THE BOARD IS BEING PURGED
MODS EXPLAIN
/go/ - Golden Oaks
Thread Repository
File (): 98EF3F20A266D290AF0A0F97979BA838-263926.gif (257.7 KB, 220x164, 13948139521.gif)
>>560
Is this going to be a daily affair because it seems to be helping the poster get what he/she/it wants.
Is this going to be a daily affair because it seems to be helping the poster get what he/she/it wants.
>>18076
No tune this time. If we are going to have a purge out at least we could have some background music.
No tune this time. If we are going to have a purge out at least we could have some background music.
File (): C738A75FBF87D8D7BB21333C401E4326-102389.jpg (100.0 KB, 800x519, xc2010-03-3-11-000.jpg)
>>563
Wichita is taking credit for this. You still have his IP. Can you contact his service provider. Also can you unban me?
Wichita is taking credit for this. You still have his IP. Can you contact his service provider. Also can you unban me?
>>577
It's not happening. What are you even going to do with the information? Get his mom to take his GBP for being an internet tryhard?
It's not happening. What are you even going to do with the information? Get his mom to take his GBP for being an internet tryhard?
File (): C9512215C8AA3B7E915F10C65BFDBBEA-1147687.png (1.1 MB, 5726x7331, 654345654.png)
I was going to leave the weebs alone too. Fat fucking chance of that happening now.
Okay, looking at the laws of Kansas (mods, confirm this for us) harassment is a plausible criminal legal charge against Wichita
“Harassment,” under the stalking statute, means a knowing and intentional course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose. K.S.A. 21–3438(d)(2).
State v. Whitesell, 270 Kan. 259, 259, 13 P.3d 887, 894 (2000)
mlpol isn't technically a person, but there are multiple people on this board so it's really harassment with multiple targets. I haven't seen any internet harassment based prosecutions in the case law but I bet a creative prosecutor can extend telephone and texting based harassment to the image board context
“Harassment,” under the stalking statute, means a knowing and intentional course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose. K.S.A. 21–3438(d)(2).
State v. Whitesell, 270 Kan. 259, 259, 13 P.3d 887, 894 (2000)
mlpol isn't technically a person, but there are multiple people on this board so it's really harassment with multiple targets. I haven't seen any internet harassment based prosecutions in the case law but I bet a creative prosecutor can extend telephone and texting based harassment to the image board context
>>582
Don't forget abuse of terms of service. Basically you can take anyone to court for repeat rule breaking.
Don't forget abuse of terms of service. Basically you can take anyone to court for repeat rule breaking.
>>583
Yes and no. 99% of TOS agreements are unenforceable which is why they all have arbitration clauses
Yes and no. 99% of TOS agreements are unenforceable which is why they all have arbitration clauses
>>581
Nah, m8. Conserve your energy to post here instead.
I used to shitpost there out of habit, even before the merge, but then I realized every shitpost I did there could've been a quality post here.
We need to build-up board traffic.
Nah, m8. Conserve your energy to post here instead.
I used to shitpost there out of habit, even before the merge, but then I realized every shitpost I did there could've been a quality post here.
We need to build-up board traffic.
>>582
Incorporate and you have corporate person hood and that statute is enforceable, if any one even bothers to enforce it.
Incorporate and you have corporate person hood and that statute is enforceable, if any one even bothers to enforce it.
Again!
I couldn't figure out what had happened - this explains it.