I've nothing against James, but I immaturely chuckled at that :o:o
I can see where you are coming from (taking the piss generall out of DS), but when it becomes personal (singling individual members out) it isn't funny anymore!
Hell, I'm not a sadistic fool, and I found the DS article funny, but when out of all the millions of users, your name is the one that is taken the piss out of - it just isn't funny! It isn't as if what was posted was even remotely funny! It was incredibly harsh and of ill-manor.
I wouldn't give a donkeys, I KNOW that site takes the pee out of EVERYTHING, not exclusively DS
It's still libel though mate, if it's not true and causes loss of money/reputation. I'm not entirely sure how far the exemption for satire stretches in those cases.
Hyperstar: You're not really making a lot of sense. Some of the Wiki talk page is over two years old...
I have to say your post doesn't make much sense either. What does the age of the wikipedia talk page have to do with anything? It's all a bit boring but I didn't know there was some kind of cut-off time limit about this sort of thing.
I have to say your post doesn't make much sense either. What does the age of the wikipedia talk page have to do with anything? It's all a bit boring but I didn't know there was some kind of cut-off time limit about this sort of thing.
Well, pointing out its content to discuss current events is slightly flawed in that case. I don't really see why this was bumped with no additional thought-provoking content. There is a reason this thread slipped down the forum.
Comments
A joke, yes, but some of that stuff about the (previous) owners is downright defamatory.
Not all mind...:p
To some people it isn't funny, maybe if you were mentioned, you wouldn't find it so funny... :rolleyes:
I wouldn't give a donkeys, I KNOW that site takes the pee out of EVERYTHING, not exclusively DS
Yes I know that but doesn't mean they can say offensive things like they did about the previous owners.
I've nothing against James, but I immaturely chuckled at that
I can see where you are coming from (taking the piss generall out of DS), but when it becomes personal (singling individual members out) it isn't funny anymore!
Hell, I'm not a sadistic fool, and I found the DS article funny, but when out of all the millions of users, your name is the one that is taken the piss out of - it just isn't funny! It isn't as if what was posted was even remotely funny! It was incredibly harsh and of ill-manor.
It's still libel though mate, if it's not true and causes loss of money/reputation. I'm not entirely sure how far the exemption for satire stretches in those cases.
Yes a joke is funny unless you are on the receiving end and Libel is, of course, still a consideration.
Who put this there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Digital_Spy/Archive_1
:eek:
I have to say your post doesn't make much sense either. What does the age of the wikipedia talk page have to do with anything? It's all a bit boring but I didn't know there was some kind of cut-off time limit about this sort of thing.
Well, pointing out its content to discuss current events is slightly flawed in that case. I don't really see why this was bumped with no additional thought-provoking content. There is a reason this thread slipped down the forum.