Notice to Ray
The Committee
made for several reasons, none that had to do with any threat from you, as you
will see. Your unenforceable and completely groundless threats are the least
of our concerns.
Flyers will not get Ray off the USENET. Our objective is to return our news
groups back into a useable state. Flyers will not accomplish the objective.
Talking about Flyers was doing more to disrupt the news groups due to Mr. Parker
continual crossposting. It was becoming disruptive to people and for that we
apologize. We are not here to disrupt but to accomplish quite the opposite.
Therefore, we have moved our discussions out of USENET and into better-suited
forum. No, Ray, we will not tell you where. We know you tried to sign up for
our Yahoo group and complained to them as well. As stated, our objective is the
return of useable news groups, free from threats and harassment. The recent
post about RAS struck a nerve with many of our members and we have decided this
option as it is a better use of time and resources. We will pursue these
offline alternatives including conversations with the Philly DA. We will not
publicize them as to minimize the noise level. However, where the need arises,
we will be there to offer support.
Thingfishhh
The Committee <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote:
I applaud your decision - it was my hope my reference to RAS would also
cause you to take pause and consider the ramifications of what you
planned to do - though the RAS case has more similarities to Ray's than
it does yours.
While it is true people have been able to flyer neighborhoods, in the
case of crack houses and child molesters, there's a fine line with such
actions between 'for the public good" and libel and slander. It would do
no good to put yourself in a position of liability in this, despite your
best of intentions - a judge would no doubt also see it in similar
light. That's why I could'nt support your actions, and felt some concern
that you were opening yourself up to the same kind of liabilities that I
think Ray has opened for himself.
I saw this all as a pissing match that was about to get extremely stupid
and out of control as it was going to end up in courtrooms one way or
another if any of the actions discussed were taken - as you said, you
have much better things to do with your time than have to defend
yourself in front of a judge. I did'nt want to see that happen.
I think I should also say that i agree with what you want to accomplish
- Ray's comments about the WTC are about as loathesome and callous and
selfish as you can get. I think in our current environment such
attitudes are directly aiding and abetting a clear enemy of the country
and the public safety, and comments like that, to me, make Ray no better
than the terrorists themselves. But having said that, as loathesome and
despicable as Ray is, he is afforded rights in this country, and
breaking the law yourself in retaliation is not justified.
I think contacting the Philly DA is the best route to take, no-one is
better suited to clearly tell you what methods are at your disposal to
deal with Ray, if you believe him to be a real menace to his community
and to others online. You can at the very least start an official
record, if you need to take action further down the line.
It was clearly time for some realities to be discussed. I see Ray
threatening people almost on a daily basis, but he needs to know that
those threats can be liabilities, and some of his actions as threatened,
as shown in the RAS case, are decidely actionable. If Ray decides to
take those steps, let him do it on his own, and suffer the consequences
on his own. Let Ray live in the hell he's creating, don't become his
roomate.
Alex
Thingfishhh at Thing...@yahoo.com wrote on 11/26/01 6:56 AM:
> I think in our current environment such
> attitudes are directly aiding and abetting a clear enemy of the country
> and the public safety, and comments like that, to me, make Ray no better
> than the terrorists themselves.
Let's not get carried away.
Ray is loathsome, repugnant and, frankly, pathetic but his comments about
the WTC don't even begin to resemble flying a fully fueled passenger jet
into the buildings.
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
Look for a federally filed complaint for "Intentional Infliction of
Emotional Distress" along with conspiracy, defamation, racketeering,
tortious interference with my rental agreement, and a host of other charges.
Immortal Raiden
wrote:
>In article <BomM7.37649$xS6....@www.newsranger.com>,
> The Committee <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote:
>> Therefore, we have moved our discussions out of USENET and into better-suited
>> forum. No, Ray, we will not tell you where. We know you tried to sign up
>> for our Yahoo group and complained to them as well. As stated, our objective is
>> the return of useable news groups, free from threats and harassment. The recent
>> post about RAS struck a nerve with many of our members and we have decided
>> this option as it is a better use of time and resources. We will pursue these
>> offline alternatives including conversations with the Philly DA. We will not
>> publicize them as to minimize the noise level. However, where the need
>> arises, we will be there to offer support.
>
>I applaud your decision - it was my hope my reference to RAS would also
>cause you to take pause and consider the ramifications of what you
>planned to do - though the RAS case has more similarities to Ray's than
>it does yours.
>
>While it is true people have been able to flyer neighborhoods, in the
>case of crack houses and child molesters, there's a fine line with such
>actions between 'for the public good" and libel and slander. It would do
>no good to put yourself in a position of liability in this, despite your
>best of intentions - a judge would no doubt also see it in similar
>light.
While there is always the need to reduce noise on the newsgroups,
Parker's ultimate goal is his own legal destruction at the hands of
someone he has attacked on the internet. Similar to a real world
suicide by cop wish, except Parker is intent on merely his legal
obliteration in a civil arena. Ignoring him, or leaving newcomers as
fodder for the psychopath will not give him what he seeks in the end.
Flyers can and have been legally defended in court, as you said, in
cases dealing with drugs, pedophiles, sexual predators. If flyers were
distributed containing the reams of statements, emails and instant
messages attributed to Parker over the years, any legal case can only
deal with the validity of the claim that the statements originated
from him.
As one astute member pointed out, Parker has repeatedly both
disavowed and acknowledged the statements, one moment attempting to
misdirect the discussion by claiming such material can be falsified,
then rendering all manner of justification for making the statements.
In the absence of anyone pursuing criminal charges against Parker for
making harassing interstate telephone calls, libeling their business
or them personally, or sending threatening email, the issue of whether
he can ultimately avoid any consequences for his past online
activities might be tied to something as simple as the matter of the
threatening statements he has been accused of making for years. Did he
actually send them or not?
Given the hundreds upon hundreds of messages that have been credited
to him that mention death, torture, injury, mishap, and the many
speaking about children, if such messages can be verified as his work,
this would have immense influence on what can be regarded as
reasonable assumption about his habits and obsessions.
Any actions or behavior that has been verified in court can be
attributed to him openly on web sites, documents, flyers and he can do
nothing about it.
If anyone chose to focus primarily on the matter of Parker's past
internet history and these disturbing messages, Parker would be forced
to challenge the truth of the claims, and as he is so fond of saying,
"it would open a lot of doors" for the defendant to gather the
information needed to substantiate allegations.
Any such action to address the issue of his threats and messages
would probably end up requiring little or no effort. More like a
school project, or a light diversion to avoid boredom. Once Parker has
set the legal cogs in motion, it should take almost no time to secure
the needed information and slay him in the courtroom. Child's play.
All one need do is gather the kindling and wait for Parker to strike
the match.
This would finally give him the elusive goal he seeks so earnestly.
The Immortal Raiden
Odious
"Ray Gordon, GENIUS" wrote:
>
> Too bad you should have realized the error of your ways.
>
> Look for a federally filed complaint for "Intentional Infliction of
> Emotional Distress"
Yeah the guy who tells parent that he hopes their kids die or get
crippled is going to win a judgment for IIED. LOL!
> along with conspiracy,
Not a crime unless conspiring to do something illegal.
> defamation,
If your own words are defamatory to you, you've nobody to sue but
yourself.
>racketeering,
LOL! Yeah so who exactly is making you pay protection money?
> tortious interference with my rental agreement,
Only if someone knowingly and intentionally made a specific request that
your landlord violate your rental agreement.
> and a host of other charges.
Sure, I bet you have at least a dozen more charges that don't apply and
would be tossed out of court. Why not just try to charge him with cattle
rustling while you're at it?
Jesters N Court
>
>
> > tortious interference with my rental agreement,
>
>
> Only if someone knowingly and intentionally made a specific request that
> your landlord violate your rental agreement.
I thought he just made a typo and meant to put "rectal agreement". Maybe?
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
ONE more post from you defaming me and I can release all the info I have on
YOU here.
Last warning.
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
> >
> > Look for a federally filed complaint for "Intentional Infliction of
> > Emotional Distress"
>
>
> Yeah the guy who tells parent that he hopes their kids die or get
> crippled is going to win a judgment for IIED. LOL!
>
> > along with conspiracy,
>
> Not a crime unless conspiring to do something illegal.
Harassment is illegal.
> > defamation,
>
> If your own words are defamatory to you, you've nobody to sue but
> yourself.
False-light defamation occurs when people cherry-pick one's statements.
> >racketeering,
>
> LOL! Yeah so who exactly is making you pay protection money?
Not the only application.
> > tortious interference with my rental agreement,
>
> Only if someone knowingly and intentionally made a specific request that
> your landlord violate your rental agreement.
Wrong: reasonable person would simply move. This is interference with my
agreement.
> > and a host of other charges.
>
> Sure, I bet you have at least a dozen more charges that don't apply and
> would be tossed out of court. Why not just try to charge him with cattle
> rustling while you're at it?
Odd that my last lawsuit didn't follow the course you predicted.
Paul Duren
(c) copyright 1999 by
someone else.
Dear:
[ ] Clueless Newbie [ ] Lamer [X] Flamer
[ ] Loser [X] Spammer [X] Troller
[ ] "Me too" er [ ] Pervert [ ] Geek
[X ] Freak [ ] Nerd [ ] Elvis
[ ] Racist [ ] Fed [ ] Freak
[ ] Fundamentalist [ ] Satanist [ ] Homeopath
[ ] Unbearably self-righteous person
I took exception to your recent:
[ ] Email [ X] Post to ______________Too Many News Groups______.
(newsgroup)
It was (check all that apply):
[X] Lame [X ] Stupid [X ] Abusive
[X ] Clueless [X ] Idiotic [X] Brain-damaged
[X Imbecilic [X] Arrogant [ ] Malevolent
[ ] Contemptible [X] Libelous [ ] Ignorant
[X] Clueless [X] Stupid [ ] Fundamentalist
[ ] Boring [ ] Dim [X] Cowardly
[ ] Deceitful [X] Demented [X] Self-righteous
[ ] Crazy [ ] Weird [ ] Hypocritical
[ ] Loathsome [ ] Satanic [ ] Despicable
[ ] Belligerent [ ] Mind-numbing [ ] Maladroit
[X] Much longer than any worthwhile thought of which you may be
capable.
Your attention is drawn to the fact that:
[ ] You posted what should have been emailed
[ ] You obviously don't know how to read your newsgroups line
[ ] You are trying to make money on a non-commercial newsgroup
[ ] You self-righteously impose your religious beliefs on others
[ ] You self-righteously impose your racial beliefs on others
[ ] You posted a binary in a non-binaries group
[ ] You don't know which group to post in
[X] You posted something totally uninteresting
[X] You crossposted to *way* too many newsgroups
[X] I don't like your tone of voice
[X] What you posted has been done before.
[X] Not only that, it was also done better the last time.
[ ] You quoted an *entire* post in your reply
[X] You started a long, stupid thread
[X] You continued spreading a long stupid thread
[ ] Your post is absurdly off topic for where you posted it
[ ] You posted a followup to crossposted robot-generated spam
[ ] You posted a "test" in a discussion group rather than in alt.test
[ ] You posted a "YOU ALL SUCK" message
[X] You posted low-IQ flamebait
[X] You posted a blatantly obvious troll
[X] You followed up to a blatantly obvious troll
[ ] You said "me too" to something
[X] You make no sense
[ ] Your sig/alias is dreadful
[X] You must have spent your life in a skinner box to be this
clueless.
[ ] You posted a phone-sex ad
[ ] You posted a stupid pyramid money making scheme
[ ] You claimed a pyramid-scheme/chain letter for money was legal
[ ] Your margin settings (or lack of) make your post unreadable.
Each
line
just goes on and on, not stopping at 75 characters, making it hard to
read.
[ ] You posted in ELitE CaPitALs to look k0OwL
[ ] You posted a message in ALL CAPS, and you don't even own a TRS-80
[ ] Your post was FULL of RANDOM CAPS for NO APPARENT REASON
[X] You have greatly misunderstood the purpose of this newsgroup.
[X] You have greatly misunderstood the purpose of the Internet.
[X ] You are a loser.
[X] This has been pointed out to you before.
[ ] You didn't do anything specific, but appear to be so generally
worthless that you are being flamed on general principles.
It is recommended that you:
[X] Get a clue
[ ] Get a life
[X] Go away
[X] Grow up
[X] Never post again
[ ] Read every newsgroup you posted to for a week
[X] stop reading Usenet news and get a life
[ ] stop sending Email and get a life
[X] Bust up your modem with a hammer and eat it
[X] Have your medication adjusted
[X] Jump into a bathtub while holding your monitor
[ ] find a volcano and throw yourself in
[X] get a gun and shoot yourself
[ ] Actually post something relevant
[ ] Read the FAQ
[ ] stick to FidoNet and come back when you've grown up
[X] Apologize to everybody in this newsgroup
[ ] consume excrement
[X] consume excrement and thus expire
[ ] Post your tests to alt.test/misc.test
[ ] Put your home phone number in your ads from now on
[X] Refrain from posting until you have a vague idea what you're
doing
In Closing, I'd Like to Say:
[ ] You need to seek psychiatric help
[ ] Take your gibberish somewhere else
[ ] *plonk*
[ ] Learn how to post or get off the usenet
[ ] Most of the above
[X] All of the above
[ ] Some of the above, not including All of the above
[ ] You are so clueless that I didn't even bother filling in this
form.tion if he so chooses.
Immortal Raiden
Since you have never warned me of anything before in this universe,
this would be my first warning. And please cease from addressing me by
any other than my own name. Thank you for your compliance. You have my
real name, as I bought a copy of your book some time ago for curiosity
sake. Forgotten me already?
As for defaming you, I suggest you address this in a legal venue in
order to allow a court of competent jurisdiction to ascertain the
validity of any statements I have made concerning your activities and
actions on the internet. Specifically those relating to alleged posts
made concerning children.
I believe that you did, in fact, post, send or transmit a very large
majority of the messages accredited to you over the years. Possibly
all of them. If you disagree, then you should take appropriate steps
to resolve the issue in a civil court.
Surely you would like to settle this matter once and for all. I know
most, if not all of the people you have attacked and stalked over the
years would like to see this come to an end.
In parting, you continue to refer to an interference with "your
lease". As I understand it, the lease or rent on the abode where you
claim to reside with Ms. Parker is actually in your mother's name. If
so, only she has valid claim to any damages, unless you have power of
attorney.
This begs more questions. Over the years, posts from your various
accounts stopped using the Penny Parker address. This seemed to
correspond with your near omnipresence on the internet. I would be
interested to know if anyone has actually had personal contact with
Ms. Parker in recent years, and is she healthy and well?
Does she pay her debts by mail, or in person? Has anyone seen her in
the flesh in the past year? Some might take her inactivity in recent
years to mean something might have befallen her, perhaps health wise.
I certainly hope not, but your obsessive internet behavior, allegedly
emanating from her residence, along with her lack of activity in
recent years makes one pause and wonder.
There are many more questions along this line that interested and
curious people might like to see answered, but maybe we should save
those for another time.
The Immortal Raiden
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
You leave your fingerprints in more places than you care to realize.
Immortal Raiden
Perfesser Parker.
The Immortal Raiden
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
> >
> >You leave your fingerprints in more places than you care to realize.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Perfesser Parker.
It doesn't take a "professor" to figure out who you are.
I'd SHOW you how stupid you are but then you'd be less easy to track.
Gary Collard
Ray? Racketeering is pretty creative even for your demented mind.
--
Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
coll...@earthlink.net
"DVDs represent an amazing advancement from video tapes -- now
that I rent DVDs instead of cassettes, I've stopped accidentally
returning my homemade sex videos to Blockbuster."
-- Jeff Alexander
Gary Collard
>
> > > Too bad you should have realized the error of your ways.
> > >
> > > Look for a federally filed complaint for "Intentional Infliction of
> > > Emotional Distress"
> >
> >
> > Yeah the guy who tells parent that he hopes their kids die or get
> > crippled is going to win a judgment for IIED. LOL!
> >
> > > along with conspiracy,
> >
> > Not a crime unless conspiring to do something illegal.
>
> Harassment is illegal.
And threatening to sue is harassment, so thanks for clearing that up - you
are breaking the law on a regular basis if what you say is true.
Odious
Maybe he meant to say, "Torturous indifference with my rectal
bereavement?"
Odious
Man, you're a hypocrite Ray.
Odious
"Ray Gordon, GENIUS" wrote:
>
> > > Too bad you should have realized the error of your ways.
> > >
> > > Look for a federally filed complaint for "Intentional Infliction of
> > > Emotional Distress"
> >
> >
> > Yeah the guy who tells parent that he hopes their kids die or get
> > crippled is going to win a judgment for IIED. LOL!
> >
> > > along with conspiracy,
> >
> > Not a crime unless conspiring to do something illegal.
>
> Harassment is illegal.
>
Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it harassment.
> > > defamation,
> >
> > If your own words are defamatory to you, you've nobody to sue but
> > yourself.
>
> False-light defamation occurs when people cherry-pick one's statements.
Your entire posts are available on google, as are the whole threads. And
how exactly is quoting your whole post cherry picking? You did say these
things. So what false light are you being portrayed in? Where is the
false part?
That's like saying that quoting an entire article by writer in a
newspaper is misrepresenting the article. How can it be falsely
presented, when the whole fucking thing is presented exactly how you
posted it?
> > >racketeering,
> >
> > LOL! Yeah so who exactly is making you pay protection money?
>
> Not the only application.
Yes there are other applications... and none apply here. No matter how
much you want them to, they won't. Go ahead and name the one that
applies.
> > > tortious interference with my rental agreement,
> >
> > Only if someone knowingly and intentionally made a specific request that
> > your landlord violate your rental agreement.
>
> Wrong: reasonable person would simply move. This is interference with my
> agreement.
If you make the decision to move, you are the one terminating the
contract ray. Are you really this stupid? You can't sue for TI when you
break the contract. LOL!
Why do you insist on continuing to make an ass of yourself like this?
And you can not blame your actions on the circulation of statements you
made publicly. You made them publicly, it would be no different than if
you stood on your street corner and said them. People can inform other
people of what you've said and there is NOTHING you can do about it.
> > > and a host of other charges.
> >
> > Sure, I bet you have at least a dozen more charges that don't apply and
> > would be tossed out of court. Why not just try to charge him with cattle
> > rustling while you're at it?
>
> Odd that my last lawsuit didn't follow the course you predicted.
Have you ever won a judgment in court, or have you always settled for a
few bucks.... that is when you are suing someone who actually exists?
Just like with women, you fear being in the position of someone else
making a decision. Somewhere deep inside your twisted little mind you
know that jury and a judge would reject you, just like women do. It could
be a female judge. So you opt out. You only sue people you are pretty
sure will either be intimidated by your threats or who will settle to
avoid the inconvenience.
I am neither. I've made it quite clear that I have no reservations about
calling your bluff, because we both no that you won't win, because the
very things that make you a loser with women will make you a loser in
court.
I mean come on parker, when I read and quoted you the RICO statute that
stated the only situations civil RICO applies are those covered in
section 1940, all you could do was try to claim civil RICO was "a
different breed of cat."
I know you are full of shit ray, and so will any judge and any jury.
Odious
Immortal Raiden wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:45:21 -0500, "Ray Gordon, GENIUS"
> <r...@cybersheet.com> wrote:
>
> >Tommy BOY
> >
> >ONE more post from you defaming me and I can release all the info I have on
> >YOU here.
> >
> >Last warning.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Since you have never warned me of anything before in this universe,
> this would be my first warning. And please cease from addressing me by
> any other than my own name. Thank you for your compliance. You have my
> real name, as I bought a copy of your book some time ago for curiosity
> sake. Forgotten me already?
OMFG wait... so you are a CUSTOMER of Ray's and he is now THREATENING TO
REVEAL HIS CUSTOMER'S PERSONAL INFO?
Ray, the same shithead who has been screaming for months that ross
threatened a customer with revealing his personal info... when in fact
the guy wasn't a customer and it really wasn't much of a threat. (which
is why ray never quotes it)
But here we have Ray openly threatening to reveal the personal
information of a guy who is claiming to be a customer.
What does Ray have to say for himself?
Nicholas
> OMFG wait... so you are a CUSTOMER of Ray's and he is now THREATENING TO
> REVEAL HIS CUSTOMER'S PERSONAL INFO?
>
Thanks for pointing this out, Odious. This is fucking hilarious.
--
Nick
"That man that hath a tongue, I say, is no man,
"If with his tongue he cannot win a woman."
--William Shakespeare, "The Two Gentlemen of Verona", Act 3 scene 1
"Losers always whine about their best...
"Winners go home and fuck the prom queen."
--John Mason (Sean Connery) "The Rock"
Dean Dryer
> > Sure, I bet you have at least a dozen more charges that don't apply and
> > would be tossed out of court. Why not just try to charge him with cattle
> > rustling while you're at it?
>
> Odd that my last lawsuit didn't follow the course you predicted.
Odd that your last lawsuit didn't go the way YOU predicted either. What did you
sue for? Was is $200K and you settled for $250 rather than face me in court?
Not exactly the brilliant legal victory you predicted.
Dean
Chuck
CFB1
Paul Duren wrote:
> STANDARDIZED BONEHEAD REPLY FORM
> (c) copyright 1999 by
> someone else.
>
> Dear:
>
> [ ] Clueless Newbie [ ] Lamer [X] Flamer
> [X ] Loser [X] Spammer [X] Troller
> [ ] "Me too" er [ X] Pervert [ ] Geek
> [X ] Freak [ ] Nerd [ ] Elvis
> [ ] Racist [ ] Fed [X ] Freak
> [ ] Fundamentalist [ ] Satanist [ ] Homeopath
> [X ] Unbearably self-righteous person
>
> I took exception to your recent:
>
> [ ] Email [ X] Post to ______________Too Many News Groups______.
> (newsgroup)
>
> It was (check all that apply):
>
> [X] Lame [X ] Stupid [X ] Abusive
> [X ] Clueless [X ] Idiotic [X] Brain-damaged
> [X Imbecilic [X] Arrogant [X ] Malevolent
> [X ] Contemptible [X] Libelous [ ] Ignorant
> [X] Clueless [X] Stupid [ ] Fundamentalist
> [ ] Boring [ ] Dim [X] Cowardly
> [X ] Deceitful [X] Demented [X] Self-righteous
> [X ] Crazy [ ] Weird [X ] Hypocritical
> [ ] Loathsome [ ] Satanic [ ] Despicable
> [X ] Belligerent [ ] Mind-numbing [ ] Maladroit
> [X] Much longer than any worthwhile thought of which you may be
> capable.
>
> Your attention is drawn to the fact that:
>
> [ ] You posted what should have been emailed
> [ ] You obviously don't know how to read your newsgroups line
> [X ] You are trying to make money on a non-commercial newsgroup
> [X ] You self-righteously impose your religious beliefs on others
> [X ] You self-righteously impose your racial beliefs on others
> [ ] You posted a binary in a non-binaries group
> [X ] You don't know which group to post in
> [X] You posted something totally uninteresting
> [X] You crossposted to *way* too many newsgroups
> [X] I don't like your tone of voice
> [X] What you posted has been done before.
> [X] Not only that, it was also done better the last time.
> [ ] You quoted an *entire* post in your reply
> [X] You started a long, stupid thread
> [X] You continued spreading a long stupid thread
> [X ] Your post is absurdly off topic for where you posted it
> [XXXXXXXXXX ] find a volcano and throw yourself in
> [X] get a gun and shoot yourself
> [ ] Actually post something relevant
> [ ] Read the FAQ
> [ ] stick to FidoNet and come back when you've grown up
> [X] Apologize to everybody in this newsgroup
> [ ] consume excrement
> [X] consume excrement and thus expire
> [ ] Post your tests to alt.test/misc.test
> [ ] Put your home phone number in your ads from now on
> [X] Refrain from posting until you have a vague idea what you're
> doing
>
> In Closing, I'd Like to Say:
>
> [ ] You need to seek psychiatric help
> [ ] Take your gibberish somewhere else
> [ ] *plonk*
> [ ] Learn how to post or get off the usenet
> [ ] Most of the above
> [X] All of the above
> [ ] Some of the above, not including All of the above
> [ ] You are so clueless that I didn't even bother filling in this
> form.tion if he so chooses.
>
Hi Paul,
Just added a few where needed.
Hope you don't mind. (Hope it drives the little bonehead nuts.)
--
Carl cf...@prodigy.net
ICQ #:9262629
October 2001
Taliban Leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar: "The situation where
we are now, there are two thing: either death or victory. To those who
are fighting and bombarding us, they should understand the Afgan man
is a fighter willing to die for jihad."
June 1944
General George S. Patton: "I want you to remember that no
bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making
the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country. . ."
Odious
LOL! $250?!?!?!?
That's all?
Steve
Melissa Pearson
> >
> > That's all?
>
> No shit. Does that even cover expenses?
*snicker*
You guys hadn't heard that?
Yeah, Ray settled with Dean for $250 rather than fork over any actual cash
to fly to Florida to appear at the hearings, hire a lawyer, etc. For
someone so set in his opinions, seems sort of weenie-ish to me.
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
For four months you didn't post a THING to USENET, the lawsuit didn't cost
me a dime, and since it would have cost me a considerable amount of income
to continue it (which was not the case in the beginning), AND since
collecting on judgments is always iffy even if someone has money (I don't
know if you do or not nor do I care), I made which what FOR ME was the
correct choice.
You haven't repeated a thing that triggered the suit so obviously you got
the hint.
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
I wouldn't have had to hire a lawyer, but I would have had to miss out on a
new job I was starting.
Strictly a business decision, nothing more.
Jesters N Court
Gordon, GENIUS <r...@cybersheet.com> wrote in message
news:9u1hhq$v41$0...@pita.alt.net...
Steve
jester...@home.com says...
> I would chose $200K over a new job any day. Anyone actually buy that?
I'd choose $200K if the price were to put off a another job for 6
months or so...but then again, I'm sane.
Melissa Pearson
a
> new job I was starting.
Whatever Ray. Well all know you just don't have any balls.
Dean Dryer
> > > Odd that my last lawsuit didn't follow the course you predicted.
> >
> > Odd that your last lawsuit didn't go the way YOU predicted either. What
> did you
> > sue for? Was is $200K and you settled for $250 rather than face me in
> court?
> >
> > Not exactly the brilliant legal victory you predicted.
>
> For four months you didn't post a THING to USENET, the lawsuit didn't cost
> me a dime, and since it would have cost me a considerable amount of income
> to continue it (which was not the case in the beginning), AND since
> collecting on judgments is always iffy even if someone has money (I don't
> know if you do or not nor do I care), I made which what FOR ME was the
> correct choice.
>
> You haven't repeated a thing that triggered the suit so obviously you got
> the hint.
I have repeated many times that YOU ARE NOT A GYMNASTICS COACH!!!!!!
Let me say it again .........YOU ARE NOT A GYMNASTICS COACH!!!!!!
The fact is, you never had a case. Any more than you had the courage to come
down and face me (or the cash for a lawyer).
Dean Dryer
John C. Randolph
"Ray Gordon, GENIUS" wrote:
> Harassment is illegal.
So why don't you quit doing it, asshole?
-jcr
Ray Gordon, GENIUS
>
> So why don't you quit doing it, asshole?
I'm not harassing anyone out here.
You're defaming me, however.
Kindly cease and desist.
Br...@interbaun.com
You literally CAN'T defame RAY MORON, TOUT FRAUD
since this would be very little different than
Osama Bin Laden whining that he has been "defamed"
by all those people saying unkind words about him.
Odious
"Ray Gordon, GENIUS" wrote:
>
> > > Harassment is illegal.
> >
> > So why don't you quit doing it, asshole?
>
> I'm not harassing anyone out here.
>
So where are the people you are harassing?
CFB1
"Ray Gordon, GENIUS" wrote:
> > > Harassment is illegal.
> >
> > So why don't you quit doing it, asshole?
>
> I'm not harassing anyone out here.
>
Bullshit.
>
> You're defaming me, however.
>
Again, Bullshit.
>
> Kindly cease and desist.
Bite me.
America Rocks!
<Tumbl...@stonehill.org> wrote:
Why on earth did you pay him $250??? Were you actually guilty of
something? What did your lawyer advise???
This is so puzzling to me.
Dean Dryer
> > Odd that your last lawsuit didn't go the way YOU predicted either. What did
> > you
> > sue for? Was is $200K and you settled for $250 rather than face me in court?
> >
> > Not exactly the brilliant legal victory you predicted.
> >
> > Dean
>
> Why on earth did you pay him $250??? Were you actually guilty of
> something? What did your lawyer advise???
This is precisely what my lawyer advised. You see in FL if you lose a case when
there is an offer on the table, you are liable for your opponents legals fees. So I
made the offer of $250 in anticipation of the judge laughing Ray out of court. My
guess is he realized this too, and thought the $250 was better than getting hit
with my legal fees plus whatever sanctions the judge smacked him with.
Dean Dryer
Michael P. Reed
> "America Rocks!" wrote:
>
> > > Odd that your last lawsuit didn't go the way YOU predicted either. What
> > > you
> > > sue for? Was is $200K and you settled for $250 rather than face me in
> court?
> > >
> > > Not exactly the brilliant legal victory you predicted.
> > >
> > > Dean
> >
> > Why on earth did you pay him $250??? Were you actually guilty of
> > something? What did your lawyer advise???
>
> This is precisely what my lawyer advised. You see in FL if you lose a case
> when
> there is an offer on the table, you are liable for your opponents legals
> fees. So I
> made the offer of $250 in anticipation of the judge laughing Ray out of
> court. My
> guess is he realized this too, and thought the $250 was better than getting
> hit
> with my legal fees plus whatever sanctions the judge smacked him with.
Dean, is there a minimum limit for settlement offers, or could you have hit him
with something absurdly low such as a Twenty?
--
Regards,
Michael P. Reed