- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2024 23:20
|
|
- Beer4TheBeerGod
- Aug 23, 2004
-
-
Exciting Lemon
|
Welcome back, Derek.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:12
|
|
- TheLightPurges
- Sep 24, 2016
-
by exmarx
|
A warm reception for the 890 JUMP - Space Yacht brings in $140k in one hour for Star Citizen
i love star citizen
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:14
|
|
- ripptide
- Jul 28, 2016
-
|
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
I am going to keep this short; though I did consider writing a blog.
First of all, I have been around and an Internet Warlord for decades now. I know the drill. I've seen flamewars errupt and evolve from BBS teletype, to badly formatted Usenet postings, to articulate blogs.
I am well versed in the ways of online discourse.
I do not support, condone, nor engage in doxing.
Aside from the fact that the law is very clear on doxing.
Back in 2013, I wrote a primer on it in fact.
And there are additional resources on specifically this, what is legal, illegal etc. READ:
Doxxing: It’s Like Hacking, But Legal
The Problem With “Doxxing”
The Illegal Activity of “Doxing”: Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk
Basically, the doxing and stalking laws are
Pointing out someone's social media page, isn't doxing.
Pointing out that person A is really person B under an alias, isn't doxing.
Posting material that the person themselves made public, isn't, never was, and never will be, doxing.
If the above were doxing, every single person in the media would be guilty of having committed a crime.
What MoMa did here months ago, was doxing. And it's 100% legally actionable. He posted that I had a traffic citation. There was no context or reason for it to be here in a forum where we're making fun of grown men buying JPEG space ships. He posted it with malice, and with the intent to harass and harm. The only thing he didn't do, was post the actual citation itself; but anyone incited by his posting, could very well go seek it out for themselves. They never knew about it before he posted it.
I didn't dox Deloria (now banned). Though the post has been removed here, it is still on my website (post # 4905) for anyone who cares to go and read it for themselves.
All I did was out a scammer using material they themselves posted here (e.g. this post) and on social media.
Period. End of story.
There are NO rules on SA which prohibit what I did. Not a single one. Don't take my word for it though, here, go read all the rule pages
Then FAU, after emerging from what I can only imagine must have been a meltdown recovery process, switched from "doxing" to "helldumping". Which, to me - and anyone with a brain that's in working condition - was hilarious; seeing as the latter isn't even an SA rule. That aside from the fact that the very notion of "helldumping" is so far removed from "doxing", that in and of itself, is NOT a bannable offense. Probation? Yeah, maybe' it depends on the mod.
The fact of the matter is that since FAU tried to close down this forum - and failed; he's been gunning for me because not only did I have it brought back, but I was made mod. Heck, we just had yet another spat mere months ago over this same thing.
This sub-forum is moderated on a honor system. As a mod, I never had to take any action other than probating some people (4) when they cross the line. Once, after several probates, I probated someone for 30 days. I didn't perma-ban.
This sub-forum has never - ever - broken ANY of the SA rules. We encourage off-topic posts (recipes, memes etc) because it breaks from the monotony of making GBS threads on Star Citizen and Shitizens 24-7.
A LOT of people followed me to SA and paid 10 bux to be able read what I post, interact, find the lols etc. That too is a solid fact.
Yet, somehow, for some bullshit reason, FAU is of the opinion that I am not a "good" mod. The regulars here and I had a good laugh about that on on Discord, for the sheer hilarity of it. And when pressed, like the absentee landlord, he simply couldn't point out a SINGLE reason WHY he thinks I'm not a "good" mod. Not one.
Aside from the fact that I didn't even ask to be a loving mod. In much the same way that Beer4TheBeerGod and Beet Wagon didn't get asked either. He made them mods, then installed an IK buffoon who subsequently shat up my nice sub-forum, while attracting all the rear end-clowns from FYAD and elsewhere - and who otherwise didn't even know we existed here in our niche corner.
This is bullshit. What the gently caress is the matter with you people; that a forum with such HIGH TRAFFIC and quality posters who are otherwise behaving themselves and abiding by the rules, can't be left alone?!? The money is going into Lowtax's coffers, so what do you care, and why be salty about it?
Look, I am not a stranger to being banned. Heck, I was banned TWICE on FDev for breaking the rules. And in both cases, it was a matter of a "shady" areas in which 1) I was using asterisk to bypass the bad word filter 2) I posted material from here on SA
So, if I had somehow broken an SA rule, and been banned as a result, it won't have been any big deal. I would pay the 10 bux, re-reg, and get right back into the poo poo-posting.
As I am 100% certain (and I have high priced attorneys who ensure that I don't do/say stupid poo poo that will get me arrested or sued) that I hadn't broken an SA rule, let alone guilty of doxing, I refused to re-reg on principle alone. And I made that clear to everyone who asked.
As the regulars here on my Discord can attest to, I said that I wasn't coming back here unless the ban was reversed. Then a group (7 at last count) of people (one of them being a backer here on SA who I had saved money by helping him get a Star Citizen refund) offered to pay the 10 bux if I came back. I still refused. Then some made the case that as long as I wasn't the one paying the 10 bux, it won't break my principles and that I should consider it.
So I did.
And here I am.
Nevertheless, seeing as there is a mod actively holding a grudge and who I believe is going to keep finding ways to either get me probated, banned or who I believe wants to see the forum die, I won't be as prolific a poster as I used to be because this is bullshit.
Still glad to see you back Warlord
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:21
|
|
- Samizdata
- May 14, 2007
-
|
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
I am going to keep this short; though I did consider writing a blog.
First of all, I have been around and an Internet Warlord for decades now. I know the drill. I've seen flamewars errupt and evolve from BBS teletype, to badly formatted Usenet postings, to articulate blogs.
I am well versed in the ways of online discourse.
I do not support, condone, nor engage in doxing.
Aside from the fact that the law is very clear on doxing.
Back in 2013, I wrote a primer on it in fact.
And there are additional resources on specifically this, what is legal, illegal etc. READ:
Doxxing: It’s Like Hacking, But Legal
The Problem With “Doxxing”
The Illegal Activity of “Doxing”: Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk
Basically, the doxing and stalking laws are
Pointing out someone's social media page, isn't doxing.
Pointing out that person A is really person B under an alias, isn't doxing.
Posting material that the person themselves made public, isn't, never was, and never will be, doxing.
If the above were doxing, every single person in the media would be guilty of having committed a crime.
What MoMa did here months ago, was doxing. And it's 100% legally actionable. He posted that I had a traffic citation. There was no context or reason for it to be here in a forum where we're making fun of grown men buying JPEG space ships. He posted it with malice, and with the intent to harass and harm. The only thing he didn't do, was post the actual citation itself; but anyone incited by his posting, could very well go seek it out for themselves. They never knew about it before he posted it.
I didn't dox Deloria (now banned). Though the post has been removed here, it is still on my website (post # 4905) for anyone who cares to go and read it for themselves.
All I did was out a scammer using material they themselves posted here (e.g. this post) and on social media.
Period. End of story.
There are NO rules on SA which prohibit what I did. Not a single one. Don't take my word for it though, here, go read all the rule pages
Then FAU, after emerging from what I can only imagine must have been a meltdown recovery process, switched from "doxing" to "helldumping". Which, to me - and anyone with a brain that's in working condition - was hilarious; seeing as the latter isn't even an SA rule. That aside from the fact that the very notion of "helldumping" is so far removed from "doxing", that in and of itself, is NOT a bannable offense. Probation? Yeah, maybe' it depends on the mod.
The fact of the matter is that since FAU tried to close down this forum - and failed; he's been gunning for me because not only did I have it brought back, but I was made mod. Heck, we just had yet another spat mere months ago over this same thing.
This sub-forum is moderated on a honor system. As a mod, I never had to take any action other than probating some people (4) when they cross the line. Once, after several probates, I probated someone for 30 days. I didn't perma-ban.
This sub-forum has never - ever - broken ANY of the SA rules. We encourage off-topic posts (recipes, memes etc) because it breaks from the monotony of making GBS threads on Star Citizen and Shitizens 24-7.
A LOT of people followed me to SA and paid 10 bux to be able read what I post, interact, find the lols etc. That too is a solid fact.
Yet, somehow, for some bullshit reason, FAU is of the opinion that I am not a "good" mod. The regulars here and I had a good laugh about that on on Discord, for the sheer hilarity of it. And when pressed, like the absentee landlord, he simply couldn't point out a SINGLE reason WHY he thinks I'm not a "good" mod. Not one.
Aside from the fact that I didn't even ask to be a loving mod. In much the same way that Beer4TheBeerGod and Beet Wagon didn't get asked either. He made them mods, then installed an IK buffoon who subsequently shat up my nice sub-forum, while attracting all the rear end-clowns from FYAD and elsewhere - and who otherwise didn't even know we existed here in our niche corner.
This is bullshit. What the gently caress is the matter with you people; that a forum with such HIGH TRAFFIC and quality posters who are otherwise behaving themselves and abiding by the rules, can't be left alone?!? The money is going into Lowtax's coffers, so what do you care, and why be salty about it?
Look, I am not a stranger to being banned. Heck, I was banned TWICE on FDev for breaking the rules. And in both cases, it was a matter of a "shady" areas in which 1) I was using asterisk to bypass the bad word filter 2) I posted material from here on SA
So, if I had somehow broken an SA rule, and been banned as a result, it won't have been any big deal. I would pay the 10 bux, re-reg, and get right back into the poo poo-posting.
As I am 100% certain (and I have high priced attorneys who ensure that I don't do/say stupid poo poo that will get me arrested or sued) that I hadn't broken an SA rule, let alone guilty of doxing, I refused to re-reg on principle alone. And I made that clear to everyone who asked.
As the regulars here on my Discord can attest to, I said that I wasn't coming back here unless the ban was reversed. Then a group (7 at last count) of people (one of them being a backer here on SA who I had saved money by helping him get a Star Citizen refund) offered to pay the 10 bux if I came back. I still refused. Then some made the case that as long as I wasn't the one paying the 10 bux, it won't break my principles and that I should consider it.
So I did.
And here I am.
Nevertheless, seeing as there is a mod actively holding a grudge and who I believe is going to keep finding ways to either get me probated, banned or who I believe wants to see the forum die, I won't be as prolific a poster as I used to be because this is bullshit.
Weldome back, FWIW. Many of us suspected it wouldn't have been forever. Just promise us you didn't spitepledge during your absencse...
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:22
|
|
- Samizdata
- May 14, 2007
-
|
For he is the Kwisatz Doxxerach!
He is well versed in the Doxxing Way...
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:29
|
|
- ripptide
- Jul 28, 2016
-
|
Posting someone's facebook is personal info. Making a big post about someone's personal life is 'getting into someone's personal life'. They also have a catch all clause because you aren't the first person to try and rules lawyer this stuff.
Even by your own definition it is still doxxing, as you are posting their information to intimidate them.
Sorry, but this has to be one of the weirdest things I've ever seen (and I know it's not just you thinking it). If you create a webpage, or a twitter account, or a facebook page, or any of the other social media tools, and make it public-facing (not restricted to friends, invites etc), by definition it cannot be considered private. Posting a link to someones public facebook page is not releasing private information.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:35
|
|
- Zzr
- Oct 6, 2016
-
|
Always give people an out where they can save face.
That is a rule good of life guys. Let a way for Chris to believe he did the right things, when he'll be assfucked tightly pushed on the bars by a black man saying he was right again and again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:44
|
|
- MeLKoR
- Dec 23, 2004
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
That is a rule good of life guys. Let a way for Chris to believe he did the right things, when he'll be assfucked tightly pushed on the bars by a black man saying he was right again and again.
https://i.imgur.com/zvbsvMP.mp4
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:51
|
|
- starkebn
- May 18, 2004
-
"Oooh, got a little too serious. You okay there, little buddy?"
|
What's the use of a troop transport? What would you actually use it for?
What's the use of a cargo ship? What would you actually use it for?
What's the use of a motorbike ship? What would you actually use it for?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:52
|
|
- TheLastRoboKy
- May 2, 2009
-
Finishing the game with everyone else's continues
|
What's the use of a troop transport? What would you actually use it for?
What's the use of a cargo ship? What would you actually use it for?
What's the use of a motorbike ship? What would you actually use it for?
Oh oh I know the answer to this one.
Ramming other ships.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:54
|
|
- Samizdata
- May 14, 2007
-
|
Beer, Beet, FAU, Lowtax, Marching Powder, g0m, whoever can be our honorable Space Judge.
You know, Samizdata would be a great Space Judge as well as the premium choice for YOUR IDIOT KING!
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:55
|
|
- ripptide
- Jul 28, 2016
-
|
"...love to see how they plan..." That's so cute!
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:01
|
|
- ComfyPants
- Mar 20, 2002
-
|
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
I am going to keep this short; though I did consider writing a blog.
First of all, I have been around and an Internet Warlord for decades now. I know the drill. I've seen flamewars errupt and evolve from BBS teletype, to badly formatted Usenet postings, to articulate blogs.
I am well versed in the ways of online discourse.
I do not support, condone, nor engage in doxing.
Aside from the fact that the law is very clear on doxing.
Back in 2013, I wrote a primer on it in fact.
And there are additional resources on specifically this, what is legal, illegal etc. READ:
Doxxing: It’s Like Hacking, But Legal
The Problem With “Doxxing”
The Illegal Activity of “Doxing”: Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk
Basically, the doxing and stalking laws are
Pointing out someone's social media page, isn't doxing.
Pointing out that person A is really person B under an alias, isn't doxing.
Posting material that the person themselves made public, isn't, never was, and never will be, doxing.
If the above were doxing, every single person in the media would be guilty of having committed a crime.
What MoMa did here months ago, was doxing. And it's 100% legally actionable. He posted that I had a traffic citation. There was no context or reason for it to be here in a forum where we're making fun of grown men buying JPEG space ships. He posted it with malice, and with the intent to harass and harm. The only thing he didn't do, was post the actual citation itself; but anyone incited by his posting, could very well go seek it out for themselves. They never knew about it before he posted it.
I didn't dox Deloria (now banned). Though the post has been removed here, it is still on my website (post # 4905) for anyone who cares to go and read it for themselves.
All I did was out a scammer using material they themselves posted here (e.g. this post) and on social media.
Period. End of story.
There are NO rules on SA which prohibit what I did. Not a single one. Don't take my word for it though, here, go read all the rule pages
Then FAU, after emerging from what I can only imagine must have been a meltdown recovery process, switched from "doxing" to "helldumping". Which, to me - and anyone with a brain that's in working condition - was hilarious; seeing as the latter isn't even an SA rule. That aside from the fact that the very notion of "helldumping" is so far removed from "doxing", that in and of itself, is NOT a bannable offense. Probation? Yeah, maybe' it depends on the mod.
The fact of the matter is that since FAU tried to close down this forum - and failed; he's been gunning for me because not only did I have it brought back, but I was made mod. Heck, we just had yet another spat mere months ago over this same thing.
This sub-forum is moderated on a honor system. As a mod, I never had to take any action other than probating some people (4) when they cross the line. Once, after several probates, I probated someone for 30 days. I didn't perma-ban.
This sub-forum has never - ever - broken ANY of the SA rules. We encourage off-topic posts (recipes, memes etc) because it breaks from the monotony of making GBS threads on Star Citizen and Shitizens 24-7.
A LOT of people followed me to SA and paid 10 bux to be able read what I post, interact, find the lols etc. That too is a solid fact.
Yet, somehow, for some bullshit reason, FAU is of the opinion that I am not a "good" mod. The regulars here and I had a good laugh about that on on Discord, for the sheer hilarity of it. And when pressed, like the absentee landlord, he simply couldn't point out a SINGLE reason WHY he thinks I'm not a "good" mod. Not one.
Aside from the fact that I didn't even ask to be a loving mod. In much the same way that Beer4TheBeerGod and Beet Wagon didn't get asked either. He made them mods, then installed an IK buffoon who subsequently shat up my nice sub-forum, while attracting all the rear end-clowns from FYAD and elsewhere - and who otherwise didn't even know we existed here in our niche corner.
This is bullshit. What the gently caress is the matter with you people; that a forum with such HIGH TRAFFIC and quality posters who are otherwise behaving themselves and abiding by the rules, can't be left alone?!? The money is going into Lowtax's coffers, so what do you care, and why be salty about it?
Look, I am not a stranger to being banned. Heck, I was banned TWICE on FDev for breaking the rules. And in both cases, it was a matter of a "shady" areas in which 1) I was using asterisk to bypass the bad word filter 2) I posted material from here on SA
So, if I had somehow broken an SA rule, and been banned as a result, it won't have been any big deal. I would pay the 10 bux, re-reg, and get right back into the poo poo-posting.
As I am 100% certain (and I have high priced attorneys who ensure that I don't do/say stupid poo poo that will get me arrested or sued) that I hadn't broken an SA rule, let alone guilty of doxing, I refused to re-reg on principle alone. And I made that clear to everyone who asked.
As the regulars here on my Discord can attest to, I said that I wasn't coming back here unless the ban was reversed. Then a group (7 at last count) of people (one of them being a backer here on SA who I had saved money by helping him get a Star Citizen refund) offered to pay the 10 bux if I came back. I still refused. Then some made the case that as long as I wasn't the one paying the 10 bux, it won't break my principles and that I should consider it.
So I did.
And here I am.
Nevertheless, seeing as there is a mod actively holding a grudge and who I believe is going to keep finding ways to either get me probated, banned or who I believe wants to see the forum die, I won't be as prolific a poster as I used to be because this is bullshit.
R u ok commando?
(seriously, welcome back)
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:06
|
|
- Zzr
- Oct 6, 2016
-
|
Please do.
I just need as much info as I can if I'm going to make a decision.
Or you could just continue to jerk off female dogs and let this dead sub-forum alone, FartsAreUrinefull. Stop triyng to be like crobberts, backer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:13
|
|
- orcinus
- Feb 25, 2016
-
-
Fun Shoe
|
Sorry, but this has to be one of the weirdest things I've ever seen (and I know it's not just you thinking it). If you create a webpage, or a twitter account, or a facebook page, or any of the other social media tools, and make it public-facing (not restricted to friends, invites etc), by definition it cannot be considered private. Posting a link to someones public facebook page is not releasing private information.
You're right, and it is weird.
Unfortunately, about 90% of the population doesn't really get that and thinks that information they've released to the public magically becomes private again when it suits them.
Why do you think Facebook displays those obnoxious tooltips and popups reminding you of the privacy/visibility settings all the time? Because people simply can't grok the concept of publishing their information and the fact there is no going back once it's done (and the fact they're responsible for making it public).
We had a user at work drag our support through hell because he literally explicitly published his schedule for a swinger's meeting/cruise/whatever, alongside a link to his "private" webshop with kink toys.
"I didn't know Google would crawl it", "I didn't know my name would show up" and "I didn't know my bio was visible" (then why the gently caress did you fill it out, ya dingus?!) were some of the choice quotes.
orcinus fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Nov 24, 2016
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:14
|
|
- Samizdata
- May 14, 2007
-
|
Hell with that. Derek you better have bought a Javelin while you were away, I need somewhere to perfect my golf-swing.
Wow. I REALLY mangled THAT spelling. I will be over here dog-sitting while you scan stuff...
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:17
|
|
- A Neurotic Corncob
- Nov 12, 2016
-
A light wind swept over the corn, and all nature laughed in the sunshine.
|
Or you could just continue to jerk off female dogs and let this dead sub-forum alone, FartsAreUrinefull. Stop triyng to be like crobberts, backer.
stop posting
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:19
|
|
- Tokamak
- Dec 22, 2004
-
|
Sorry, but this has to be one of the weirdest things I've ever seen (and I know it's not just you thinking it). If you create a webpage, or a twitter account, or a facebook page, or any of the other social media tools, and make it public-facing (not restricted to friends, invites etc), by definition it cannot be considered private. Posting a link to someones public facebook page is not releasing private information.
I'll try to explain the reasoning behind it, because it is the same standard used across across almost every forum/reddit/chan. There is no hard or fast rule, and is just a common sense rule that moderators have developed through practice.
You are correct in the sense that it is a publicly accessible webpage, and is not technically private. However it is not information that people reading this thread would have access to without knowing what to specifically look for. It is like providing a key to a publicly visible hash table with billions of values. The information (values) were always there, but you'll never find it without the key. The information is private through obscurity. The Library of Babel has the doxx of everyone who has ever existed or will ever exist, and your deepest and most private secrets, but you'll never find it without a key.
You also have to take the motivations of the poster into consideration (which are generally not positive). So if you have an anonymous user who hasn't divulged any personally identifying information, making it available would be doxxing (regardless of technical visibility). The other extreme is someone who uses their actual name, and has readily accessible links to personal and business webpages (the sort of person who might be referred to as a 'public figure'). Generally linking to their name and business address isn't doxxing (but you might still get in trouble for starting drama). There are grey areas where someone might use a pseudonym but link to a personal blog which has their name (or links to another page with personal information). So moderators use common sense and intentions to determine whether it is considered is doxxing or not.
My rap sheet has a good example of roughly where the line is drawn (it was a helldump, but close enough). The person regularly posted links to their personal blog (which had their name and college where they were employed in an academic capacity) and treated their views as academic in nature. I posted information criticising their academic performance, which might be snarky but not out of place in an academic environment among peers. I was basically given a probation and warned not to dig any further, the post wasn't even removed. Would it be doxxing since I bought it up again? Probably not because the intention is good, and the information doesn't really matter unless you were a participant in that thread.
Tokamak fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Nov 24, 2016
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:20
|
|
- Viscous Soda
- Apr 24, 2004
-
|
please everyone keep quoting Derek's latest unreadable tantrum in full, tia
k
quote:
Derek's latest unreadable tantrum in full
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:27
|
|
- The Titanic
- Sep 15, 2016
-
Unsinkable
|
What's the use of a troop transport? What would you actually use it for?
What's the use of a cargo ship? What would you actually use it for?
What's the use of a motorbike ship? What would you actually use it for?
1: $250-$500
2: $300-$750
3: $75-$150
I think that about sums up what CIG has considered for the complex mechanics behind these very interesting ships.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:28
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2024 23:20
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:06
C-Bangin' it 
