Is Vivek actually awesome or is he a plant?

[cachorro]

I’m going to kill no bacons fake kids if they ever come near my fake kids to rape them

 

[Turry Fawks]

threatening Steve downe’s the voice actor.. is... very reasonable

Uh-oh

 

[NoBacon]

I’m going to kill no bacons fake kids if they ever come near my fake kids to rape them

@admin , comment?

 

[BUBBLER]

I think he should just ban us both, in a Sherlock Holmes / Moriaty jumping off a cliff ending.

@stealthyzarbon3 on Twitter

@admin , Please honor Bacon's request, I was a fan of Jenna, but this thread proves that he/she has become as unhinged as bacon...A good human/administrator would do the right thing for the sake of their mental health.

-A concerned Brotherman.

 

[quasi101]

hello this is fakename actress avatar and i was verrryyyy injured. I used your forum software and I was threatened to be stranded on the moon and shot with rays from a space gun.

ahhhhhhshubabbalubbbadodowwwwwwwwwwww

 

[BakersfieldChimp]

How did a thread about a street shitter get to 5 pages? Oh right, faggot forum drama.

 

[Sue Lightning]

To clarify to @fbi , I do not approve of death threats and anyone doing that will be banned. I'm rejecting your proprietary definition of death threats. How can you threaten (again on a comedy satire forum), someone that isn't scared, doesn't feel threatened, and doesn't even have an identity. You've never explained how someone who doesn't exist and doesn't feel threatened... can be threatened. Again wtf?

Now i’m no legal eagle ova here but doesn’t a threat also necessitate an actual action, or just the planning / intent of one? Lets go back to the CorradoSoprano4 example of “I want to strangle Opie in his sleep.” Simple statement. Theres no detail of how this would be done, the seriousness of the statement, repeated instances showing that this is a frequent thought…hopefully you get what i’m saying. Maybe it will help if we compare it to Boomias retarded “I’m coming down to the US next month and i think i’m going to shoot Patrick” which checks all the boxes previously described.

 

[Jenna]

google what ontology and epistemology are. this post makes no sense. Also learn what an analogy is you don't seem to understand the concept. You also changed third person to first person which totally changes the entire discussion. I can't be anonymous to myself. So this breaks the symmetry. Also google symmetry breaking.

Are you always this dishonest? Its fascinating. You've pulled me back in again. I want to see where this goes, keep saying really dishonest things. I can't even predict how you'd respond to this. Give me something retarded to work with. TIA.

U.S.C. Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

There's the US law saying that no, you're not allowed to run around the internet posting "I'm going to find you and shoot you to death" to everyone that annoys you.

Am I gonna get another "Jenna you're so stupid and dishonest and I can't even" outta you like a reddit moderator who can't argue a single point? Um google epistemology sweetie, that will educate you why shooting threats are okay.

 

[Jenna]

Now i’m no legal eagle ova here but doesn’t a threat also necessitate an actual action, or just the planning / intent of one? Lets go back to the CorradoSoprano4 example of “I want to strangle Opie in his sleep.” Simple statement. Theres no detail of how this would be done, the seriousness of the statement, repeated instances showing that this is a frequent thought…hopefully you get what i’m saying. Maybe it will help if we compare it to Boomias retarded “I’m coming down to the US next month and i think i’m going to shoot Patrick” which checks all the boxes previously described.

Boomia at least had some "I'm going to say hi to Patrick and if he responds with violence I'll defend myself". And he got banned for that.

NoBacon goes "if I hear a girly voice I'm going to immediately open fire and shoot them" but that's okay because epistemology.

 

[Turry Fawks]

U.S.C. Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

There's the US law saying that no, you're not allowed to run around the internet posting "I'm going to find you and shoot you to death" to everyone that annoys you.

Am I gonna get another "Jenna you're so stupid and dishonest and I can't even" outta you like a reddit moderator who can't argue a single point? Um google epistemology sweetie, that will educate you why shooting threats are okay.

YOU'RE NOT PEOPLE

 

[NoBacon]

Boomia at least had some "I'm going to say hi to Patrick and if he responds with violence I'll defend myself". And he got banned for that.

NoBacon goes "if I hear a girly voice I'm going to immediately open fire and shoot them" but that's okay because epistemology.

Boomia said he was going to drive to Eric Hildeman’s house and eradicate him or some word like that

 

[quasi101]

reddit moderator who can't argue a single point?

Ok i'm back in , what specific one point would you like me to address and I will stick to that topic.

 

[Jenna]

Ok i'm back in , what specific one point would you like me to address and I will stick to that topic.

We can start with "Jenna doesn't exist therefore you cannot make a death threat against them".

Do you have proof I'm some advanced AI?

 

[Sue Lightning]

You once again are dumb or being disingenuous.

Boomia at least had some "I'm going to say hi to Patrick and if he responds with violence I'll defend myself". And he got banned for that.

You are simplifying his comment to make it seem more similar to Nobacons and also to obfuscate the context. Boomia was banned for this comment after he had already been banned 4 times - The shit he could say was watched closely. Furthermore Boomia didn’t leave it at a sentence. He typed a whole fucking paragraph describing when he was coming down to the US, where he would be, what he planned to do, all after already threatening Pat multiples times, being banned for it, and going on long unhinged rants where he threatened people.

The exact difference is that Boomia used joking language to make it seem like the threat wasn’t serious. Nobacon used “threatening language” to make a joke. It is quite literally the exact opposite.

How the fuck you can justify a guy writing a rambling paragraph that is actually a threat as all good and just a joke while Nobacons single sentence comment is a serious threat towards your life is insane.

But oh I know what the difference is. He “threatened” you, you don’t like him, you want him to face any repercussions ala you getting kicked from the chat.

At least just fucking say that. Because you’re incapable of arguing why what Nobacon said is credible as a threat or comparable to the other users banned for it.

 

[Turry Fawks]

Just to be clear I want Jenna booted so I'm not off topic underboss anymore.

 

[Sue Lightning]

We can start with "Jenna doesn't exist therefore you cannot make a death threat against them".

Do you have proof I'm some advanced AI?

Jesus christ you are so bad at this. He wasn’t saying you literally don’t exist but that you, the poster Jenna, are not whoever the fuck you are in real life. Nobacon does not know who you are. He made a “threat” against the “character” of @Jenna, not whoever you actually are. Like all we need to do to make this a “credible threat” is if Nobacon just subbed the words Jenna out for your real name. That could absolutely be construed as threatening.

It’s like you fail to understand context is…a part of everything. Yes, Nobacon was not planning to shoot you because he doesn’t even fucking know who “you” are.

Again, what you are basically arguing for is for @NoBacon to be banned not out of a crime being committed or fear for your life but because you were offended. What is this fucking Reddit? If I reply to someone on there and go “Shut the fuck up before I slap you in the asshole” should be info be forwarded to law enforcement? Or would i just be banned for angry language?

 

[Jenna]

You once again are dumb or being disingenuous.

You are simplifying his comment to make it seem more similar to Nobacons and also to obfuscate the context. Boomia was banned for this comment after he had already been banned 4 times - The shit he could say was watched closely. Furthermore Boomia didn’t leave it at a sentence. He typed a whole fucking paragraph describing when he was coming down to the US, where he would be, what he planned to do, all after already threatening Pat multiples times, being banned for it, and going on long unhinged rants where he threatened people.

The exact difference is that Boomia used joking language to make it seem like the threat wasn’t serious. Nobacon used “threatening language” to make a joke. It is quite literally the exact opposite.

How the fuck you can justify a guy writing a rambling paragraph that is actually a threat as all good and just a joke while Nobacons single sentence comment is a serious threat towards your life is insane.

But oh I know what the difference is. He “threatened” you, you don’t like him, you want him to face any repercussions ala you getting kicked from the chat.

At least just fucking say that. Because you’re incapable of arguing why what Nobacon said is credible as a threat or comparable to the other users banned for it.

Or maybe I don't think anyone should be threatening to shoot other posters, especially after the day of a school shooting.

This whole "special privileges for special posters" shit doesn't hold up anywhere else. "Death threats are okay if I like the poster" doesn't hold up anywhere else.

Again, it's on admin. You wanna openly break laws to pwn Jenna, don't be shocked when Cloudfare pulls protection and this place gets DDOS'd to hell.

 

[quasi101]

We can start with "Jenna doesn't exist therefore you cannot make a death threat against them".

Do you have proof I'm some advanced AI?

This is the reason I asked you to understand the difference between those two words. You're not making sense to me. The actual person who is typing words exists, is the ontos of the human (presumably), person writing your words. The username+avatar that is your "user" the abstraction that exists writing on a forum does not. Those two entities are distinct because I'm not making a metaphysical distinction regarding your person. I'm making an epistemic one. We don't have access to the ontological entity writing your posts. You are anonymous.

This is why i keep saying you're making an error. There is overlap between what we know (epistemology) and what the essence of a thing is. But, in the real practical world, if the physics of the current state of the world preclude us from the ontos, then that entity doesn't exist.

Here is the error you are making colloquially know as "mistaking the map for the place"

Map–territory relation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Mistaking the map for the territory is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone confuses the semantics of a term with what it represents

 

[cachorro]

U.S.C. Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

There's the US law saying that no, you're not allowed to run around the internet posting "I'm going to find you and shoot you to death" to everyone that annoys you.

Am I gonna get another "Jenna you're so stupid and dishonest and I can't even" outta you like a reddit moderator who can't argue a single point? Um google epistemology sweetie, that will educate you why shooting threats are okay.

Yeah but you're completely ignoring the True Threat standard. Check out Watts v US, Watts threated LBJ in a similar fashion "If (scenario) then I'll kill (person)" The Supreme Court ruled this as expression and declared hyperbole to be different from a true threat. This has been settled case law in this country for over half a century.


but then again im just some guy dont listen to me

 

[Turry Fawks]

Fawkin Administotle rocks