Hmmm, seems Ace Combat is now safe...

JMEaT · Post by **JMEaT** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:05 am

http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyan ... &subj=news

Seriously though... WTF...?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:43 am

I'm 'annoyed' by some guy using the name Mr. President on the internet, he's all over the place, on news web sites, even on the official white house web site telling people he's going to be hunting them down and brought to justice etc. etc.
I wonder, can I use this law to prosecute this guy who hides behind the alias of \"Mr. President\"?

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 10:11 am

Ugh... just Ugh. That is so retarded it boggles the mind. How can they even sign a law in that uses the word 'annoy'? A fly buzzing in your window is 'annoying', kids playing loudly can be 'annoying', its the word for something you don't like but is generally so small that doing anything about it would be more work then just ignoring it.

Iceman · Post by **Iceman** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 10:29 am

Agreed ... It is so retarded that it screams for a good checking into the validity of that article and the stated consequences of the law. Could it be that the article is bullchit?

JMEaT · Post by **JMEaT** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 10:32 am

Iceman wrote:Agreed ... It is so retarded that it screams for a good checking into the validity of that article and the stated consequences of the law. Could it be that the article is bullchit?

I hope so...

Sting_Ray · Post by **Sting_Ray** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:32 am

Sigh, fine... ya'all be bïtches.

Sincerely,
Joe.

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:50 am

Caught it on Fark the other day, seems real.

Vertigo 99 · Post by **Vertigo 99** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:54 am

yeah its popping up all over the place, if its a hoax its masterfully done

Dedman · Post by **Dedman** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:04 pm

This entire thread anoys me therefore someone must be imprisoned

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:53 pm

HEY... maybe we can get some of these viral video people sent off to jail for being annoying!

Iceman · Post by **Iceman** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:37 pm

Dedman wrote:This entire thread anoys me therefore someone must be imprisoned

LOL!

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:39 pm

I find Lothar's mile long posts annoying as hell! You're going to jail now buddy!

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:54 pm

HAHAH!! very funny J\"Whore\"

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:11 pm

This is teh funniest thread in a while.

x2. LOL @ dedman.

Heh. Let's all go to the big house. What's not to like - three squares, library within walkin distance (heck everything is within walking distance

), stuctured exercise program, plenty of law enforcement around to maintain order

, etc., etc. ...

*Javed* · Post by ***Javed*** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:48 pm

Heh.

My name IS Javed, but it doesn't have the stars. I guess I can't 'annoy' people on the DBB

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:52 pm

dissent wrote:This is teh funniest thread in a while.

x2. LOL @ dedman.

Heh. Let's all go to the big house. What's not to like - three squares, library within walkin distance (heck everything is within walking distance ), stuctured exercise program, plenty of law enforcement around to maintain order , etc., etc. ...

And free cable TV for all you freeloaders!

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:37 pm

MD-2389 wrote:I find Lothar's mile long posts annoying as hell!

The law was about intent to annoy, not actual annoyance. You can only have me busted if I'm doing it for the purpose of annoying you. In other words, in order to apply this law, you have to infer that a comment was designed, by an intelligence, to annoy someone.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:05 pm

Lothar wrote:
MD-2389 wrote:I find Lothar's mile long posts annoying as hell!
The law was about intent to annoy, not actual annoyance. You can only have me busted if I'm doing it for the purpose of annoying you. In other words, in order to apply this law, you have to infer that a comment was designed, by an intelligence, to annoy someone.

Psst! It was a joke.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:23 pm

MD-2389 wrote:
Lothar wrote:
MD-2389 wrote:I find Lothar's mile long posts annoying as hell!
The law was about intent to annoy, not actual annoyance. You can only have me busted if I'm doing it for the purpose of annoying you. In other words, in order to apply this law, you have to infer that a comment was designed, by an intelligence, to annoy someone.
Psst! It was a joke. ;)

ecks two.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:28 pm

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:12 am

Lothar wrote:
MD-2389 wrote:I find Lothar's mile long posts annoying as hell!
The law was about intent to annoy, not actual annoyance. You can only have me busted if I'm doing it for the purpose of annoying you. In other words, in order to apply this law, you have to infer that a comment was designed, by an intelligence, to annoy someone.

but can you prove it to a jury?

JMEaT · Post by **JMEaT** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:13 am

AceCombat wrote:HAHAH!! very funny J"Whore"

I'll see you in court, sir.

VR7 · Post by **VR7** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:48 pm

When I read the topic, I thought you guys were talking about the PS2 game franchise, not the person.

You know, Jack Thompson learned about this law too, and intends on using it to \"shield\" himself. For example, if someone tried to e-mail him politely about anything, that guy would be, in Jack Thompson's world, a fucked man.

Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Admiral Thrawn** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:52 pm

Hell, if our government is going to go that far, they might as well include those annoying screaming kids on xbox live too. I'd be more than happy to sue a few parents.

Behemoth · Post by **Behemoth** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:21 pm

good use of our tax dollars

Hmmm, seems Ace Combat is now safe...

Hmmm, seems Ace Combat is now safe...

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: