no, I can see that - but the way you are acting is very in professional imo so there is that
Sure.
Itâs terrible to think CCP can punish how they see fit because the EULA was broken, even though I donât agree with the actual punishment. Itâs terrible to think that unless you are a lawyer, you shouldnât be offering opinions on the law.
At least you and I share the ability to terribly post I guess.
you must be mentally deficient. all the judge did was something ccp has never had a problem with - run away with everything not nailed down.
he didnât bait gigx into making real life threats and didnât deliberately attempt to get gigx banned. all he had to do was report gigxâ unforced error.
iâm not offering opinions on the law here, chum.
Sure and you are entitled to make that judgement. No problem with that.
Serbia Criminal Code
Endangerment of Safety
Article 138
(1) Whoever endangers the safety of another by threat of attack against the life or body of
such person or a person close to him, shall be punished with fine or imprisonment up to one year.
(2) Whoever commits the offence specified in paragraph 1 of this Article against several
persons or if the offence causes anxiety of citizens or other serious consequences, shall be punished with imprisonment of three months to three years.
Australia Federal Law
CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 31
Documents containing threats
31 DOCUMENTS CONTAINING THREATS
(1) A person who intentionally or recklessly, and knowing its contents, sends or delivers, or directly or indirectly causes to be received, any document threatening to kill or inflict bodily harm on any person is liable to imprisonment for 10 years.
(2) It is immaterial for the purposes of an offence under this section whether or not a document sent or delivered is actually received, and whether or not the threat contained in a document sent, delivered or received is actually communicated to the person concerned or to the recipient or intended recipient of the document (as relevant in the circumstances).
Neither am I matey, so we should be all good. Just both terrible shitposters.
:justpost:
You are quoting a law from 1900 on documents, in relation to the internet. This is so dumb.
It demonstrates exactly the point I have been making. You are not qualified to offer an opinion on whether that law is relevant.
did you know that the age of a law doesnât prevent it from being on the books?
Hey you losers are really terrible. The fact is that the internet is full of idiots and even if he really meant no harm and had no ill-intent, itâs still something that should be taken seriously.
They might just be funny things you say that donât actually happen 99 out of 100 times, but thereâs that one time that it does happen and then everyone is left asking how and why. The truth is that he asked for people in his alliance to get the dudes name and number. Who knows how many sick fucks there are that would take something like this out of game and think they are doing good by Gigx.
Yes, but that doesnât mean it applies to a specific situation. Iâm dropping out of this whole stupid âlaw has been brokenâ discussion.
None of us are qualified to offer anything more than completely valueless statements on that issue.
It, um, âblows my mindâ that you believe thought crime is a thing.
I wonder, how would you enforce this new law of thought crime? If someone thinks a thing but does not articulate it, is that also a crime? If not, have you criminalized speech?
And who will pay to enforce these thought crime laws?
And what shall be the sentence for getting angry and articulating a wish that others find criminal? Given that folks murder each other and are released after a few months because it is cruel and mean to incarcerate folks from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds? Shall we have a full tril and then give them 15 minutes in the pen? Or should we incarcerate white males for life because they should know better and
have racial privilege?
Lookit, in the kindergarten, the young lady in charge speaks to the little children from great height. This is because she is an adult and they are all little kids without mature minds or experience. They are not adult.
In the real world, leaving to one side the nanny state mentality, adults deal with adults.
You can promote the idea that adults should be policed in word as well as deed, but in the end you have to explain who is going to pay for that.
tl;dr this guy thinks heâs better than everyone else in this thread
Thought crime, like the textbook breaking of decade old laws that exist in some way or another in pretty much every developed country.
if the law hasnât been changed since 1900 it is still a law. are you sure you work in any part of the law? they wouldnât change the law to make it okay - saying you intend to harm someone over the internet is still saying it - so although the law maybe worded differently today - iâm sure it is still very close to the same meaning as it was in 1900
thought crime would be saying I wish my wife was dead. actual crime is revealing intent by saying I want to kill someone.
also thinking doesnât include communicating said thought to others, or asking others help in locating someone or instilling fear in that person.
If you didnât read it, how do you know?
You are clearly angry at me. Given that Iâve not addressed anything of direct concern to you, I can only assume you are peeved because you are not, as perhaps your mother promised you, the smartest person in every thread.
Friend, be careful. I am not the source of your irritation and sense of dis entitlement. I did not raise you to believe you are special. Others did that to you. If keep on down this path, you will be aggressive towards all who exceed your abilities, and that will bring you into conflict and earn the derision of your peers.
Over time, this derision will cause you to fail in the routine social competition that defines young adults, and you may find yourself proclaiming yourself as something you believe is biological in nature, when in fact it is no more than the predictable consequence of coming last in the playground dating game, again because you have been lead to believe that you are inherently special.
peace out!
2 Likes
i too am gay