Sir_Squab

Mmm boobs... Honestly Q, don't joke about that sort of thing. Either ACTUALLY DO IT or don't post it. P.S. I think you should actually do it next time.

About night spiders, a slayer monster in Daemonheim, not dropping their unique slayer drop when killed. Not about dying due to poison damage, which can be acquired from any spider in DG and is not specific to night spiders. Also, I've never heard that astrals are a waste of time and most teams I've been in people at least make a few. Back on topic, sucks that you haven't gotten a drop, but I it's usually not best to camp something continuously for a drop because then large dropless streaks get noticed and it will usually stress you out.

stfu anal girl

Skyward Skyrim.

There's no law saying you HAVE to participate. Lol. I'll probably DG.

Why would we not want to hear this?

I troll her enough. I made her scream "I'm a Jew dammit!" one day in class. Wat.

[harpies] are where the spam's at.

Pretty much.

The lawsuit isnt about those who interacted with the game code it was given to everyone who purchased bot services (regardless or whether or not it was used). At least one person who recieved the email didnt use this software (please dont source me, im obviously not going to post their name). So my argument is that if they can sue for breaking ingame rules alone what is stopping them from sueing for breaking offensive language rules. A fallacy means that the arguments proposition and conclusion are only connected psychologically and not closely related to support each other. Hopefully this post clears up that they happen to be so closely related that they do support each other. I hadn't thought of that... I'll buy that since it's incredibly likely that at least one player did that exact thing. Honestly, most J mods probably know about most of the popular fansites. You don't seem to realize that Jagex probably had half a dozen (or more) lawyers/law-firms which they probably paid $10,000+ to each of them to make sure they didn't obtain it illegally? You know what about law? And you know Jagex has lots of lawyers being paid 10000+ each from where? Stop making things up and use legal precedent, current copyright law, and current cases to prove your point. Otherwise you are just blowing wind and proving nothing. The $10,000 was made up, but honestly... I don't need to do research to know that Jagex is paying several lawyers and/or one or more law firms to help them with this case, who presumably know more about the law and put more effort into it then you do, considering it's their job and lively-hood. Thus, I find legal discussions on these forums kinda pointless. -shrugs- Sure, and I find all your fallacies pointless, as they add nothing to the topic. Jagex is using this as a scare tactic. At least I back up any opinion I have on this topic with facts and evidence, instead of pulling numbers out of thin air in an attempt to give my ludicrous claims credence. I pulled out ONE number, which I retracted in a later post, and the reason I used that number is it's the same number that, according to someone else's (sarcasm) in this post chain, it's the same amount that individual players will be sued for using foul language in the future. At any rate, your argument boils down to using your understanding of legal code in order to dismiss or put down Jagex, whereas my argument, or what I'm trying to say, is that it's pointless for us to discuss it because we don't know as much as the lawyers involved in the case. You think discussing the laws and legal technicalities of this case is a constructive, whereas I don't; here we find a difference of opinion, which neither of us will likely change.

Implying all the harpie swords aren't always facing skywards?

EDIT: I'm also pretty sure you're "if Jagex sues botters for botting, they can sue swearers for swearing" is an example of Reductio ad absurdum, the logical fallacy of extending someone's argument to ridiculous proportions and then criticizing the result. Since I started arguing anyways, the rest is now in a hide tag.

Honestly, most J mods probably know about most of the popular fansites. You don't seem to realize that Jagex probably had half a dozen (or more) lawyers/law-firms which they probably paid $10,000+ to each of them to make sure they didn't obtain it illegally? You know what about law? And you know Jagex has lots of lawyers being paid 10000+ each from where? Stop making things up and use legal precedent, current copyright law, and current cases to prove your point. Otherwise you are just blowing wind and proving nothing. The $10,000 was made up, but honestly... I don't need to do research to know that Jagex is paying several lawyers and/or one or more law firms to help them with this case, who presumably know more about the law and put more effort into it then you do, considering it's their job and lively-hood. Thus, I find legal discussions on these forums kinda pointless. -shrugs-

40 + 40 x 0 + 1 = ( 40 ) ( 1 + 0 ) + 1 = 42 AMG ANSWER TO LIFE THE UNIVERSE AND EVERYTHING HOLY SHIT @@@ Joke's on you. 42 was not an option. I think the fact some answered '81' proves there are people under 10 (or are really, really stupid) who use Facebook. :lol: Meh. I'd be tempted to put 81 down because it's [harpie] facebook and not a math test. I was tempted to put "The universe is very furry" on my astronomy test. It was an option. I went with "The universe is very furry." instead.

40 + 40 x 0 + 1 = ( 40 ) ( 1 + 0 ) + 1 = 42 AMG ANSWER TO LIFE THE UNIVERSE AND EVERYTHING HOLY SHIT @@@

Honestly, most J mods probably know about most of the popular fansites. You don't seem to realize that Jagex probably had half a dozen (or more) lawyers/law-firms which they probably paid $10,000+ to each of them to make sure they didn't obtain it illegally?

I love you Cracked.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19488_14-luxury-sex-toys-extremely-rich-creepy.html

Just a reminder, for people who think Jagex is on shaky legal grounds, remember that Jagex has their own lawyers looking over these things. In far greater detail then us, if for no other reason then they have access to more detailed information then us.

How do you facebook? Seriously, I go on there for 5 minutes, think "now what," then go to another site.

IMO libel has always been the rich man's screw you clause. So silly. Yeah not wanting damaging lies spread about your business that can cause lose of earnings is such a silly thing! I mean I'm sure if you were running a clothing boutique lets say that was your source of income and you started losing trade because people were falsely claiming you used child labour it'd be such a silly thing for there to be a libel law that lets you recover lost earnings and silence the liars... True in the US especially libel cases get thrown about like mad, but few actually are won because unless someone is outright lying its not libel. Err...are you agreeing with me or what is going on in these two paragraphs; they're polar opposite opinions. He says that libel is needed in case you take a financial hit due to someone false damaging your reputation. Although many people try to abuse this by suing a party that says something bad about you, few libel cases are actually won because few libel cases are actually libel. So, he seems to be acknowledging that people can try to abuse libel, but that there is a very good reason it exists in the first place.

What the [harpie] was that?

I was saying your friends could use google instead of a dictionary.

Or, you know, google...

SAMMICH TIME I'm a diabetic, so I gotta stick a needle in myself 5 times a day. I'd be pretty [bleep]ed if I was trypanophobic. GAH, that's a hard word to spell.