Definition of an Idiot: The trilogy

4-Ripcord

New member
Here's the basics of it.

I frequent tacomaworld.com, that place is freaking awesome.

All day, this guy has been making threads and getting them locked by mods.

He parked like a dumbass and got mad that someone parked next to him. A

He got DESTROYED by the TW forums!:flamethrwoer2:
Now he is threatening to sue them.. except he waived his rights for that in the terms of use...

enjoy..
heres a picture of an idiot - Tacoma World Forums

definition of an idiot (part 2) - Tacoma World Forums

definition of an idiot (part 3) --think twice - Tacoma World Forums

IMAG0134.jpg~original
 
Register to hide this ad
whatta moron

thanks for sharing.............. yeah, I'd say he got owned. threatening to sue? What? Really? The 3rd thread is open to members only ...........how about you copy and paste that here :hungry:, hahahhaha
 
From his original post in the 3rd thread:
=============================

what started as a simple thread to post how somebody picked to park right next to me so close when i didnt even realize i had parked like i did till after i came out to put something in passenger rear area became a huge slander against me. unreal. i am especially angry at the way the moderators handled this. i have printed all the blogs and have forwarded them to my attorney to see what kind of case we might have. if you think this is a joke, read the information below. the courts can subpoena the website for the names of the people behind the comments for judicial purposes.

Is Internet Defamation Defined as Slander, Libel or Both?
Until the recent development of blogs and other types of online videos such as those featured on the Internet was largely deigned Libel. But whether an online case of accused Defamation should fall under either category of Libel or Slander will not be nearly as meaningful as whether the activity satisfies the basic Defamation criteria, as defined above. What is most important is to focus upon the actual statement, whether verbal or written, that a plaintiff claims is defamatory.
A recently filed case illustrates the application of a libel claim in a blogging case in NY, Stuart Pivar v. Seed Media, 2007cv07334, Filed August 16, 2007, in New York Southern District Court. Seed Media pays PZ Myers to blog at ScienceBlogs.com, and there he reviewed a book by Dr. Stuart Pivar, called "LifeCode: The Theory of Biological Self Organization" which purports to reconfigure Darwinian Evolution.

Myers claimed Pivar is a "classic crackpot" on his Pharyngula website. In response, the lawsuit complaint states, "Myer's defamatory remarks were made with actual malice; Myers called Plaintiff "a classic crackpot" fully knowing that statement to be false as a statement of fact and in reckless disregard of the truth about Plaintiff because Myer's knew full well, the time of publishing his defamatory statement that no scientist holding the international reputation of any of Hazen, Sasselov, Goodwin or Tyson would endorse or review the work of a crackpot."

The complaint claims Myers caused "considerable mental and emotional distress," tortious interference with the plaintiff's business relationships as a "scientist and scientific editor," and "loss of book sales and diminished returns on ten years of funded scientific research in special damages" exceeding $5 million.
The suits asks for: declaratory relief to remove defamatory statements from the web and an injunction to block further libel; $5 million in special damages for "tortious interference with business relations"; and $10 million in damages for defamation, emotional distress, and loss of reputation.
This lawsuit well illustrates the libelous cause, effect and damages of a proper tort case based upon defamation.

Can a Blog Be Sued for Defamation; Isn't It All Free Speech?
The answer would be, generally, that a blog owner whose blog has published materials can be held liable and a blogger using the site can be liable. The Communications Decency Act of 1996 is a protector of blog owners, but there are exceptions. It states, in section 230, that it "precludes courts from entertaining claims that would place a computer service provider in a publisher's role." As to how the court sees blogs, in general, overall, the US Supreme Court has ruled that blogs are similar to news groups, saying "in the context of defamation law, the rights of the institutional media are no greater and no less than those enjoyed by other individuals and organizations engaged in the same activities."

For bloggers, all Defamation legal rules apply to their posts. But there are many complications in applying them. First, many people who post online comments, and probably those tending to make the most inflammatory and false statements, will do so anonymously, for obvious reasons. So the first threshold is identifying the blogger making Defamatory claims. Several things make this difficult, as well. Since the blogger probably will not identify themselves when the issue comes to light, there needs to be a legal process that allows identification. They can be traced by high-tech means, but a court must agree via summary judgment that all the elements of Defamation have been met. This technology does have some limits, as well, as it can be stymied through use of "Proxies," which mask the true origin of the blogger. Also, the website owner may not cooperate in the search, as well.

A recent case showed how powerful Defamation laws, applied online, can be. In November 2006, a Florida woman, Sue Scheff, was awarded $11.3 million in damages in Broward County Circuit Court, in one of the biggest awards ever tolled. The suit was filed for Internet defamation, and the jury found a Louisiana woman had posted caustic messages against the Scheff and her company, claiming she was a "con artist" and "fraud". The jury found the charges were completely false, so the Louisiana woman had no defense. Interestingly, Scheff's attorney had offered to settle the case for $35,000 before it went before the jury.

=============================

Then this followed:

Accompanied by much more flaming.
scarjo_popcorn.gif~original

popcorn.gif~original

popcorn.gif~original

popcorn_10000.jpg~original
 
Last edited:
I almost crapped myself laughing so hard. Had to read the entire 250ish posts.

Btw, speaking of defamation, didnt he start the whole thing by calling the saturn owner an idiot?
 
I almost crapped myself laughing so hard. Had to read the entire 250ish posts.

Btw, speaking of defamation, didnt he start the whole thing by calling the saturn owner an idiot?

Indeed he did. Did you see the other thread that they linked to in the 1st page of the 1st thread? He got pissed about someones sarcastic comment on another thread about oil changes..
This guy is hilarious!
 
I read that one too. Im amazed hes still a member.

Did you notice taht the second thread had 120 posts in 1hr 37 mins??!!
 
THAT'S what I love about tacomaworld. At any given moment, they have like 20x the amount of online registered users as we do. At least..
 
WTF?!?!?! This guy doesn't even deserve a license to communicate with other people, let alone drive a vehicle, if this is an example of his brain wave. I'm going for TW. Oh well at least it makes me and others laugh. Very entertaining and thank you for sharing.
 
haha. that was hilarious. I had thoughts of joining that forum just to make fun of him too. What an idiot.

edit: I'm surprised nobody posted the "internet tough guy" pic
 
I am constantly complaining to my wife about people (ok, women) at the mall who can't back their 75-foot long Chevy Suburban XL out of a parking space without executing a 35-point turn by muttering "Don't Buy It if You Can't Drive It!"

:lookout:

That guy shouldn't have bought a Tacoma. Obviously, a 1/4-ton pickup is too big for him. Maybe a MINI or a SMART car would be better for him.

Mad props to Philsey for seeing this thread and deciding he should PM me about it!
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
278,316
Messages
3,554,111
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Trending content

Back
Top