or email ... Posting information or spreading rumors about the victim on the internet, in a public place, or by word of mouth.'
'Someone who: 1. Literally follows a person's every move, on Facebook or otherwise. 2. Is way too obsessed with someone to the point of being a creeper.'
CRIMINAL ASFL.
You represent the epitome of the lying denialist deranged hateful left. YOU recruited hate blogger Octo. YOU are the admin of the blog. YOU could have rejected the campaign of hate and harassment.
ACTIONS speak louder than words. YOUR actions tell everyone all they need to know. YOU created this stalking hate blog to monitor, harass, intimidate, and destroy. YOU are a lying asshat progressive. YOU continue to welcome the most vile hate-filled progressive pricks right here in your threads. YOU have defended racist attacks and campaigns of workplace harassment. YOU words mean nothing. The 'sphere knows you're RACIST = REPSAC = HATE = HARASSER = LOSER = DICKHOLE.
Even your own commenters have called you out. YOU live in your own world of hate and denial. Frankly, you're not normal. A sick bastard, really. And the perfect progressive prick who no one likes. Indeed, you're being used bad, like a slimey gay bung-juice junky.
Freak.
Get a life, low-life loser stalking COBAG Costanza.
I didn't say I had a "right" to comment on your blog... I simply said that when you mention me in a post, I'll probably respond. You can whine and cry about "rights" and "banning," but it won't change anything...
There is no "banning" on a blogger blog... The technology isn't there...
So you can ask all you want, and you can certainly bitch and moan, delete my comments, and even whine to google or your legal team if you think you have a case, but I'm telling you; when you mention me in a post, I'm probably going to reply with a comment. A post mentioning me is an invitation to reply, and I will, even if only to piss you off and make you yet again show your true colors...
Do as you will with that info, Don... But stop crying about it, because these bitch-filled protests are wholly unpersuasive...
Your most recent "mention" posts come after weeks of my completely ignoring you, Don... It doesn't matter what I do... Whether I post here or not, or comment there or not, you keep instigating more shit... So I'm going to do as I please, and post or comment according to my wishes, rather than yours... Learn to cope.
But hey... Thanks for stopping by... The more you talk, the more folks see what an ass you are...
'There is no "banning" on a blogger blog...'
Idiot asshole. You clearly have neither morals nor a brain. Just because you can load and fire a gun doesn't mean you should kill someone. And thus, being banned doesn't depend on technology. If I say you're banned from commenting at my blog, then you're banned. Indeed, the police will see you for what you are: a stalker who intrudes on the personal space of others. 'Repeated, unwanted, intrusive ... communications from the perpetrator...'
You're a classic stalker, asshat.
'A post mentioning me is an invitation to reply, and I will, even if only to piss you off and make you yet again show your true colors...'
Wrong. I can write about you all I want. If you don't like it that's your problem. If you don't like the truth of your stalking evils, too bad. Asswipe. You being unhappy and whining like a child does not give you a right to intrude in my comments section. You've been banned for a long time and you've never accepted the policy, whether I've written about you or not. You're a textbook stalking asshat. And again, actions speak louder than words. If you didn't support workplace attacks, intimidation, and harassment, you would wouldn't have allowed it here. You're the admin. You sponsored, recruited, and by your actions endorsed the hate. You can lie about it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact, which is what everyone of decent morals can see, and the police too.
So, keep it up at my blog. It's all on record, repeatedly, that you're not to comment there. Your statements are evidence of a pathological hatred and stalking obsession.
ASFL COBAG NIHILIST DICKSUCK REPPY.
"If I say you're banned from commenting at my blog, then you're banned."
And all I'M saying is that, technology being what it is (or isn't, I guess), you're going to have to enforce the banning manually, because Google won't do it for you... If you want me banned, you're going to have to delete those comments from the cue, just as you have been.
"Indeed, the police will see you for what you are: a stalker who intrudes on the personal space of others."
Call 'em, Don... Stop whining and threatening, and pull that trigger... Show them your "evidence" and listen to them laugh in your face. I double-dog dare you... If my "crime" is posting comments to your blog in reply to your posts mentioning me, even in defiance of your whiny objections, I think we both know what they (or your lawyer, or even Google/Blogger itself, even) are going to say in reply to your complaints.
But please... by all means... Stop threatening, and call whatever authorities you think will help you fend off my comments in reply to your blog attacks. Less talk, more action. Put up or shut up.
"I can write about you all I want. If you don't like it that's your problem... ou being unhappy and whining like a child does not give you a right to intrude in my comments section."
Nice reply... Now listen to your own words, because that's the same thing I'm telling you. If you don't like my posting here, or commenting in reply to your blog attacks over at AmPow, that's your problem, and not mine. Learn it. Live it. Love it.
(And again, this isn't a "rights" issue. Your rights don't include the right not to have me respond when you mention me in a post.... You can certainly stop my comments from appearing, but you have no "right" to stop me from offering them.) So again: You post about me, I almost certainly reply via comment on the post in question. It's that simple, Donald... Do as you will.
You are claiming a right to comment at my blog that doesn't exist. Again, it doesn't matter whether technology allows someone to comment against the wishes of the publisher. You're arguing at right to troll. And, again, you've claimed this right whether I've blogged about you or about other topics with which you disagree. You are, in other words, obsessed. People in fact have long identified you as dangerous. You stalked Tania, for example. She told me you were creeping her out, following her even to her YouTubes. Your name was the laughingstock at CPAC. You have a reputation as a sick fuck stalker and troll, and the more you comment here and insist on infringing on my personal space the more you prove it. And I'm not making threats. I have had both police authorities and attorney involved with the blog harassment, and I've posted the complaints, so you know it's not Sasquatch conspiracy. You are continuing the harassment you've backed all along.
So, to be clear. WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS WRONG AND IMMORAL. GET WITH THE PROGRAM OF DECENCY. ASFL. YOU ARE BANNED FROM MY COMMENTS. TO INSIST YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO COMMENT THERE IS TO THREATEN HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATION. YOU SHOULD STOP.
Again, Donald, the only one talking about rights or legalities is you. You're making assertions about some nonexistent "right" not to keep someone from submitting comments to your blog against your wishes, even when the post in question is about them. I'm sorry, Dr. Douglas, but there is no such right. It simply doesn't exist.
I'm not saying you can't post your lies about me. I AM saying that I will likely respond, right there at the post where you make your fool allegations (as well as on my own blog, so that my refutations will see the light of day, even if you're too cowardly to post them) every time you do.
This really isn't that complex, Donald. Why you fail to grasp the concept (or are pretending to, anyway) I will never know.
But since you are so insistent to talk about rights:
While I doubt that anyone but a fool would call my responses to your defamatory posts "trolling," yes, there is actually a right to troll the comment sections of public blogs. It's rude, perhaps, but it isn't against any law, and the right to do so is a part of one's free speech. You have the right not to publish them, but I retain the right to submit them, regardless.
(Now, I'm sure you will allege harassment, and once again suggest that I've submitted "hundreds" of comments to your blog since you "banned" me. We both know that's a lie, but you can certainly lie to your readers if you choose. All I can do is to urge you to put up or shut up, and show your evidence to whatever authorities will stop me from "harassing" you with my "hundreds" of comments. The facts are not on your side, and I'm willing to stand behind the comments I have submitted to your blog in the last year (3-4/month, at most) as being both legal and no more abusive or threatening than your own posts and comments at your blog or my own.)
"I have had both police authorities and attorney involved with the blog harassment, and I've posted the complaints, so you know it's not Sasquatch conspiracy."
I don't know about "blog harassment," but you have had a few folks contact people where you work, and I have regularly spoken out against involving offline entities in online squabbles, even when it's been done by people with whom I might otherwise ideologically agree. (And unlike you, I have been consistent in my words, regardless of the sociopolitical ideology of perp or victim.)
But Donald, no police officer or lawyer has ever contacted me about either harassment or workplace intimidation. They won't. They can't. Because for all your whining to the contrary, I am not guilty of any of it personally, or legally responsible for what anyone else has done. I have no henchmen, and no one here or elsewhere has ever said or done anything to or about you because I suggested, enticed, or coerced them to do so. THAT is Sasquatch conspiratorial fantasy.
You're the one talking about the police as a response to my daring to submit a comment on your blog at a post where you talk about me. Just think about how crazy that sounds...
You're suffering from some kinda paranoid persecution complex, when all that's happening is that I'm treating you very much the way you treat others.
I quote what you post on your blog, and respond to it here. And sometimes, I submit comments to your blog, mostly in reply to posts where you mention me.
It ain't harassment.
It ain't stalking.
It's just political blogging.
Grow up, Donald. Your skin is way too thin for this, and your potty-mouthed raging rants only makes you look more childish.
'...there is actually a right to troll the comment sections of public blogs.'
Prove it. There is no such "right." And even if there was, you have insisted in harassing me in the comments with unwanted interactions. That is, YOU could open YOURSELF to criminal liability. Again, you are claiming a right THAT DOES NOT EXIST if you have been warned not to comment, AND YOU HAVE BEEN. AND IT'S EVEN WORSE considering you've publicly insisted on harassing me "wherever and whenever" you please. It's all on record. Your comments. Your FUCK YOU Douglas comments.
And you might be careful about sponsoring your workplace attacks against me at this blog. You, as the admin, published calls to contact my employers, and that's called "tortious interference" with someone's work, and a judge recently ruled against a blogger in Minnesota. My lawyer raised the references, so we're on to you, and you are not on sound legal ground. And no, you haven't been contacted, because I never claimed I was going to contact you or have law enforcement contact you. The point is that you ARE on the radar and what you are doing is wrong. And you keep doing it, against your own interests. So, WISE UP, idiot ASFL. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMMENT AND HARASS ME IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY REPORTING ON YOUR PROGRESSIVE CAMPAIGNS OF HATE.
'You're the one talking about the police as a response to my daring to submit a comment on your blog at a post where you talk about me. Just think about how crazy that sounds...'
Keep telling yourself how crazy that sounds. Police think it sounds like harassment and intimidation WHEN I SHOW THEM YOUR COMMENTS AND THREATS. I had Alex Knepper investigated and police took it VERY seriously. YOU'RE fooling yourself if you don't think the police would take this seriously, especially if I compile all your angry rants about FUCK YOU Douglas and about how you would comment at my blog "whenever and wherever" you feel. NOW THAT sounds crazy.
YOU SHOULD STEP BACK. DON'T BE AN IDIOT FOR ONCE. YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. IF YOU ARE BEING DEFAMED YOU CAN FILE SUIT. YOU CANNOT INTIMATE. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO HARASS AND SUPPORT ATTEMPTS TO GET PEOPLE FIRED SIMPLY BECAUSE SOMEONE BLOGS ABOUT YOUR PROGRESSIVE EVIL.
Grow up, RACIST = REPSAC. You have neither the facts or logic on your side. And I doubt you really want to test out your theories in the real world. AND GET SOME ADVICE. SOME REAL ADVICE. SOMEONE SMART WILL DISABUSE YOU OF THESE ABSURD NOTIONS THAT YOU CAN HARASS PEOPLE ONLINE ANYTIME YOU LIKE.
Stop commenting at my blog. YOUR comments are unwanted examples of internet stalking and harassment, to which you have no right. ON THE OTHER HAND, I have rights to freedom of speech, and you are attempting to abridge those rights. That is wrong. THAT IS IMMORAL. YOU SHOULD STOP. NOW.
"Prove it. There is no such "right."
The proof, Donald, is that no one is arrested or prosecuted for trolling, despite how common trolling is on the internet.
"you have insisted in harassing me in the comments with unwanted interactions. That is, YOU could open YOURSELF to criminal liability. "
Bring it on, Douglas... Call the police because I comment on your blog against your wishes when you post about me. I'm practically BEGGING you to pull that trigger and prove how thin-skinned you really are... but if you're not going to actually do it, then for God's sake stop making the threat. Like your cries of "nihilist," it's becoming meaningless through senseless repetition.
You and I both know that the comments I've submitted to your blog are not harassment, especially given how many of them are in response to something you've posted about me. No matter how much you whine and cry and carry on about "stalking" or "harassment," we both know you have no case... Get over yourself... ...or stand behind your words, and actually call the police.
Either way, I'll be here, just as I have been... ...and you can be sure that the next time you bring up my name in a post on your blog, I will submit a comment, if only to prove that you're too cowardly to post it, and that all this legal bullshit you threaten is just more talk, and we both know it.
Have a good night, rage boy.
Donnie, I understand there are many brands of decaf that taste almost as good as the real thing.
Reppie, don't you love the imperious tone? "Thou shalt not comment at my blog!"
As if...
Poor deluded little man.
Reality check will be forthcoming. I suggest you cash it, Donny. You could use the currency.
The thing is, Carl, Donald can dish these things out, but he's entirely too thin-skinned to take much of any of it in return.
Lost in all of Donald's whining about "workplace intimidation" is the fact that the reason that guy Octopus gave for contacting Donald's college in the first place was that Donald repeatedly commented at Octo's blog after Octo told him not to, and threatened legal and other retaliatory action if he did not stop. While I don't know for certain how often this trolling did or did not happen, I did see one post where Donald taunted Octo on Christmas morning, basically saying "you can't stop me from commenting here whenever I want (nyaaaaa nya, nya-nyaaaaa nya...)." (Sadly, Octo turned out to be a whole lot more like Donald than either of them is willing to admit, including believing that his blog space was sacred and could not be trolled under penalty of nanny state (& perhaps spiritual) law, as well as a penchant for "dramatic license" in the retelling--for effect, don'cha know... It's not about ideology... It's a personality defect.)
There is very little that I have done here that Donald hasn't done there, and the fact remains that most of my posts and comments concerning folks I disagree with, including Donald himself, are more respectful and decent than most of his offerings about those he disagrees with, even if he does put asterisks in the word "f*%k" when he calls someone a fuckhead.
Donald's theory that I somehow rule over others, and make them commit acts against Donald in my stead is conspiratorial paranoid nonsense.
Believing that we're all adults and all responsible for our own words and deeds, I have allowed others to respond and react to Donald as they saw fit, rather than censoring anyone's posts, before or after the fact. And, while I believe it was morally wrong for Octo to suggest that folks who were offended by Donald's antics contact LBCC (Donald's workplace), repeating the contact information he found at the college website--and said so repeatedly, at the time--I did not then and do not now believe it was illegal for him to do so. Like trolling, it's not polite, but it's also not illegal... ...and in fact, there are certain circumstances where it is the right thing to do. (If Donald ever posts a threat to harm any of his students, for instance, I'll likely be among the first ones on the phone to LBCC letting them know what he posted.)
The more he makes these pronouncements and issues these empty threats, the more clear it becomes that Donald Douglas is just an angry thin-skinned, self-important blowhard who cannot take what he so freely dishes out.
In my book, you've acted both responsibly and legally. You should be commended. Many under the duress AssProf has placed you under would have buckled.
As AssProf did when he banned you with far less cause. Automatically, this makes you the better man. You've never been anything less than respectful in dealing with AssProf, and deserve his gratitude.
After all, it's not your fault he can't take a joke. SASQUATCH ISREAL!
Carl... I have the strangest feeling ol' Don will not see things as you do, but thank you for your words.
Donald: I read up on this "tortuous interference" business... With all respect due your fine lawyer, I'm pretty sure you must suffer some visible harm (like for instance, being fired as a result of something I myself posted) before you can make any such claim against me.
Specifically (from the link above, and with particular attention to numbers 3 and 5 in the first case, and 1-3 in the second):
To establish a claim for tortious interference of contract, a plaintiff must show: (1) the existence of a contract; (2) knowledge of the contract; (3) intentional procurement of the contract’s breach; (4) absence of justification; and (5) damages caused by the breach. Similarly, a claim for tortious interference with prospective advantage requires a showing that: (l) the defendant intentionally and improperly interfered with the prospective contractual relation, (2) causing pecuniary harm resulting from loss of the benefits of the relation, and (3) the interference either induced or otherwise caused a third person not to enter into or continue the prospective relation or prevented the continuance of the prospective relation....
Keep fuckin' that chicken, though...
Some hilarious stuff here Donald. You truly are the finest wingnut parodist on the web. Those "web police" you're sending after Reppy? Do they live inside your head with the dream police?
Love how you moderate comments at your blog, but come here and fling whatever loony and offensive shit you want. Donald "freedom of speech for me, but not for thee" Douglas.
And Reppy, thanks for allowing this delusional whackjob to comment here. Dear God, never moderate him.
AND GET SOME ADVICE. SOME REAL ADVICE. SOMEONE SMART WILL DISABUSE YOU OF THESE ABSURD NOTIONS ... ON THE OTHER HAND, I have rights to freedom of speech, and you are attempting to abridge those rights.
Geez, Louise, talk about someone who needs to get disabused of some absurd notions. Unless Repsac is Congress* it is absolutely impossible for him to abridge your right of free speech. But that never seems to stop those who supposedly revere the Constitution from completely misunderstanding and misapplying it.
* - or a State legislature, as the First Amendement is applied to States through the Fourteenth Amendment. But you knew that already, right Counselor Douglas?
Good catch on the "tortious interference" stuff, Rep. But while I'm reading the past posts on this thread I can't help but marvel at the crack legal team Douglas must have put together that failed to disabuse him of:
1) The fact that a blog on "blogger.com" is not the personal property of the blogger. I bet it's even spelled out in blogger.com's Terms of Service. Therefore, no trespass (which is what DD is struggling for the words to actually accuse you of).
2) The dictionary definition of "stalking" does not establish any sort of legal standard. So sorry :( Pull out the California Code and I bet it will spell out something much harsher than what DD got from about.com or wherever. One of the key elements will be something about "fear for personal safety." Is DD actually admitting that he's afraid?
With all respect due your fine lawyer
*koffkoff*
Damn. Dobby's right!
As a result of that pattern of conduct, the plaintiff reasonably feared for his or her safety, or the safety of an immediate family member. For purposes of this paragraph, "immediate family" means a spouse, parent, child, any person related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any person who regularly resides, or, within the six months preceding any portion of the pattern of conduct, regularly resided, in the plaintiff's household.
Reasonably. That word is not in the AssProf's vocabulary.
Aside that, Donald is more'n'likely incapable of admitting he's afraid of anyone or anything, especially me... Gotta keep up that he-man image, don'cha know... (If he admitted fear--a requirement under CA law--his neocon / 'pubbie friends would think he's gay, and tease him on the tea bagger / CPAC playground until he cried...)
True dat, Reppie. He'd grit his teeth and through the tears of fear, he'd say "I'm not afraid, dammit! NOT AFRAID!"
Which of course raises the whole issue about why he gets all panty-twisted when he feels his job is on the line, yadayadayada...
Post a Comment