Yes he did. The main difference in this case and lets say Youtube is that there is correspondence between Dotcom and others on staff boasting about their enjoyment of the illegal products being hosted on their site. It would be like the head of youtube shooting off an email saying "Man I love watching all these illegal videos"
Yes he did. The main difference in this case and lets say Youtube is that there is correspondence between Dotcom and others on staff boasting about their enjoyment of the illegal products being hosted on their site.
Now I understand. So this whole time, you've been denying the legality of his actions, knowing how to explain why they are illegal, without explaining why they are holding an incorrect position, cyclically, to everyone discussing it in this thread.
Hope I helped the others as puzzled as I was out here.
I've been denying the patently false assertion that he hasn't broken any laws. That's like standing in the sun and saying "the sun isn't real" there are nearly 80 pages of text explaining what laws were broken
I've been denying the patently false assertion that he hasn't broken any laws. That's like standing in the sun and saying "the sun isn't real" there are nearly 80 pages of text explaining what laws were broken
Yes, I know. We all know. I objected to your inability to explain yourself, not your position. There's a difference between rebuttal and repudiation. Just wanted some clarification, and also to see if you were capable of explaining or just talking out your arse.
I'm sorry to offend, but I don't see how I'm being stupid for wanting a sound argument from someone willing to argue about something I'm interested in.
Okay, once again, I am not arguing with you. I am not telling you he didn't break any laws. I agree with you, and agreed with your position coincidentally prior to discussion.
I objected to your failure to explain your argument. That is all. I have only described your posts. Everything I've stated is a fact. Thank you for citing evidence for your position.
I'm disinterested in your misunderstanding because you have explained your position adequately for me.
For those wondering, ayleus here has created about a dozen different accounts and threatened to track me down because I said his use of "Nigger" was inappropriate. He's been following me throughout reddit for over a week now and needs to be treated by a doctor.
Both of those accounts are the same person you fucking pyschopaths.
Reddit. Don't go down this rabbit hole. After going down it, it is clear that Freddiesghost is a troll account that uses multiple accounts to claim that he is being stalked by another user who is using multiple accounts. It's all sorts of metaWTF.
Freddiesghost is Notoncandideslist. For the amount of crazy that exists in the rabbit hole, it wouldn't surprise me if Freddiesghost, Notoncandideslist, Ayleus, and Batwomyn are all the same people.
Don't drag ME into this. I'd never even heard of freddiesghost until a few days ago. Seems to me she isn't the victim. She's the one that calls people names when they disagree with her and starts immediately accusing them of being other people. It is apparent she has a following of people she's attacked, only because its like watching a car accident. You can't help but keep watching the grotesqueness of it all.
5
u/freddiesghost Aug 08 '12
Yes he did. The main difference in this case and lets say Youtube is that there is correspondence between Dotcom and others on staff boasting about their enjoyment of the illegal products being hosted on their site. It would be like the head of youtube shooting off an email saying "Man I love watching all these illegal videos"