Anna Perenna EXPOSED!!!! Worthless 25 year old *****.

[phreakwars]

I say enough with picking on Anna already, she has more then proven her worth not only as an excellent debater, but an artist in linguistic expression and flame. She gets enough **** tossed at her on Off Topic Forum, only over there, they get obsessively nasty, like I have noticed has been going on again as of recent.

.

.

 

[builder]

I say enough with picking on Anna already, she has more then proven her worth not only as an excellent debater, but an artist in linguistic expression and flame. She gets enough **** tossed at her on Off Topic Forum, only over there, they get obsessively nasty, like I have noticed has been going on again as of recent.
.

.

Yeah, back off CES. She can't post while she's laughing her head off at your fixation issues.

 

[Pinky]

PRIVACY, ends at your front door.

You are profoundly and densely stupid. So stupid that my head hurts just trying to comprehend the sheer ignorance and stupidity of what you've just posted.

PRIVACY ends at your front door?

Seriously, are you aware that all Western democracies have privacy laws? Furthermore, are you aware of the fact that many of these laws extend beyond the confines of your home... beyond you front door, as it were? For example, do you think that you have no legal recourse if a fat, naked man runs up to your children and takes a picture of them at a public pool? By your logic, no, since you forfeited your right to privacy once you left your home. In reality, of course you can take legal action. In Canada, it's an indictable offence under the Criminal Code (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ ), and unless you live in some third world country, it'll be illegal in your jurisdiction too. Ever heard of a photographer's release form? People can't just walk up to you in public, take your picture, then post it in the media without obtaining your consent. If they do so, they open themselves up to any number of lawsuits.

Of course, you must be right that the internet is a free-for-all zone of privacy infringement, right? Wrong again, you fukking ignoramus. In the European Union, it's illegal to publish "embarrassing pictures of people without their consent" (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/27/eu_internet_privacy_laws_tightened/ )...

...oh, but what about privacy laws in the United States? A cursory Google search reveals that indeed, if you violate someone's privacy in an inflammatory fashion, you can be held responsible for defamation by the affected individual and sued accordingly. Additionally, all sorts of private information is protected on the internet (SIN#, financial information etc.).

So next time you want to make retarded statements like "privacy... it ends at your front door", why don't you think long and hard about it, and STFU to spare the rest of us from your blinding idiocy.

 

[Lethalfind]

Pinky, you literally have no idea about privacy if you think you can really expect privacy over the internet, your smokin crack.

Maybe just young and stupid.

Point of advice, never say or do anything you wouldn't do in a crowded room, on the internet, pure and simple.

If she really thinks someone is stalking her, please have her contact the police and they will laugh her out the door.

*** I hate histrionic people...

 

[Pinky]

Pinky, you literally have no idea about privacy if you think you can really expect privacy over the internet, your smokin crack.Maybe just young and stupid.

Point of advice, never say or do anything you wouldn't do in a crowded room, pure and simple.

If she really thinks someone is stalking her, please have her contact the police and they will laugh her out the door.

*** I hate histrionic people...

What part of of "there IS such a thing as internet privacy laws" failed to permeate your thick skull?

Please show me evidence that you can divulge any type of someone else's personal information on the internet with total freedom from legal reprecussion. When, and only when, you've done that will I consider anything you say with regards to issues of internet privacy worthy of merit.

Or, perhaps you agree with CES that not only on the internet but also in real life, privacy ends at the front door of your home.

***, I hate dense people.

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Pinky,

You are so young and so stupid, yet so self absorbed, it's truly painful to have to even read your dribble.

Reality and the law are two very different things, and if you ever spend a moment in a court of law worth a grain of salt, you will learn this.

When you post any picture to which you have ownership onto the internet, into a non-regulated web space, it becomes the public domain.

Simply linking to an existing website is just that, a simple link to something in the public domain. Get over yourself.

No, in fact

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I say enough with picking on Anna already, she has more then proven her worth not only as an excellent debater, but an artist in linguistic expression and flame. She gets enough **** tossed at her on Off Topic Forum, only over there, they get obsessively nasty, like I have noticed has been going on again as of recent.
.

.

**** You Phreak! If the ***** can dish it out, she can take it.

But then again, you can be just like builder and AIG and have internet oral *** with the ***** and become her protector. LMAO.

You do love to stir the shitpot don't you?

 

[Pinky]

<snip>

Your post reeks of someone whose argument was destroyed, and while I don't expect you to admit it, we both know it.

Beyond this, you have FURTHER demonstrated that you a complete ignoramus (I didn't think that was possible, but the power of human stupidity never ceases to amaze me).

By your logic, once something is posted on the internet on a "non-regulated server", it becomes public domain... wrong again, Einstein. Do you think that corporate trademarks become public domain once they grace the internet? Can I go use the McDonalds logo for my store because I saw it on a website and hey, everything on the internet is public domain. No. What about photographs? In most countries, authorship remains with the photographer. A photographer/artist doesn't automatically forfeit their rights to a work just because they post it on the internet, dumbass. "Fair use" often ends up as an excuse for copyright/artistic infringement, and just as often gets a judicial smackdown.

Your uninspired rebuttal to the "privacy ending at the front door comment" is blatent backtracking. You made an incredibly stupid comment. Why don't you just own up to it? In a 'practical sense of the concept', you could have your throat slashed by a psychotic maniac the second you walk out the door. Does this mean that "hey, if you have your throat slashed the second you leave your home, tough luck"? Only a clinical ****** would agree with that assessment. And are you saying that you wouldn't mind if you were pursued by the paparazzi 24/7?

"Dumb kid" Wow, I'm truly in awe of your complex, scathing and cunningly brilliant insult. How ever did you know I was in that demographic??? I tremble in fear of your vastly superior intellect... of course, I shouldn't be suprised, since you're the mastermind that came up with "Worthless 25 year old *****".

Get a life.

 

[phreakwars]

And to think he even idiot boxed pinky for merely stating his free opinion, for shame C.E.S.

I released him, that was unwarranted.

.

.

 

[Pinky]

And to think he even idiot boxed pinky for merely stating his free opinion, for shame C.E.S.

I released him, that was unwarranted.

.

.

Thanks.

Clearly, CES doesn't like having people point out when he says something proufoundly retarded.

 

[Lethalfind]

I'm starting to feel like I need to find a forum that gives an IQ test and asks for minimum age because I hate babysitting pre-pubescents...

What a waste of time, at least AIG is interesting...

posted by CES

"But then again, you can be just like builder and AIG and have internet oral *** with the ***** and become her protector. LMAO."

that brings up an interesting question,

Are you really worthy of having a computer at all if you need someone to be your protector??

I say not.

Its like at daycare centers, they divide the children by age, so they won't get hurt. I think Anna and Pinky are playing in the wrong age group and I don't mean just chronological age. If you need someone to stand up for you, fight your so called battles (lolol) then you need to go back to the kindergarten group.

 

[Lethalfind]

"Originally Posted by Anna Perenna

Anna Perenna - From what I can gather, Anna is a very bored, mysterious human/cyborg who remains deliberately ambiguous in regards to revealing a specific age & gender, in order to maintain a semblance of an enigmatic air. But what is his/her purpose here? Simply to stir the pot? Or is it more complex than that? Obviously Anna is highly irritable and confrontational, yet, he/she cannot resist the lure of some of the more serious topics. Hmmm. Whatever. I simply cannot stand that pugnacious little prolix! In fact, I hate Anna with a passion, and you should too."

"pugnacious little prolix"

We have learned something else about Anna, she loves to use fancy words.

Prolix is an adjective, meaning unduly prolonged or drawn out:

too long, marked by or using an excess of words

 

[Lethalfind]

I reject this argument. When someone posts their picture on the internet, they usually do so with the assumption that it'll only be viewed by their friends/family/trusted contacts... or at the least, by neutral and psychologically-balanced strangers.
Strictly speaking, you're correct that once your picture graces the internet, your reasonable expectation of privacy plummets. Nonetheless, it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to be annoyed with the asshats both here and on Off Topic Forum who tracked down her personal information and spewed it all over the place. Why? Because I strongly doubt she posted her information with the intent of having jealous, foaming-at-the-mouth nutcases on debate forums posting it all over the place. I mean, if you put a picture of your kids on the web, and an insane *** offender gets ahold of said picture and jacks off to it for 6 hours a day (I'm looking at you, OCP), does that mean you're not allowed to be mortified since "hey... you posted it on the internet, no expectation of privacy"? Of course not.

PINKY, how old are you?? I need to know so I can make sure I collect enough money for babysitting you when your Mom comes by.

IN FACT those pictures were posted in a totally public way, no password entry nothing. She is an ignorant ***** as are you if you really believe that only the nice people can view your pictures if you post them on the internet. There is no box to check off saying your one of the nice guys when you ask to view a Yahoo profile. Be serious.

Phreak pulled my picture off my Yahoo profile not a week ago and put it on here. I had just been too laxy to do so, didn't bother me at all. If I didn't want someone to see it, I WOULD NEVER HAVE PUT IT ON MY YAHOO PROFILE !!

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Your post reeks of someone whose argument was destroyed, and while I don't expect you to admit it, we both know it.

The day you can put 3 or more words together and make a coherent thought appear is the day that pigs fly. The only thing you are capable of destroying around here, is yourself. But then again, nobody really takes seriously any post by somebody named "Pinky". LMAO.

Beyond this, you have FURTHER demonstrated that you a complete ignoramus (I didn't think that was possible, but the power of human stupidity never ceases to amaze me).

Nothing funnier than a 19 year old calling anybody let alone myself, an ignoramus. You wouldn't recognize intelligence if it jumped up and bit you in your pimply pubescent ***.

By your logic, once something is posted on the internet on a "non-regulated server", it becomes public domain... wrong again, Einstein. Do you think that corporate trademarks become public domain once they grace the internet? Can I go use the McDonalds logo for my store because I saw it on a website and hey, everything on the internet is public domain. No. What about photographs? In most countries, authorship remains with the photographer. A photographer/artist doesn't automatically forfeit their rights to a work just because they post it on the internet, dumbass. "Fair use" often ends up as an excuse for copyright/artistic infringement, and just as often gets a judicial smackdown.

What a pathetically non-sequitur argument. Trademarks, by their very definition are registered property. Anna's skanky photo on a Yahoo website is not. Unless a photograph contains a copyright notice and has the copyright embedded within the photo image itself, it is in the public domain. This is fact; go look it up mindless one.

Fair use, IN THIS COUNTRY, is clearly define in U.S. Code Title 17, which I told you earlier, but you of course, just ignore the facts. Typical and truly expected for your age.

Your uninspired rebuttal to the "privacy ending at the front door comment" is blatent backtracking. You made an incredibly stupid comment. Why don't you just own up to it? In a 'practical sense of the concept', you could have your throat slashed by a psychotic maniac the second you walk out the door. Does this mean that "hey, if you have your throat slashed the second you leave your home, tough luck"? Only a clinical ****** would agree with that assessment. And are you saying that you wouldn't mind if you were pursued by the paparazzi 24/7?

Did you mean

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

And to think he even idiot boxed pinky for merely stating his free opinion, for shame C.E.S.

I released him, that was unwarranted.

.

.

You bet, I boxed him, and I did it again.

He can state his free opinion all he wants from the Idiot Box.

 

[berniec]

The day you can put 3 or more words together and make a coherent thought appear is the day that pigs fly. The only thing you are capable of destroying around here, is yourself. But then again, nobody really takes seriously any post by somebody named "Pinky". LMAO.


Nothing funnier than a 19 year old calling anybody let alone myself, an ignoramus. You wouldn't recognize intelligence if it jumped up and bit you in your pimply pubescent ***.

What a pathetically non-sequitur argument. Trademarks, by their very definition are registered property. Anna's skanky photo on a Yahoo website is not. Unless a photograph contains a copyright notice and has the copyright embedded within the photo image itself, it is in the public domain. This is fact; go look it up mindless one.

Fair use, IN THIS COUNTRY, is clearly define in U.S. Code Title 17, which I told you earlier, but you of course, just ignore the facts. Typical and truly expected for your age.

Did you mean

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Thank you.

Oh, I'm sure ***** Boy will have some snappy comeback as all 19 year olds do.

I'm sure everyone here is waiting on bated breath to hear from the current village idiot. Afterall, he is about as interesting as a lintball stuck in your navel.

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

And Anna you naughty girl/boy/the jury is still out on this one...

I just noticed that you took down your Yahoo and geocities websites.

Ah, too bad.

Luckily I saved the picture for everybody!

View attachment 650

So, we're fairly sure that you're a preoperative transsexual, although we still cannot figure out from what to what...

Do tell...Enquiring minds want to know.

 

[Lethalfind]

<----------------------waiting with baited breath...

 

[builder]

Can you feel the love in this thread?

It's palpable.

Obsessions on the web are such an amusing trend.