1. Bob is claiming his freedom of speech is being compromised by this lawsuit, yet he has censored, altered or omited all but one of my attempted postings over there. They were all "civil" as he likes to say, yet they were critical of him.
2. He is trying to build his case on "facts" obtained from someone calling themself we da pee.
Keep the slams true and they will be posted. And the slams here against Bob aren't libelous? Calling him a janitor, pervert, etc isn't libel? You allow the pictures of Bob to be posted and you believe you aren't guilty of libel? I am encouraging Bob to mount his own lawsuit against you and those who comment here. Fred and Jaeff barkes haveposted here. Rodney has posted here. I bet we can prove they are a number of the anonymous posters as well. And the IP information can be obtained through your host. So sit and brag and demean my friend Robert. I believe he has a stronger case here than Dumb and Dumber have there. Glass houses, remember?
"And the slams here against Bob aren't libelous? Calling him a janitor, pervert, etc isn't libel?"
Janitor, no. Pervert, maybe. But I've never seriously called him a pervert. In libel cases, courts consider the context.
"You allow the pictures of Bob to be posted and you believe you aren't guilty of libel?"
I'm not responsible for what others post. Plus I've offered multiple times to consider removing anything Bob considers libel, but he has never taken me up on the offer. I don't think he understands the definition of libel.
"I am encouraging Bob to mount his own lawsuit against you and those who comment here."
Well, you'll need proof that I've committed libel. Where's your proof? Put up or shut up.
"I bet we can prove they are a number of the anonymous posters as well. And the IP information can be obtained through your host."
You'll have to get those from Google. And according to Bob, Bob needs to tell me specifically how I have libeled him, he needs to tell me his side and why he believes I have libeled him, give me a chance to post his side and retract mine, and do it 4-11 days before filing the lawsuit.
"So sit and brag"
Thanks, I will.
"and demean my friend Robert."
You need new friends.
"I believe he has a stronger case here than Dumb and Dumber have there."
Delusional. Where is you proof that Fred Barkes has broken the law?
"I am encouraging Bob to mount his own lawsuit against you"
By the way, if Bob decides to attempt to sue me, it's really going to cost him. Your local/state courts do not have jurisdiction over me in a civil lawsuit.
The pervert and janitor jokes are not libel, they are slander. Different claim altogether, but I'm sure you columbuzz attorneys in training already knew.
"give me a chance to post his side and retract mine, and do it 4-11 days before filing the lawsuit." You have at least 4-11 days before he files the lawsuit then. I predict he will end one lawsuit before generating another.
"You have at least 4-11 days before he files the lawsuit then. I predict he will end one lawsuit before generating another."
Sorry, but that is not a legal notice and you are not following the proper procedure according to Bob. Bob needs to tell me specifically how I have libeled him, he needs to tell me his side and why he believes I have libeled him, give me a chance to post his side and retract mine. But first you will need to subpoena Google to find out to whom to send the legal notice. I'll be waiting, but I won't hold my breath. You should really stop embarrassing yourself. You don't scare me with your lame threats.
I have never claimed that Bob is responsible for what commenters post on columbuzz. But he is responsible for what he posts on columbuzz. He has claimed that Fred Barkes is a law breaker without proof.
I never said it was legal notice. You pointed out that Bob has to tell you specifically where you libeled him 4-11 days before he files a lawsuit. He says that as well. You lawsuit is at least 4-11 days away because he will file it correctly if he files one.
So Bob is 50+ years old, has no equity in two houses that he owns, and just paid a large amount to Capital One. I would guess that his net worth is zero or less than zero. I take it he's not very good at money management, yet he wanted to be the Trustee and manage large sums of money? Sounds reasonable.
"He couldn't be any worse than what we currently enjoy."
LOL! Good one. But seriously, you really think Bob was qualified for the job, with his "132" IQ? Maybe he should use that "132" IQ to learn how to manage money. It's not that difficult.
33 comments:
Providing links for Bob is probably pointless at the moment, Dude. Hard drive issues...again! LOL
I see COLUMBUTT is back up and running again
Oh joy.
Two observations that make me chuckle.
1. Bob is claiming his freedom of speech is being compromised by this lawsuit, yet he has censored, altered or omited all but one of my attempted postings over there. They were all "civil" as he likes to say, yet they were critical of him.
2. He is trying to build his case on "facts" obtained from someone calling themself we da pee.
Yea, it's real hard to write something acceptable enough to post. I wonder how all those other people get their stuff posted.
"Yea, it's real hard to write something acceptable enough to post. I wonder how all those other people get their stuff posted."
If the comment slams Fred or Rodney, it is posted. If it slams one of the columbuzz clowns, it is not posted.
Keep the slams true and they will be posted.
And the slams here against Bob aren't libelous? Calling him a janitor, pervert, etc isn't libel? You allow the pictures of Bob to be posted and you believe you aren't guilty of libel? I am encouraging Bob to mount his own lawsuit against you and those who comment here. Fred and Jaeff barkes haveposted here. Rodney has posted here. I bet we can prove they are a number of the anonymous posters as well. And the IP information can be obtained through your host.
So sit and brag and demean my friend Robert. I believe he has a stronger case here than Dumb and Dumber have there.
Glass houses, remember?
"Keep the slams true and they will be posted."
Yeah, right. And you're unbiased. Delusional.
"And the slams here against Bob aren't libelous? Calling him a janitor, pervert, etc isn't libel?"
Janitor, no. Pervert, maybe. But I've never seriously called him a pervert. In libel cases, courts consider the context.
"You allow the pictures of Bob to be posted and you believe you aren't guilty of libel?"
I'm not responsible for what others post. Plus I've offered multiple times to consider removing anything Bob considers libel, but he has never taken me up on the offer. I don't think he understands the definition of libel.
"I am encouraging Bob to mount his own lawsuit against you and those who comment here."
Well, you'll need proof that I've committed libel. Where's your proof? Put up or shut up.
"I bet we can prove they are a number of the anonymous posters as well. And the IP information can be obtained through your host."
You'll have to get those from Google. And according to Bob, Bob needs to tell me specifically how I have libeled him, he needs to tell me his side and why he believes I have libeled him, give me a chance to post his side and retract mine, and do it 4-11 days before filing the lawsuit.
"So sit and brag"
Thanks, I will.
"and demean my friend Robert."
You need new friends.
"I believe he has a stronger case here than Dumb and Dumber have there."
Delusional. Where is you proof that Fred Barkes has broken the law?
"Glass houses, remember?"
Put up or shut up.
"I am encouraging Bob to mount his own lawsuit against you"
By the way, if Bob decides to attempt to sue me, it's really going to cost him. Your local/state courts do not have jurisdiction over me in a civil lawsuit.
The pervert and janitor jokes are not libel, they are slander. Different claim altogether, but I'm sure you columbuzz attorneys in training already knew.
Legal action against Bob will cease before the end of the month. Watch and see.
Bob won't have any money to mount any kind of suit when this is over.
He doesn't have any now.
Dude you are more responsible for what others post here than what Bob is at columbuzz. You own this website, he does not own columbuzz.
"give me a chance to post his side and retract mine, and do it 4-11 days before filing the lawsuit."
You have at least 4-11 days before he files the lawsuit then. I predict he will end one lawsuit before generating another.
"Legal action against Bob will cease before the end of the month. Watch and see."
I've been watching for quite a while now and have not seen any proof yet from Bob. Yawn.
"He doesn't have any now."
I believe Capital One took a lot of his money.
"Dude you are more responsible for what others post here than what Bob is at columbuzz. You own this website, he does not own columbuzz."
Tell that to the judge.
"You have at least 4-11 days before he files the lawsuit then. I predict he will end one lawsuit before generating another."
Sorry, but that is not a legal notice and you are not following the proper procedure according to Bob. Bob needs to tell me specifically how I have libeled him, he needs to tell me his side and why he believes I have libeled him, give me a chance to post his side and retract mine. But first you will need to subpoena Google to find out to whom to send the legal notice. I'll be waiting, but I won't hold my breath. You should really stop embarrassing yourself. You don't scare me with your lame threats.
"He doesn't have any now."
Doesn't Bob own property?
"Dude you are more responsible for what others post here than what Bob is at columbuzz. You own this website, he does not own columbuzz."
I guess you haven't read this:
Section 230 Protections
I have never claimed that Bob is responsible for what commenters post on columbuzz. But he is responsible for what he posts on columbuzz. He has claimed that Fred Barkes is a law breaker without proof.
Bob owns two houses and has no collateral in either one.
I never said it was legal notice. You pointed out that Bob has to tell you specifically where you libeled him 4-11 days before he files a lawsuit. He says that as well. You lawsuit is at least 4-11 days away because he will file it correctly if he files one.
"Bob owns two houses and has no collateral in either one."
Did you mean equity?
"You lawsuit is at least 4-11 days away because he will file it correctly if he files one."
I'm shaking.
Equity yes.
So Bob is 50+ years old, has no equity in two houses that he owns, and just paid a large amount to Capital One. I would guess that his net worth is zero or less than zero. I take it he's not very good at money management, yet he wanted to be the Trustee and manage large sums of money? Sounds reasonable.
He couldn't be any worse than what we currently enjoy.
Equity is market controlled. Like a lot of people, he had equity in both a few years ago. The market dropped and so did his equity.
"He couldn't be any worse than what we currently enjoy."
LOL! Good one. But seriously, you really think Bob was qualified for the job, with his "132" IQ? Maybe he should use that "132" IQ to learn how to manage money. It's not that difficult.
"Equity is market controlled. Like a lot of people, he had equity in both a few years ago. The market dropped and so did his equity."
Excuses, excuses. Didn't hurt me any.
Bob didn't have everything handed to him though. And Bob isn't gay or have wealthy boyfriends.
"Bob didn't have everything handed to him though. And Bob isn't gay or have wealthy boyfriends."
More excuses. I didn't have everything handed to me either. By the way, are you a homophobe?
Post a Comment