Crimson-Snow: @Anonymous: Have fun mulling over this whole thing and stewing over how much you hate me lol , this is the and I do mean it the very very last time I reply to you.
Anonymous3(1): @Anonymous: So what you’ll just follow him around and call him a pedo and other names constantly? What exactly will you do if he ignores you forever?
@Nymousano: Despite asking for no reply, I have to say that's a real stretch. The legal definition of "cyberstalking" is as follows:
“the use of the Internet, email, or other electronic communications to stalk, and generally refers to a pattern of threatening or malicious behaviors,” involving a “credible threat to harm.”
Seeing as there's no credible threat to harm anything but their image, this would most likely be blown off, they'd prolly have a better libel or defamation case. Buuuuuut, having said that, seeing as they have openly admitted the stance they have, it probably wouldn't turn out in their favor. Even if they don't act on those beliefs, pointing attention to an admitted opinion is not libelous. Their internet history when acquired as evidence prolly wouldn't do them any favors either.
Crimson-Snow: Now since this pic has nothing to do with what you people are trying to cram down my throat please fuck off. This is it for me I wont reply again.
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3U0udLH974
Besides, what you do is stalking and harassing. CS could sue you for this if they wanted to.
Don´t even bother to reply to me, for I will just ignore you. This is a one timer.
@Nymousano: Despite asking for no reply, I have to say that's a real stretch. The legal definition of "cyberstalking" is as follows:
“the use of the Internet, email, or other electronic communications to stalk, and generally refers to a pattern of threatening or malicious behaviors,” involving a “credible threat to harm.”
Seeing as there's no credible threat to harm anything but their image, this would most likely be blown off, they'd prolly have a better libel or defamation case. Buuuuuut, having said that, seeing as they have openly admitted the stance they have, it probably wouldn't turn out in their favor. Even if they don't act on those beliefs, pointing attention to an admitted opinion is not libelous. Their internet history when acquired as evidence prolly wouldn't do them any favors either.
- Reply
- Reply