[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Humor Title: Be a man, try running Liberty Post >> TooConservative-- Before you just shut it down, have you done any tally of results? Just eyeballing it, it looks like tpaine is probably above 60%.
>> Sneakypete---- Seems to ME that if TPaine is serious he would quit being a wuss and stand up like a man and say he will accept a 51 percent vote tally by regular posters as a victory and step up to the plate.
----It isn't me that would have to be a man and take all the bullshit... It would be the moderator. And my choice for mod would have been TooConservative, or Sneakypete, or even better, both of you. ----Tell you what, if you two take over mod/tech functions, I'd be willing to put up the money for the first year as the 'owner', and take responsibly for any legal problems we might encounter. >> After all,he has never pretended to be anything other than a Libertarian with a "Big L",and since when have Bil L Libertarians ever demanded a 75 percent vote for anything? -----I've never belonged to the big 'L' party. I consider myself a constitutional libertarian, who votes (mostly) republican. >> In MY mind,if he doesn't man up and and accept ownership if he gets the majority of the votes,he was never serious about it to start with. ---I'll call your bluff. Put up (joining me, as above) or shut up about man-ing up. >> I personally hope this isn't the case because I think all political discussion boards need Big L Libertarian owners/moderators. Anyone else and they just turn into partisan party arms preaching the party line with no dissent allowed. Without dissent there is no discussion. ---Here's your chance to put your man-ing up with your mouth. How bout it? Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Comments (1-100) not displayed.
Thanks Chan. Good synopsis, but I'd bet that it flies right over the heads of many here..
#102. To: nolu chan, tpaine, Willie Green (#99) They were no longer "empowered" by Goldi to do anything. You know none of this as fact, unless of course you had been named in Goldi's will or are the next of kin. Why are you specualting? IMO shutting down LP was the most righteous thing to do and the best tribute to Goldi, unless of course you have a Goldi clone waiting in the wings - and even then that would not be sufficient to maintain Goldi's memory.
#103. To: SOSO (#102) IMO shutting down LP was the most righteous thing to do and the best tribute to Goldi You don't know anything.
#104. To: tpaine (#98) You need rest. Did you lift that from my post today about Clarity, the lawyer who lost TOS's case with WaPo/LAT? I recounted how he used to say that and what an annoying prick that disbarred shylock really was.
#105. To: Fred Mertz (#103) IMO shutting down LP was the most righteous thing to do and the best tribute to Goldi Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize just how active a poster you were on LP in recent times. I guessed I missed that memo. For that matter you don't seem to much of a poster of news article on LF either, but that's for another discussion. But I am all ears, pray tell what you believe would have been the best disposition on LP on Goldi's demise, especially when apparently she left no instructions or even expressed a preference (unless she did ti sysadmin and Neil at some time). BTW, it's you don't know nothin'.
#106. To: SOSO (#102) You know none of this as fact, unless of course you had been named in Goldi's will or are the next of kin. Unless Goldi was NOT the owner when she died, I know as FACT that sysadmin and Neil acted without authority. It is impossible that they had authority. I'm more than willing to hear how it is possible.
#107. To: SOSO (#102) You know none of this as fact, unless of course you had been named in Goldi's will or are the next of kin. If sysadmin told us the truth about Goldi having no will, then nolu is correct. You need to read up on fiduciary laws. They protect estates from misappropriation of all kinds.
#108. To: SOSO, Deckard, Hondo68, Pericles (#105) (Edited) I didn't realize just how active a poster you were on LP in recent times. I guessed I missed that memo. nolu's history at LP is well-known. It is you who hides behind a mask here, afraid to reveal yourself because, obviously, you know you made yourself hated at LP. It is the only reason anyone would hide their LP identity. Deckard is IW, Hondo was Booshbot, Pericles was Destro/Godwinson. They aren't hiding anything. But you are. Because you know what our reaction is to your psychopathic personality. But you claim to have nothing to hide while stalking others and trying to pretend that they are the ones hiding something. Come out from under your bridge into the light. Reveal thyself, troll.
#109. To: nolu chan (#106) It is impossible that they had authority. Why? "I'm more than willing to hear how it is possible. " Yours is the claim that needs to be proven. I made no claim. But I will give you the courtesy of citing that there readily could have been private communications to one or both of them wherein Goldi expressed her wishes. I am certain that this has some legal weight. Besides IMO this would be an infinitely more preferable disposition of LP than leaving it to the state to decide. Chances are the state would not even known of LP's existence as part of Goldi's estate. Further, someone would need to have paid the bills before all would have been lost on defualt or non-payment. Who do you think would have foreclosed on LPs assets? Would that have been a more fitting tribute to Goldi's memory?
#110. To: TooConservative, willy, Y'ALL (#104) Did you lift that from my post today about Clarity, the lawyer who lost TOS's case with WaPo/LAT? In context: ----
Willy: --- I'd rather see Obama get a 3rd term.
I'll be charitable. You need rest.... _______________________________________ You got it, -- your post today reminded me of his great line. I agree Clarity was a real prick, but he did have a way with words.
#111. To: TooConservative, Deckard, Hondo68, Pericles (#108) nolu's history at LP is well-known. Yo, witless, post #105 was to Fred Mertz, not Nolu. Your dementia is showing. Perhaps you should relax your panties. "It is the only reason anyone would hide their LP identity. Now you are Carnac the Magnificent. My identity is already well know to many posters on LF. In case you missed the memo, witless:
#112. To: nolu chan (#106) Unless Goldi was NOT the owner when she died, I know as FACT that sysadmin and Neil acted without authority. It is impossible that they had authority. So WTF are you going to do about it? drama queen? Let it rest.
#113. To: Fred Mertz, Y'ALL (#112) nolu chan (#106) --- Unless Goldi was NOT the owner when she died, I know as FACT that sysadmin and Neil acted without authority. It is impossible that they had authority. Fred, what in the hell is going on with you? Why are you attacking Chan about the legal facts he's posting? -- Facts that imho, need to be understood by everyone that watched the little drama put on by the sysadmin at LP... Chill, man.. You may need rest.
#114. To: Fred Mertz (#112) The drama queens were singing a different song when they thought they could seize LP through a vote.
#115. To: SOSO (#111) From the photo....Thank you for telling us you have 5 identities:) But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12) #116. To: SOSO, Spartacus, nolu chan, Hondo68 (#111) Your dementia is showing. Perhaps you should relax your panties. Your true colors are starting to show. Nice cheap shots at every woman posting here at LF. Psychopaths with deep-seated inferiority complexes always follow this pattern. Maybe you should tell us about your mother sometime. That would be entertaining.
My identity is already well know to many posters on LF. Oh? Then you can name these posters who know your LP identity other than LF's newly registered Spartacus (but who is not LP's Spartacus who got banned from LP a decade ago and stopped posting to any of the P forums). And you and this newly-minted Spartacus just happened to register in tandem here at LF at the same time? It's almost like you were coordinating your actions via email or phone. Are you sure you don't want to post a "LOLAYDA" or two? C'mon, I know it's eating you up. Just let it out. Open your little beak and sing, Canary.
#117. To: redleghunter (#115) 5 identities Unless it's just the Sterno talking, I see 6. : )
#118. To: TooConservative, Spartacus, nolu chan, Hondo68 (#116) Nice cheap shots at every woman posting here at LF. Oh, sorry, I thought that you were a little girl.
#119. To: tpaine (#110) I agree Clarity was a real prick, but he did have a way with words. That and stealing from the $600,000 settlement from his client which got him disbarred, exactly as nolu said. But nolu does have access to legal info the rest of us don't.
#120. To: redleghunter (#115) From the photo....Thank you for telling us you have 5 identities:) You read too much into things. Just not enough width in the lens.
#121. To: SOSO, Palmdale, Spartacus, Hondo68 (#118) My identity is already well know to many posters on LF. Then name them, other than Palmdale and You keep saying this. Now tell us who these others are. Or admit that you're lying.
#122. To: TooConservative, Palmdale, Spartacus, Hondo68 (#121) Man, you really are in need of a blow job more than any white man in history. You will just have to live with the mystery, witless. But I am flattered that you care so much. Perhaps when you get out of the witless protection program all may be revealed. Until then, Caio, baby!
#123. To: TooConservative (#121) Please leave me out of your squabble.
#124. To: Palmdale, TooConservative (#123) Please leave me out of your squabble. Geez, I wish he'd do the same for me.
#125. To: TooConservative, Y'ALL (#119) --- nolu does have access to legal info the rest of us don't. Yep, and I'm glad he's presenting it in a calm, reasonable manner. -- That's why I'm completely baffled by the animosity being directed at him. Maybe it's just cocktail time posturing?
#126. To: TooConservative (#121) Or admit that you're lying. That aint gonna happen. “Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.” #127. To: TooConservative (#116) Your dementia is showing. Perhaps you should relax your panties. Your true colors are starting to show. Nice cheap shots at every woman posting here at LF. Psychopaths with deep-seated inferiority complexes always follow this pattern. I like you dude. But to be honest you have been badgering him since his first post. Or close to it. So if anyone came in here and read the conversations from the beginning. They would agree. It seems like anything he said is a reaction. I don't give a crap who he was at LP. I don't care if you two were enemies at LP. This is a different place.
#128. To: TooConservative (#121) There are a number of people here making intelligent rational points, and there are a few who are dishonest and unpleasant. It feels just like Liberty Post, complete with its own canary cage in the far left corner.
#129. To: A K A Stone, TooConservative (#127) I don't give a crap who he was at LP. I don't care if you two were enemies at LP. This is a different place. Thank you. I have grown tired of pulling the wings off of this flea. He is displaying a side of himself that was not evident on LP, at least the obessive aspect of it. This really has taken me by surprise. I didn't think that we were enemies on LP. But even if I had, this is LF not LP.
#130. To: Dead Culture Watch (#128) complete with its own canary cage What is this persistent reference to canary cage and canaries? Obviously I missed the memo.
#131. To: SOSO (#130) (Edited) Maybe you should discuss EXACTLY how nolu chan was incorrect in his legal discussion on the matter of LP. Let's see what you got.
#132. To: SOSO (#129)
#133. To: Nexus6 (#132) Hmmm, werent you the one saying you may not stay if things went a certain way?
#134. To: Dead Culture Watch (#133)
#135. To: A K A Stone (#127) Forgot to mention this earlier. Maybe a friendly reminder to new folks that LF has a user homepage. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12) #136. To: SOSO (#111) (Edited) ![]() You wuz Spartacus The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party![]() #137. To: A K A Stone, all (#127) (Edited) SOSO posted --- Your dementia is showing. Perhaps you should relax your panties. You seem to have attributed that remark to TC.. --- And in response you posted: ----
I like you dude. But to be honest you have been badgering him since his first post. Or close to it. ------- So if anyone came in here and read the conversations from the beginning. They would agree. I've read them all, and I can't agree that TC is doing all the badgering. SOSO has been doing his best to badger all of us that are being critical of the way the Sysadmin-LP handled the shut down. Dead Culture Watch just asked the crucial question of SOSO. Odds are he won't get much of an answer.
#138. To: Dead Culture Watch (#131) Maybe you should discuss EXACTLY how nolu chan was incorrect in his legal discussion on the matter of LP. Oh, sorry, I didn't know that you represent him and need to speak for him. Shall I cc you on any further of my correspondence to him? But to address your question, does he have direct personal knowledge of the exchanges between sysadim and/or Neil and/or anyone else on the matter? If he does then he may very well be correct. I didn't see were he claimed that he had. First, I admitted right off that I have no such direct knowledge. Second, I am not a lawyer. Third, and most significantly, he made a claim without offering any evidence that he had personal knowledge of the situtation. He is entirely free to express his opinion, which on legal matters may very likely be more informed than mine. That's what I got. I trust it's enough for you. If not, please take it to the bar, take it to the bar.
#139. To: SOSO (#102)
It is impossible that they had authority. I see you cannot even create a possible scenario where sysadmin and/or Neil acquired any authority to act. A real or imaginary private communication of Goldi's wishes is not a will. It carries zero legal weight. If Goldi died intestate, as stated by sysadmin, the estate goes to the nearest relative, if one can be found. Absent a living relative, the estate goes to the state. There is no exception in the law that gives the estate, or any part thereof, to someone who claims that the decedent made a private communication expressing something or other to sysadmin. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0732/0732.html
732.101 Intestate estate.—
#140. To: Fred Mertz (#112) So WTF are you going to do about it? drama queen? I am going to state the applicable law correctly and let the drama queens get the vapors.
#141. To: tpaine (#137) You seem to have attributed that remark to TC.. --- And in response you posted: ---- No Sir. I know he said that. Which is why I said things he are saying are a reaction. From the first post people have been asking him who he is. Over and over. He doesn't want to tell them. That is fine. If he is some bad dude time will tell. Why not give him the benefit of the doubt and see where it goes. Not you specifically, but in general. If people kept asking me the same question I would get annoyed too. Wouldn't you? As far as the shutdown. I was for keeping it open But nolu chan is correct I believe.
. . . Comments (142 - 263) not displayed. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|