Jilted ex-boyfriend puts up abortion billboard

[The Dude 206]

Yes, because joking about violence condones it. "See, that proves it. He posted jokes on his online accounts. He's a violent person." Seriously?

Jerk does not equal violent and/or illegal action.

It shows state of mind, which goes to show intent. Can't wait for Slim's next episode of Legal Pearls Of Wisdom!

Edited June 13, 2011 by The Dude

[slim 1,514]

It shows state of mind, which goes to show intent. Can't wait for Slim's next episode of Pearls Of Wisdom!

Because whatever you post on the internet reveals what type of person you really are.

If that's true, why are so many of us such douchebags online yet get on well with folks in real life?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Because whatever you post on the internet reveals what type of person you really are.

If that's true, why are so many of us such douchebags online yet get on well with folks in real life?

Most people don't go to the trouble of putting up billboards to publicly advertise that they are douchebags. This guy does exactly that and posts a bunch of hate-filled ####### that suggest that he is indeed a douchebag.

Hardly worth defending. Hardly worth attacking either for that matter. It is what it is.

[The Dude 206]

Because whatever you post on the internet reveals what type of person you really are.

If that's true, why are so many of us such douchebags online yet get on well with folks in real life?

Slim, if you can't grasp why past behavior is indicative, then you've got bigger problems at hand. Whether it is online or not goes to show, even if it is a small part of someone's intent.

[slim 1,514]

Most people don't go to the trouble of putting up billboards to publicly advertise that they are douchebags. This guy does exactly that and posts a bunch of hate-filled ####### that suggest that he is indeed a douchebag.

Hardly worth defending. Hardly worth attacking either for that matter. It is what it is.

If I remember correctly, the billboard indicated the mother of his child was the douchebag, not him. And did he have a link to his internet posts on the billboard? How did everyone know his name and who he was and how to find his stuff online?

Slim, if you can't grasp why past behavior is indicative, then you've got bigger problems at hand. Whether it is online or not goes to show, even if it is a small part of someone's intent.

How is posting some jokes on the internet "behavior?"

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If I remember correctly, the billboard indicated the mother of his child was the douchebag, not him. And did he have a link to his internet posts on the billboard? How did everyone know his name and who he was and how to find his stuff online?

What people do online isn't difficult to find, particularly if you are in the eye of the media.

What the woman might have done is irrelevant (though clearly her judgement is questionable for going out with this character) putting up a billboard to advertise it makes him the douchebag. He has created the problem, a problem that has resulted in a court case and media attention that appears to suggest he isn't a particularly person.

Slim, once again - jokes in questionable taste are one thing. Going to the trouble of putting up a billboard suggests his emotional judgement isn't all there. It also suggests that he's rather immature.

[slim 1,514]

What people do online isn't difficult to find, particularly if you are in the eye of the media.

What the woman might have done is irrelevant (though clearly her judgement is questionable for going out with this character) putting up a billboard to advertise it makes him the douchebag. He has created the problem, a problem that has resulted in a court case and media attention that appears to suggest he isn't a particularly person.

Slim, once again - jokes in questionable taste are one thing. Going to the trouble of putting up a billboard suggests his emotional judgement isn't all there. It also suggests that he's rather immature.

Wasn't she the one that let everyone know their names? I didn't see his (or her) name on the billboard. Only when she made a big stink about it and decided to take it into the public arena did their names get out there.

He didn't tell anyone. She told everyone.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Did she go to the media? I know she took the guy to court. Usually the way these things work is that a reporter spends a few hours a week in court looking for story leads from petitioned cases.

[slim 1,514]

Did she go to the media? I know she took the guy to court. Usually the way these things work is that a reporter spends a few hours a week in court looking for story leads from petitioned cases.

Court is public record. She could've asked for the case to be sealed so the media wouldn't get wind of it and if that was denied, she could've let it rest.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Court is public record. She could've asked for the case to be sealed so the media wouldn't get wind of it and if that was denied, she could've let it rest.

I wonder how many people actually do that. As far as I'm aware gay orders are passed down by the judge, and always in criminal cases where the accused of the victim are minors.

Still... why exactly are you on the side of the batshit billboard poster?

[slim 1,514]

I wonder how many people actually do that. As far as I'm aware gay orders are passed down by the judge, and always in criminal cases where the accused of the victim are minors.

So, what your saying is the common perception is that if you bring on a lawsuit your name will be out there?

I find it quite ironic a woman who was worried about privacy issues brought about a public lawsuit.

Still... why exactly are you on the side of the batshit billboard poster?

Because I believe people should have the right to free speech.

He didn't say her name. He didn't even say his name. He's a "generic" person making a point. That's completely legal. In fact, I think even if he would've said his name there would still be no problem since he didn't say hers. Had he posted her name then maybe there would be an issue. But, he didn't. No name, no issue.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Wasn't she the one that let everyone know their names? I didn't see his (or her) name on the billboard. Only when she made a big stink about it and decided to take it into the public arena did their names get out there.

He didn't tell anyone. She told everyone.

Actually, I think he did from what I've read. He received press for the billboard before she got involved.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So, what your saying is the common perception is that if you bring on a lawsuit your name will be out there?

I find it quite ironic a woman who was worried about privacy issues brought about a public lawsuit.

Because I believe people should have the right to free speech.

He didn't say her name. He didn't even say his name. He's a "generic" person making a point. That's completely legal. In fact, I think even if he would've said his name there would still be no problem since he didn't say hers. Had he posted her name then maybe there would be an issue. But, he didn't. No name, no issue.

If the guy used the womans initials alongside a picture of himself - that identifies the woman. She would know he was referring to her and so would her friends and family.

As for free speech, writing on the walls in your own feces might be free speech but it's still fvcking nuts.

Actually, I think he did from what I've read. He received press for the billboard before she got involved.

Of course he did, he's obviously a massive self promoter.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

BTW, her first name was on the billboard! Her name is NANI and apparently the "National Association for Needed Information" had supported the board and included their acronym.

It was removed after complaints.

Edited June 15, 2011 by Sousuke

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

BTW, her first name was on the billboard! Her name is NANI and apparently the "National Association for Needed Information" had supported the board and included their acronym.

It was removed after complaints.

There we are then.