What's a name for

[Big Dave]

Someone who takes KiwiBiker way too seriously?

[Maha]

That person has katmanismphobia.

Possible cure:...Take two polls...sorry I mean pills and have a nana nap.
If symptoms continue, go fuck yourself, the results are amazing.

[unstuck]

aN EnGliSh tEaCheR.:sick:

[hayd3n]

tomuchnegativerep

[nodrog]

a K Beboian

[Big Dave]

Internet - serious business.
http://homepage.mac.com/david_cohen_design/.public/10pics2/lolcano.gif

[Usarka]

Nigel.


Or, pick one from the list:

http://allpsych.com/disorders/alphaindex.html

[scissorhands]

Hearts may be in the right place, trying to save lives....

Live and let die?

Grammar nazi?

A virgo?

'Panic merchant'?

[scumdog]

aN EnGliSh tEaCheR.:sick:

Mwahaha...I could see that one coming!:yes:

[Big Dave]

Nigel.


Or, pick one from the list:

http://allpsych.com/disorders/alphaindex.html

Frotteurism - Leg humping!!!!

A 'Nigel'. We're always making plans for Nigel.

'The Nigel Response.' 'The Nigel Responded.'


Nigel definitely has legs. Not very repectful to anyone named Nigel though.

[davebullet]

A: Big Dave?

[Big Dave]

Lools - Going all BD on it.

[EJK]

It's fucking serious.

[Big Dave]

It's fucking serious.

You take those lollerskates off in the house young man.

[Banditbandit]

It's fucking serious.

:rofl: You gotta be shitting ...

[onearmedbandit]

Any one of the people who threaten legal action against the site. Or anyone who threatens to take it international.

[Maha]

Any one of the people who threaten legal action against the site. Or anyone who threatens to take it international.

I was threatened with legal action on here once, stranger things have happened.
It was laughable really.:facepalm:
Can just hear the judge now...
''This court find Maha (whats a Maha?) guilty of....well nothing nothing really, its the internet''...

[Big Dave]

WCFP

It's 'a World Cup Face Palm.'

238312

[scumdog]

Anyone who threatens to take it international.

I'm still undergoing therapy due to that threat...:shutup:

[Big Dave]

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LhQGzeiYS_Q?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[gijoe1313]

Anyone who has a nick here on KB? :innocent:

There was those neat site avatars a whiles ago that were appended to various netizens, given by their propensity to engage in various internet devices - bring them back! :msn-wink:

[Big Dave]

Nooooo - they sucked when they ejector buttoned the fink.

[EJK]

Anyone who has a nick here on KB? :innocent:

There was those neat site avatars a whiles ago that were appended to various netizens, given by their propensity to engage in various internet devices - bring them back! :msn-wink:

I remember that! Bring that back!

[bogan]

Nooooo - they sucked when they ejector buttoned the fink.

but you wouldn't take that too seriously of course :shifty:

+1 for bringing them back, they were good value.

What about Shirley, as in, surely you're not serious :bleh:

[Big Dave]

I remember that! Bring that back!

I'll sue yo ass*



* BADGOTNZ thingy alert.

[gijoe1313]

What about Shirley, as in, surely you're not serious :bleh:

Don't call me Shirley - Naked Gun

[Big Dave]

The Flame Warriors. I actually introduced them to the site and think they are great.

But you can prize the fink from my dead pixels. WCFP

[Big Dave]

but you wouldn't take that too seriously of course :shifty:



If any social media bugs you - turn it off for a while.
I've done it more than once.
Real world doesn't change so don't waste valve burnage online.

[EJK]

I'll sue yo ass*



* BADGOTNZ thingy alert.

*Whoosh* That just went right over my head (didn't get the reference).



If any social media bugs you - turn it off for a while.
I've done it more than once.
Real world doesn't change so don't waste valve burnage online.

"Real world doesn't change so don't waste valve burnage online."

I like that quote.

[Big Dave]

We have previously been admonished for using the American Ass rather than the English Arse by those who champion such causes. Their Acronym eludes me.

[bogan]

We have previously been admonished for using the American Ass rather than the English Arse by those who champion such causes. Their Acronym eludes me.

What about asshat then? is it more correct to say arsehat now? just doesn't look right.

Edit: actually that could be an answer for the thread?

[Big Dave]

What about asshat then? is it more correct to say arsehat now? just doesn't look right.

Edit: actually that could be an answer for the thread?

My answer is WCFP!

[ellipsis]

...I have a vague suspicion that some are implying that things posted on here are not totally factual...:gob:

[Grubber]

...I have a vague suspicion that some are implying that things posted on here are not totally factual...:gob:

Thats a lie right there!!!!!

[Big Dave]

...I have a vague suspicion that some are implying that things posted on here are not totally factual...:gob:

That's your opinion. :corn:

[bogan]

My answer is WCFP!

The BDOTGNAZA might have a problem with you using an acronym as a name:innocent: They may also have a problem with everyone getting their acronym wrong :facepalm: was I close?

[EJK]

...I have a vague suspicion that some are implying that things posted on here are not totally factual...:gob:

You doubt our ingenuity?


That's your opinion. :corn:

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vnJnA_mt_UA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Big Dave]

'Judge, Judy and Executioner' - Homer.

[Str8 Jacket]

KB; Home of Egos and Fuckwits galore

[scumdog]

KB; Home of Egos and Fuckwits galore

'cept me and you eh!

[Str8 Jacket]

'cept me and you eh!

No I am a Drongo!

[mashman]

Sour Stooie

[Laava]

but you wouldn't take that too seriously of course :shifty:

+1 for bringing them back, they were good value.

What about Shirley, as in, surely you're not serious :bleh:

Or Arthur? As in, Arfer fucksake!

[scumdog]

Or Arthur? As in, Arfer fucksake!

Or Wooden-eye?

"If I'd seen the cop sooner I'd have slowed down Wooden-eye."

"Don't call me Wooden-eye..plastic nose":blink:

[Big Dave]

Hair lip. Hair lip.

[wysper]

What about asshat then? is it more correct to say arsehat now? just doesn't look right.



I must say that now you have bought it up, and never having thought about it before, I like arsehat. Sounds better than asshat to my mental ears. Arsehat sounds more serious, asshat sounds a little flippant, as if you don't really mean the insult at all.

By the way, this thread is a definite winner!

[Swoop]

The BDOTGNAZA might have a problem with you using an acronym as a name
It seems to work for QANTAS.

[Big Dave]

It seems to work for QANTAS.

ACC don't do a bad job either.
How many times have you heard that!

[The Stranger]

I was threatened with legal action on here once, stranger things have happened.
It was laughable really.:facepalm:
Can just hear the judge now...
''This court find Maha (whats a Maha?) guilty of....well nothing nothing really, its the internet''...

So you can't be sued for defamation because it's the internet?

"To bring a successful defamation action you (the "plaintiff") will need to establish the following elements:

The statement must have been defamatory of you.
The statement must have been communicated to one or more people – in other words, there must have been "publication".
You do not have to prove that you suffered any specific damage or loss, as the law assumes that you have suffered loss if a statement is defamatory of you."

A bit of an education (http://www.howtolaw.co.nz/contents_defamation.asp?location=AK)for you maha.

[Mully]

The statement must have been defamatory of you.


(my bolding)

But here's an issue - what if Maha were to say "[KB Nick] is a [choose your own here]"?

How do you prove that it was defamatory to anybody in particular? I suspect many lawyers would be loathe to take that case on.

Presuming it was defamation he was threatened with, of course.

ON TOPIC: How about KB Warriors?

[Oblivion]

Steve, this is Steve, Steve, and Steve. As of today, You'll be working under Steve. Thats him over there. Give us a wave Steve. (Steve waves). That Steve he's such a joker. :weird:

[PrincessBandit]

Frotteurism - Leg humping!!!!

A 'Nigel'. We're always making plans for Nigel.

'The Nigel Response.' 'The Nigel Responded.'


Nigel definitely has legs. Not very repectful to anyone named Nigel though.

And don't forget Nigel-No-Friends...
as for leg-humping, what's the internet equivalent of the squirter bottle?

[The Stranger]

(my bolding)

But here's an issue - what if Maha were to say "[KB Nick] is a [choose your own here]"?

How do you prove that it was defamatory to anybody in particular? I suspect many lawyers would be loathe to take that case on.

Presuming it was defamation he was threatened with, of course.

ON TOPIC: How about KB Warriors?

You may well be correct.
That said one or more persons may know your nick and thus the judge may well accept that.
The only thing I know for sure in a court is that it's a roll of the dice.

I would venture to think that most any lawyer would take such a case - or do they have a problem accepting money these days.
Would be interesting to hear an opinion from one of the lawyers.

People make threats on KB and have been investigated by the Police. People have come within a whisker of loosing their jobs as a result of comments on KB, insurance has been declined and one person charged with insurance fraud all as a result of comments on KB. So I doubt the veil of anonymity is as great as you would like to think. At a guess.

[Mully]

You may well be correct.
That said one or more persons may know your nick and thus the judge may well accept that.
The only thing I know for sure in a court is that it's a roll of the dice.

I would venture to think that most any lawyer would take such a case - or do they have a problem accepting money these days.
Would be interesting to hear an opinion from one of the lawyers.

People make threats on KB and have been investigated by the Police. People have come within a whisker of loosing their jobs as a result of comments on KB, insurance has been declined and one person charged with insurance fraud all as a result of comments on KB. So I doubt the veil of anonymity is as great as you would like to think. At a guess.

Yeah, that's a good point.

I suppose were someone to talk about a frozen confection retailer in Edgecombe, it'd be pretty obvious to a lot of people....

Still, I'm a ray of fricken sunshine, so I'm unlikely to get sued....

[ellipsis]

So I doubt the veil of anonymity is as great as you would like to think. At a guess.

....its the world wide fucking web aint it...the world wide fucking web police can find a shadow on a defunct hard drive...cant they?...

[Berries]

So you can't be sued for defamation because it's the internet?
As long as you don't give your consent you'll be fine.

I'm sure I read that on here.

[Maha]

So you can't be sued for defamation because it's the internet?

"To bring a successful defamation action you (the "plaintiff") will need to establish the following elements:

The statement must have been defamatory of you.
The statement must have been communicated to one or more people – in other words, there must have been "publication".
You do not have to prove that you suffered any specific damage or loss, as the law assumes that you have suffered loss if a statement is defamatory of you."

A bit of an education (http://www.howtolaw.co.nz/contents_defamation.asp?location=AK)for you maha.

If you really think you have a Defamation case against me then...I invite you to procceed.
But answer this...
WHO was it that first brought the alleged situation to a public forum?

[Str8 Jacket]

KB; It's NOT a club

[Big Dave]

If you really think you have a Defamation case against me then...I invite you to procceed.
But answer this...
WHO was it that first brought the alleged situation to a public forum?

http://homepage.mac.com/david_cohen_design/.public/10pics2/fifa.jpg

[Maha]

Explains the whole situation perfectly.

[The Stranger]

If you really think you have a Defamation case against me then...I invite you to procceed.
But answer this...
WHO was it that first brought the alleged situation to a public forum?

The only reasons I would proceed is to have the offending material removed and/or there had been a consequence i.e. say it had cost me a client (of which I have several on KB).
The material has been removed and there was no measurable consequence.
To proceed further under such circumstance would in my view be frivolous and a waste of time and money.

Though in all honesty you should be careful with your invites. Last time I sued someone it cost me $45k up front in legal fees, but hey it cost them around $200k as near as I can figure (assuming similar legal fees).
Ironically on looking back I suspect that they saw my repeated attempts to both avoid and settle out of court as a sign of weakness or lack of resolve and probably only strenghtened theirs, silly mistake that one.

The difference between Andrew's comment and yours is the intent. I know that intent used to be a key part of defamation, though if I recall correctly this element (the requirement that intent be ill) has now been removed. Regardless of that I still believe that intent is a key element (in my decision making process at least).
For example, frequently disparaging remarks are made in jest. Sometimes disparaging remarks are made out of frustration and sometimes they are made to be vindictive and or with specific intent to defame.
Clearly Andrews remarks were in the former category and yours were in the latter category.

Furthermore, I somehow doubt that a valid defence would be - hey, it's not my fault, I was only repeating an unsubstantiated rumour. If it were then every newspaper in the country would have a valid defence. News flash - they don't, they get sued too.

[Big Dave]

I take back all those things I said about Renegade Master....no....wait....

[Maha]

The only reasons I would proceed is to have the offending material removed and/or there had been a consequence i.e. say it had cost me a client (of which I have several on KB).
The material has been removed and there was no measurable consequence.
To proceed further under such circumstance would in my view be frivolous and a waste of time and money.

Though in all honesty you should be careful with your invites. Last time I sued someone it cost me $45k up front in legal fees, but hey it cost them around $200k as near as I can figure (assuming similar legal fees).
Ironically on looking back I suspect that they saw my repeated attempts to both avoid and settle out of court as a sign of weakness or lack of resolve and probably only strenghtened theirs, silly mistake that one.

The difference between Andrew's comment and yours is the intent. I know that intent used to be a key part of defamation, though if I recall correctly this element (the requirement that intent be ill) has now been removed. Regardless of that I still believe that intent is a key element (in my decision making process at least).
For example, frequently disparaging remarks are made in jest. Sometimes disparaging remarks are made out of frustration and sometimes they are made to be vindictive and or with specific intent to defame.
Clearly Andrews remarks were in the former category and yours were in the latter category.

Furthermore, I somehow doubt that a valid defence would be - hey, it's not my fault, I was only repeating an unsubstantiated rumour. If it were then every newspaper in the country would have a valid defence. News flash - they don't, they get sued too.

Great so thats the end of it.

[Ronin]

So you can't be sued for defamation because it's the internet?

"To bring a successful defamation action you (the "plaintiff") will need to establish the following elements:

The statement must have been defamatory of you.
The statement must have been communicated to one or more people – in other words, there must have been "publication".
You do not have to prove that you suffered any specific damage or loss, as the law assumes that you have suffered loss if a statement is defamatory of you."

A bit of an education (http://www.howtolaw.co.nz/contents_defamation.asp?location=AK)for you maha.

See above for example of taking shite way to seriously.

[The Stranger]

Great so thats the end of it.

Well the end of it was a while back actually (as you will note none of this is new to you) - except you have this odd need to keep slipping in the past at every chance you get. You need to learn to let things go and move on maha.

[Big Dave]

Best thread tags ever.

[Maha]

'odd need to keep slipping in the past at every chance you get'...tis not odd, its a gift.

[marie_speeds]

'odd need to keep slipping in the past at every chance you get'...tis not odd, its a gift.

A bit like shagging an ex because you're friends with benefits....that's a gift and a slip into the past :msn-wink: