Re: Coming out

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Diane, Jul 2, 2003.

  1. Diane

    Diane Guest

    On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 03:04:17 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    <> wrote:

    >Here is your ultimatum and I HAVE done this before. if any of this crap
    >appears on another newsgroup I will aggressively report you to your ISP and
    >possibly bring up a slander lawsuit against you ass. Our family has a full
    >time pre paid lawyer on a yearly basis (for his buisness) so it would cost
    >me nothing to sue your ass into oblivion.



    Chris,
    I have a question.... will you sue me because you don't want
    people to know that you're a 360 pound morbidly obese kid who
    expresses a keen interest in crossdressing by posting intensively on
    alt.support.crossdressing or will you sue me because you are a
    morbidly obese netkook cum netcop who has a firm belief in not
    crossposting?

    Please write back soon because my lawyer, Clarence Darrow , wants to
    know OK.

    You can just respond back to the crossdressing newsgroup where you
    usually post OK?

    'Ta...
    Diane, Jul 2, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Diane

    Oldbie Guest

    Diane <> wrote:
    >On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 03:04:17 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    ><> wrote:
    >>Here is your ultimatum and I HAVE done this before. if any of this crap
    >>appears on another newsgroup I will aggressively report you to your ISP and
    >>possibly bring up a slander lawsuit against you ass. Our family has a full
    >>time pre paid lawyer on a yearly basis (for his buisness) so it would cost
    >>me nothing to sue your ass into oblivion.

    >Chris,
    > I have a question.... will you sue me because you don't want
    >people to know that you're a 360 pound morbidly obese kid who
    >expresses a keen interest in crossdressing by posting intensively on
    >alt.support.crossdressing or will you sue me because you are a
    >morbidly obese netkook cum netcop who has a firm belief in not
    >crossposting?
    >Please write back soon because my lawyer, Clarence Darrow , wants to
    >know OK.
    >You can just respond back to the crossdressing newsgroup where you
    >usually post OK?
    >'Ta...


    Seems to have an obsession about your ass, doesn't he?
    Oldbie, Jul 3, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. The suit would be based on slander/stalking.

    you are taking actions specifically with the intent of causing someone
    harm(although the reaction from rmr was far less than she hoped it seems)
    took the air out of her bubble.

    this IS illegal and it is NOT protected under free speech.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/


    "Oldbie" <> wrote in message
    news:be06na$cn5$...
    > Diane <> wrote:
    > >On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 03:04:17 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    > ><> wrote:
    > >>Here is your ultimatum and I HAVE done this before. if any of this crap
    > >>appears on another newsgroup I will aggressively report you to your ISP

    and
    > >>possibly bring up a slander lawsuit against you ass. Our family has a

    full
    > >>time pre paid lawyer on a yearly basis (for his buisness) so it would

    cost
    > >>me nothing to sue your ass into oblivion.

    > >Chris,
    > > I have a question.... will you sue me because you don't want
    > >people to know that you're a 360 pound morbidly obese kid who
    > >expresses a keen interest in crossdressing by posting intensively on
    > >alt.support.crossdressing or will you sue me because you are a
    > >morbidly obese netkook cum netcop who has a firm belief in not
    > >crossposting?
    > >Please write back soon because my lawyer, Clarence Darrow , wants to
    > >know OK.
    > >You can just respond back to the crossdressing newsgroup where you
    > >usually post OK?
    > >'Ta...

    >
    > Seems to have an obsession about your ass, doesn't he?
    >
    >
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 3, 2003
    #3
  4. On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 05:49:25 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    <> ran around screaming and yelling:

    >The suit would be based on slander/stalking.
    >
    >you are taking actions specifically with the intent of causing someone
    >harm(although the reaction from rmr was far less than she hoped it seems)
    >took the air out of her bubble.
    >
    >this IS illegal and it is NOT protected under free speech.

    when you "air out your dirty laundry" on a worldwide web, you run the
    risk of people reposting it. Not illegal at all. From what i read, she
    has not stated anything that you didn't originally post. case
    dismissed
    Joey
    Joey Tribiani, Jul 3, 2003
    #4
  5. Technically I believe that would even come under the DMCA

    she took my content (copyrighted) and reposted it to another forum other
    than where it originated.

    that is also technically illegal.

    this is also not the world wide web. it is subscription based. you have to
    subscribe/directly seek it to find it. its not a public web site.

    either way it is just as illegal as taking content from a webpage and
    posting it elsewhere without permission.

    not only that but I specifically denied her permission to repost my content
    elsewhere.

    Case not so dismissed.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Joey Tribiani" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 05:49:25 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    > <> ran around screaming and yelling:
    >
    > >The suit would be based on slander/stalking.
    > >
    > >you are taking actions specifically with the intent of causing someone
    > >harm(although the reaction from rmr was far less than she hoped it seems)
    > >took the air out of her bubble.
    > >
    > >this IS illegal and it is NOT protected under free speech.

    > when you "air out your dirty laundry" on a worldwide web, you run the
    > risk of people reposting it. Not illegal at all. From what i read, she
    > has not stated anything that you didn't originally post. case
    > dismissed
    > Joey
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 3, 2003
    #5
  6. On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 06:40:52 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    <> ran around screaming and yelling:

    >that is also technically illegal.

    "technically illegal"? Sue away buddy, it is america, ya know. You can
    sue anyone. that don't mean you will win, or you will accomplish
    anything, but have at it.

    >this is also not the world wide web. it is subscription based. you have to
    >subscribe/directly seek it to find it. its not a public web site.

    um...you have to directly seek out the web or internet also. duh.. and
    you are right, it is not a public website. they are public newsgroups.
    anyone can go to google, never subscribe to *anything* and read it
    all..case dismissed.
    Joey
    Joey Tribiani, Jul 3, 2003
    #6
  7. Irrelevant. you keep saying the case is based on access its not.

    it based on breaking the law.

    reposting copyrighted material without permission is illegal.

    on the internet it can get "grey" although the intent was quite clear.

    I specifically forbade it making it no longer grey at all.

    she or he broke the law.

    Second the actions was intended to cause harm. this is also illegal.

    you can spin it all you want the facts are the facts.

    I will not be pushed around by some pathetic excuse for a troll. Diane has
    no chance of victory. I have magnitude more patience and stubborness than he
    or she does. She has also crossed line to the point where my ego and honor
    will not allow me to let her win.

    TO let her win would be to announce others like her to take their shots at
    people.

    this can not be aloud to occur.

    I will fight her until she gives or gets bored and goes away. no other
    outcome is acceptable.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Joey Tribiani" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 06:40:52 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    > <> ran around screaming and yelling:
    >
    > >that is also technically illegal.

    > "technically illegal"? Sue away buddy, it is america, ya know. You can
    > sue anyone. that don't mean you will win, or you will accomplish
    > anything, but have at it.
    >
    > >this is also not the world wide web. it is subscription based. you have

    to
    > >subscribe/directly seek it to find it. its not a public web site.

    > um...you have to directly seek out the web or internet also. duh.. and
    > you are right, it is not a public website. they are public newsgroups.
    > anyone can go to google, never subscribe to *anything* and read it
    > all..case dismissed.
    > Joey
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 3, 2003
    #7
  8. sorry forgot this one.


    "Chris Taylor Jr" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Irrelevant. you keep saying the case is based on access its not.
    >
    > it based on breaking the law.
    >
    > reposting copyrighted material without permission is illegal.
    >
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 3, 2003
    #8
  9. On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 08:29:22 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    <> ran around screaming and yelling:

    >no chance of victory. I have magnitude more patience and stubborness than he
    >or she does. She has also crossed line to the point where my ego and honor
    >will not allow me to let her win.

    LOL...a big ass crossdressing punk with a bruised ego.....this is too
    funny(btw is it illegal to quote your post, due to copywrite issues??
    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL)
    Joey
    Joey Tribiani, Jul 4, 2003
    #9
  10. Diane

    L D Blake Guest

    Off topic in any of these groups but what the heck...


    On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 02:29:42 GMT, (Oldbie) wrote:

    >"Chris Taylor Jr" <> wrote:
    >>this IS illegal and it is NOT protected under free speech.

    >
    >How's it work outside the USA?


    Well, that's actually a lot tougher question than you might think...

    Just about anywhere you go you're going to get tagged for yelling "Fire" when
    there isn't one. Similarly you are crossing the line when you lie about the
    important stuff; you don't get to tell a courtroom someone did it when you
    know they didn't. There is pretty much a world wide consensus on outright
    dishonesty and public mischief. You are expected to tell the truth when the
    truth matters and you are under onus not to cause panic for no good reason.

    From there, it gets pretty gray-ish...

    In the USA, racist commentary is pretty much safe ground for bigots but here
    in Canada it can get you tagged up to $15,000 or if you are organizing racist
    groups you could spend up to 5 years in jail. Ernst Zundel found that out the
    hard way <G>.

    In the US you can debate the religious issue all you want, in some mid-eastern
    countries it could get you beheaded

    Put up a sign in your store that says "We reserve the right to refuse service
    to anyone" in the US and you are within your rights. Do that in Canada and
    you might well find yourself answering to the human rights commission;
    especially if "anyone" translates to a recognizable class of people.

    The internet is complicating it even further. In the USA many things are
    permitted that would be considered harassment or defamation in other
    countries. One example is www.trannytrolls.us a website set up specifically
    to incite hatred against, well, me <G>... In the US it is considered personal
    opinion and is protected under freedom of speech, in Canada the author (Diane
    Lask, aka Arons) would find herself charged with defamation and harassment. I
    would actually have two avenues of prosecution were that website Canada based;
    I could go to any justice of the peace and charge Lask with harassment under
    Canada's criminal code, for which she could go to jail, and I could use civil
    litigation to exact restitution for the defaming effect it has and I would
    likely win on both counts. But, because both she and the server she's using
    are in the US, there is literally nothing I can do about it. All she has to
    do, in the US, is prove there is one factual statement on that website and the
    whole thing would be dismissed. In Canada, I would only need to show the
    website has a harming effect on my life to win the case.

    From outside the US, living in far more reasonable place as I do, the American
    version of freedom often looks a lot more like the right to harm others than
    the foundation of an egalitarian society in which all have the opportunity to
    live without suffering undue oppression. I constantly see Yanks pulling
    stunts that, in other countries, would get them fined and/or jailed and they
    do it little or no fear of legal reprisals.

    One recent example, and the one you're probably responding to, is the business
    of wilfully "Outing" one of the people who came to this newsgroup
    (alt.support.crossdressing) for a little help and companionship. It's being
    done by someone who's been causing trouble here for years. Lask is a major
    head case, a transsexual who hates transgendered people... she's been openly
    pulling this kind of crap for more than 5 years and is getting more ambitious
    about it with every passing week. Her most recent victim was warned, by
    several regulars on this group, not to play the troll's game with her but went
    ahead and did it anyway. His justification for the trouble he's now in was
    that using kill files and ignoring a troublemaker actually violated the
    troll's freedom of speech. In fact, he brought the whole mess down on
    himself... an act of pure self-sabotage not uncommon in the transcommunity.
    In the US, since the "outing" is a statement of fact it is protected under
    freedom of speech. In Canada, however, this falls into a legal gray area
    where it is likely that even though the basic statement is factual a defaming
    effect can be proven, harm has been done, and it is likely civil action could
    be taken to gain.

    That is one case I'd like to see... it's about time there was some legal
    clarity brought the question of who controls personal information...

    Should we have the right to speak or display harmful or embarrassing
    information about others? Should we have the right to engage in the inciting
    of hatred? Should freedom of speech extend to those things which can and do
    cause embarrassment or distress to others?

    There is no question that with a little "spin" *anything* can be painted up in
    such a way as to embarrass or defame an individual, the question is whether we
    should be allowed to willfully use that "spin" for the purpose of causing
    harm...

    In present-day USA the answer is "Yes" and it is generally considered that
    silencing the expression of opinion violates a person's constitutional right
    to have those opinions. In Canada (and many other countries) a differing
    version of freedom is taken where it is believed that certain limitations on
    freedom of expression are reasonable in the interests of not having
    individuals or groups of individuals, suffering oppression simply because
    public opinion does not famous their lifestyles or birthright. Almost every
    person on Earth has something they don't want to be common knowledge and we
    all dread the day it comes out. Writing laws that recognize a person's right
    to privacy and freedom from harassment is a difficult balancing act, a good
    government will allow for diversity while at the same time imposing
    (hopefully) reasonable limitations on everyone's freedom in order to protect
    members of that diversity from ghetoization or outright oppression. Seeking a
    balance of freedom, instead of granting absolute freedom.

    One good example of the difference between countries can be seen in the way
    Canada has dealt with racist groups. In the US the KKK has websites online
    and holds white power rallies, often with police protection. In Canada the
    Heritage Front found themselves lined up in courtrooms simply because of an
    anti-semetic message on their answering machine. Comparing the way our
    respective countries deal with this raises a really interesting question:
    would racial minority members be more free in the US if they actively rounded
    up all the hate mongers... or... would that be an imposition on the hate
    monger's constitutional rights? Where does freedom of speech reasonably end?

    My answer is that it most reasonably ends when others are being opposed
    because of things beyond their own control. For example, on the basis of skin
    colour, we don't choose it and we shouldn't suffer because of it. When your
    abuses of the right to free expression poses a threat on my right to
    participate in society as a free and equal partner you should be brought to
    task for it. In my personal case, I've been politically active on issues of
    Transphobia (like "homophobia" except leveled on transgendered people).
    Should I have to suffer losses of personal freedom simply because some people
    find themselves uncomfortable in my presence? Do they have the right to
    vocally oppose me in ways that can and do impact on my ability to participate
    in society as an equal and autonomous partner? Tough questions...

    Canada has human rights commissions in each province that oversee this very
    kind of thing and as far as I can tell it's working pretty well. We don't
    have "ghettos" here, people of differing races, religions, and lifestyles all
    freely mix together, interracial and interfaith friendships and marriages are
    not uncommon here... despite the US claims of being the freest country in the
    world, people in Canada are actually more free to live their lives than in the
    US... because, for the most part the law protects diversity here; we are an
    officially multicultural country. Canadians do not have to fear organized
    opposition to the inate diversity that is our right as human beings and when
    it does happen we have legal remedies we can undertake to stop it from
    happening again. On balance, I think this a far more liveable definition of
    freedom than the one upheld by US courts.

    Wrong though it may be, there is some foundation in the way many people feel
    about the US. Americans appear to outsiders like hypocrites attempting to
    impose their version of freedom on others while failing to protect the
    freedoms of the people living within their own borders.

    So, to finally answer your question... it works very differently outside the
    US... most countries do recognize that some limits on individual freedom must
    be enforced in order to protect the communal interests of the larger society
    within that country. Ok, so a few governments do get carried away and there
    is a risk of totalitarianism if the balance of freedom is not protected but
    for the most part it does work. (Key point: I am not talking about "freedom"
    as an individual absolute, I really do mean the "balance of freedom" within a
    society)

    Within a couple of hundred feet of where I sit I have neighbours from Germany,
    England, India, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, Jamaica and Serbia. Just about every
    race is represented, there are, blacks, semitics, asians, and caucasians.
    Religions too, there are Jews, Christians, Hindus and Muslims all living on my
    floor. We've even got a gay couple two Trans people (including me <G>) on
    three different floors... AND, the important information is that we all get
    along well enough.

    I sometimes wonder if this building would still be standing if it was in the
    US...


    ---

    Laura
    L D Blake, Jul 4, 2003
    #10
  11. Diane

    Diane Guest

    Re: Coming out of Lyle Blake's Mind

    On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:00:09 -0400, L D Blake <>
    wrote:
    >One recent example, and the one you're probably responding to, is the business
    >of wilfully "Outing" one of the people who came to this newsgroup


    Speaking of "willful outing".....

    (from Google and www.trannytrolls.us )

    Laura Blake said:
    http://groups.google.com/groups?&OE=UTF-8&output=gplain
    >Leave me the hell alone... or...
    >I will distribute, privately, a full disclosure of your Real name, home
    >address, birth certificate, criminal record (including the arrests for
    >homosexual prostitution), medical history, credit history and employment
    >history. I know who you are and I know most everything about you. If you
    >don't leave me alone your friends, boss, neighbours, family and creditors
    >all learn exactly who and what Richard Elliot Lask is all about, *including
    >the botched sex-change*. Moreover, all the whistle blower lines in my area
    >have been allerted to you and will report you to the police the minute you
    >call. You don't want to end up in a *men's* prison do you Dick?
    >Screw with me again and I'll **** you over so bad you'll wish I hadn't been
    >stopped at the border last fall!
    >AND... in case you think I can't or won't do it... go talk to your fuckwit
    >buddy Lacey Lee ....



    >Lacey Leigh, author of the book, "The Emancipated Crossdresser" , said to Laura Blake:

    http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=&OE=UTF-8&output=gplain
    >YOU OUTED ME, by
    >crossposting my HOME ADDRESS, personal, and business telephone numbers
    >to multiple newsgroups, including those populated by associates within
    >one of my professional specialties in an attempt to smear, defame, and
    >harm me among my contemporaries, peers, and colleagues EVEN THOUGH YOU
    >HAVE ALSO POSTED THAT EMOTIONAL OR PHYSICAL HARM COULD RESULT. And
    >that's the TRUTH.
    Diane, Jul 4, 2003
    #11
  12. Well I have to say this is the first decent use of an otherwise dispickable
    and horrendous law.

    the DMCA it is very unforgiving to copyright violators.

    and I am very unforgiving to trolls.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "L D Blake" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Off topic in any of these groups but what the heck...
    >
    >
    > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 02:29:42 GMT, (Oldbie) wrote:
    >
    > >"Chris Taylor Jr" <> wrote:
    > >>this IS illegal and it is NOT protected under free speech.

    > >
    > >How's it work outside the USA?

    >
    > Well, that's actually a lot tougher question than you might think...
    >
    > Just about anywhere you go you're going to get tagged for yelling "Fire"

    when
    > there isn't one. Similarly you are crossing the line when you lie about

    the
    > important stuff; you don't get to tell a courtroom someone did it when you
    > know they didn't. There is pretty much a world wide consensus on outright
    > dishonesty and public mischief. You are expected to tell the truth when

    the
    > truth matters and you are under onus not to cause panic for no good

    reason.
    >
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 4, 2003
    #12
  13. Re: Coming out of Lyle Blake's Mind

    HEY LD do you have this info on diane ?

    I have plenty of webspace and domain's are cheap ?

    I wonder is trannytrolldiane.com is available

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Diane" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:00:09 -0400, L D Blake <>
    > wrote:
    > >One recent example, and the one you're probably responding to, is the

    business
    > >of wilfully "Outing" one of the people who came to this newsgroup

    >
    > Speaking of "willful outing".....
    >
    > (from Google and www.trannytrolls.us )
    >
    > Laura Blake said:
    >

    http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3gvdbu4agejfepmrqedun5srd48pb65p4h@4a
    x.com&OE=UTF-8&output=gplain
    > >Leave me the hell alone... or...
    > >I will distribute, privately, a full disclosure of your Real name, home
    > >address, birth certificate, criminal record (including the arrests for
    > >homosexual prostitution), medical history, credit history and employment
    > >history. I know who you are and I know most everything about you. If you
    > >don't leave me alone your friends, boss, neighbours, family and creditors
    > >all learn exactly who and what Richard Elliot Lask is all about,

    *including
    > >the botched sex-change*. Moreover, all the whistle blower lines in my

    area
    > >have been allerted to you and will report you to the police the minute

    you
    > >call. You don't want to end up in a *men's* prison do you Dick?
    > >Screw with me again and I'll **** you over so bad you'll wish I hadn't

    been
    > >stopped at the border last fall!
    > >AND... in case you think I can't or won't do it... go talk to your

    fuckwit
    > >buddy Lacey Lee ....

    >
    >
    > >Lacey Leigh, author of the book, "The Emancipated Crossdresser" , said to

    Laura Blake:
    >

    http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=&OE=UT
    F-8&output=gplain
    > >YOU OUTED ME, by
    > >crossposting my HOME ADDRESS, personal, and business telephone numbers
    > >to multiple newsgroups, including those populated by associates within
    > >one of my professional specialties in an attempt to smear, defame, and
    > >harm me among my contemporaries, peers, and colleagues EVEN THOUGH YOU
    > >HAVE ALSO POSTED THAT EMOTIONAL OR PHYSICAL HARM COULD RESULT. And
    > >that's the TRUTH.

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 4, 2003
    #13
  14. I say we hunt down all the Mother F**kers in this world that *think* a
    crime has been committed i.e. copyright infringement and beat their asses,
    THEN that WOULD be a crime! Let's start with VWoA!

    Case dismissed? Hell was there even a *case* to begin with?

    Happy 4th Mother F**kers!


    "Chris Taylor Jr" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well I have to say this is the first decent use of an otherwise

    dispickable
    > and horrendous law.
    >
    > the DMCA it is very unforgiving to copyright violators.
    >
    > and I am very unforgiving to trolls.
    >
    > Chris Taylor
    > http://www.nerys.com/
    >
    > "L D Blake" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Off topic in any of these groups but what the heck...
    > >
    > >
    > > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 02:29:42 GMT, (Oldbie) wrote:
    > >
    > > >"Chris Taylor Jr" <> wrote:
    > > >>this IS illegal and it is NOT protected under free speech.
    > > >
    > > >How's it work outside the USA?

    > >
    > > Well, that's actually a lot tougher question than you might think...
    > >
    > > Just about anywhere you go you're going to get tagged for yelling "Fire"

    > when
    > > there isn't one. Similarly you are crossing the line when you lie about

    > the
    > > important stuff; you don't get to tell a courtroom someone did it when

    you
    > > know they didn't. There is pretty much a world wide consensus on

    outright
    > > dishonesty and public mischief. You are expected to tell the truth when

    > the
    > > truth matters and you are under onus not to cause panic for no good

    > reason.
    > >

    >
    >
    >
    Southern Justice, Jul 5, 2003
    #14
  15. On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:00:09 -0400, L D Blake <>
    ran around screaming and yelling:

    > Her most recent victim was warned, by
    >several regulars on this group, not to play the troll's game with her but went
    >ahead and did it anyway. His justification for the trouble he's now in was
    >that using kill files and ignoring a troublemaker actually violated the
    >troll's freedom of speech. In fact, he brought the whole mess down on
    >himself... an act of pure self-sabotage not uncommon in the transcommunity.
    Joey Tribiani, Jul 5, 2003
    #15
  16. Diane

    Happy Hermit Guest

    Will someone please tell me what this conversation has to do with computers?
    Happy Hermit, Jul 5, 2003
    #16
  17. On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 05:46:12 GMT, "Happy Hermit"
    <> ran around screaming and yelling:

    >Will someone please tell me what this conversation has to do with computers?

    about as much as it has to do with aircooled volkswagens....
    Joey Tribiani, Jul 5, 2003
    #17
  18. Diane

    Robert Baer Guest

    L D Blake wrote:
    >
    > Off topic in any of these groups but what the heck...

    ************* parts SNIPped for brevity *******************
    > One recent example, and the one you're probably responding to, is the business
    > of wilfully "Outing" one of the people who came to this newsgroup
    > (alt.support.crossdressing) for a little help and companionship. It's being
    > done by someone who's been causing trouble here for years. Lask is a major
    > head case, a transsexual who hates transgendered people... she's been openly
    > pulling this kind of crap for more than 5 years and is getting more ambitious
    > about it with every passing week. Her most recent victim was warned, by
    > several regulars on this group, not to play the troll's game with her but went
    > ahead and did it anyway. His justification for the trouble he's now in was
    > that using kill files and ignoring a troublemaker actually violated the
    > troll's freedom of speech.


    I suggest that you file in the highest courts possible, and arrange
    for warrants of arrest the moment Lask enters Canada.
    It would be up to the border patrol to nab Lask.
    Also look into the possibility of international cooperation so that
    Lask is dragged into Canada.
    In the US, this is done between the states if the charges are severe
    enough, so there may be precidents tat could be used.
    Sorry, i forget the legal terminology.
    Robert Baer, Jul 5, 2003
    #18
  19. Sounds to me like I put the beating on diane.

    when was his last post here ?

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Joey Tribiani" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:00:09 -0400, L D Blake <>
    > ran around screaming and yelling:
    >
    > > Her most recent victim was warned, by
    > >several regulars on this group, not to play the troll's game with her but

    went
    > >ahead and did it anyway. His justification for the trouble he's now in

    was
    > >that using kill files and ignoring a troublemaker actually violated the
    > >troll's freedom of speech. In fact, he brought the whole mess down on
    > >himself... an act of pure self-sabotage not uncommon in the

    transcommunity.
    >
    Chris Taylor Jr, Jul 5, 2003
    #19
  20. Diane

    L D Blake Guest

    On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 09:55:11 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr" <> wrote:

    >Sounds to me like I put the beating on diane.
    >
    >when was his last post here ?


    Under her real name... several days ago.
    Under any one of a dozen aliases... a few minutes ago.

    Take my word for it Chris... you do NOT know what you are dealing with here
    and you will regret the day you tangled with Lask.


    ---

    Laura
    L D Blake, Jul 5, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Loane Sharp

    limited functionality coming out of standby

    Loane Sharp, Jan 2, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    437
    Loane Sharp
    Jan 2, 2006
  2. Nicole Kidman
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    5,939
    Nicole Kidman
    Jul 9, 2005
  3. sophia mahoney

    RE: I HAVE NO SOUND COMING OUT TO MY COMPUTER

    sophia mahoney, Sep 15, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,514
    Barry OGrady
    Sep 16, 2005
  4. Patrick L.

    Sony coming out with 8 megpixel for $1200?

    Patrick L., Nov 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    600
    zbzbzb
    Dec 2, 2003
  5. John Doe
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    581
    George Preddy
    Dec 31, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page