What's a name for

[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:Me]

I was threatened with legal action on here once, stranger things have happened.
It was laughable really.
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 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.

[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:Me]

(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 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?

[Maha]

Explains the whole situation perfectly.