Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Judging from PMs I have received today, the leading married-shopkeeper-lothario has shagged 3 women on EDF and 2 others that I know in the neighbourhood who do not post on EDF. He has told each of these women that he is single and seeking a longterm relationship. For reasons as yet unknown (but soon to be uncovered, I am sure) he is very unwilling to wear condoms and has been known to remove a condom in the heat of passion.

BBW, red devil?


Not really. I just try and imagine a 'reasonable' case, and I don't think a butcher joke is in the same league as an allegation of sexual impropriety. We all rely on each other to catch ourselves if we're sailing close to the wind. I thank you for the reminder!


On that note, we'd probably better amend your note at the top of this page!

postmodern Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> He is very good in bed.


I'm sure.

But didn't his getting up immediately afterwards and returning home to the wife and kids* he said he didn't have take some of the bloom off the afterglow?


*I should of course have said that he got dressed between getting up and returning home.

I don't know the fellow or his missus, but even Mary Archer wouldn't have put up with Jeffrey arriving home stark bollock.

You're protesting quite a bit....


???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> no I'm f*cking not and my wife post on here

> too....seriously take your sh1tty, snidey

> accusations and slurs away or spell something out.

> Did this bloke turn you down or something?

Moos Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> But I never got chatted up much even pre-Moosling,

> I'm too scary. Sigh...


Oh Moos, don't be upset, I can't bear it.

Rest assured if you were a customer in a shop I owned, I'd have given you a dose of the clap for sure.

Now don't you be lettin' that Flick and PostModern be gettin' all up in your face thinkin' they're all that.

You go girl.

HonaloochieB Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Moos Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > But I never got chatted up much even

> pre-Moosling,

> > I'm too scary. Sigh...

>

> Oh Moos, don't be upset, I can't bear it.

> Rest assured if you were a customer in a shop I

> owned, I'd have given you a dose of the clap for

> sure.

> Now don't you be lettin' that Flick and PostModern

> be gettin' all up in your face thinkin' they're

> all that.

> You go girl.



PMSL! That gave me a good old belly laugh! Thanks!

bigbadwolf Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Spot on Huuenot, my depravity knows no limits. I

> secretly reckon that Felicity is awesome in the

> sack.


And your secret is safe with me BBW. No one else will ever know.

It's in the vault.

This made me laugh - I want to know who the sleazy, scummy clap spreader is - not cos I was thinking of giving him one - but just so I can walk past with a knowing smirk.


By the way if the guy isn't named, or you give him a nickname like clapper slapper or something, then you can't be done for libel unless you stick his pic up or something.


Here is a very interesting bit of rubbish I was reading from somewhere and I think it's pretty accurate:


You can't defame nicknames when people don't know who they are.


So, if you spread the same Dyke TV licence allegations but called him Big Beardo McFluffy, he can't sue, even if he knows you are referring to him - unless other people know him by the same nickname.


On the internet the rules are exactly the same. There are no special internet defences. The only advantage is that web sites tend to have a smaller number of users, (so less people see it hence it's less defamatory so it's rarely worth the bother of going to court) and allegations can be removed promptly on protest from a defamed party.


On the web, the writer, the web site owner and the ISP can all be sued just like the writer, the magazine and the distributor in the print field. A link could also be potentially defamatory if you are linking to defamatory material.


There is also a defence of 'fair comment' which is somewhat vague but is basically there to stop someone being sued for saying they don't like Marks & Spencer or McDonalds or Piers Morgan.


You are allowed to say that - even if you were a famous star or a very persuasive writer and it could damage them financially. That's the law.


However libel does not extend to the dead. Nor is being abusive libelous.


So I can say "Keith Moon was a smackhead lover of the highest order" and it's no problem. In fact I could say "every human who ever existed was a smack dealing, gun running, uncle fucker."


This is completely okay. That's UK libel!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...