PE> Timothy someone rang me up today, asking for your details,
PE> but I said I wouldn't give out details without a court
PE> order, and he said he was going to get a court order.
PE> He wants to sue you for something you said in BBS_USER.

RS> Most likely Andrew Blume's bum buddy.
RS> I said that about him quite explicitly |-)

RS> I dont even know what his other name is, only Andy ever writes in BBS_USER

PE> How do you know to abuse him but you don't actually know his name?

Its quite possible to abuse someone whose name you dont know |-)

AND I just said that I didnt know his LAST name. I do now.

RS> He hasnt got a fucking hope in hell of 'suing', the stupid
RS> poofters havent even noticed that now its legal, they cant do
RS> a damned thing about people who remark on them being poofters.

PE> So could he sue you if you said something about him that was
PE> illegal, like drug-running or going 65 km/h in a 60k zone?

Depends entirely on how bad the illegality is. Yes, if you said
someone was a drug baron, and they were not, AND they could show
that that statement had produced a REAL effect on say their income
etc, THEN they certainly have some chance of suing you.

But if you accused someone of say breaking the 60K limit, which
everyone does occasionally, sometimes deliberately, sometimes not, the
person you said that about would have buckleys, essentially because you
having said that hasnt actually caused them any financial damage etc.

PE> He's going to raise a PC against me (he asked me how who my NC was, so
PE> presumably he's not a sysop and about to get a surprise on that score).

RS> Andrew Blume, his bum buddy, is tho. Corse he cant PC you on that anyway.

PE> There are some very wide interpretations of P4.

Sure. But when that sort of thing is quite common in fido, and
Andy himself has replied with the phrase 'dickless piece of faeces',
he is gunna find it DAMNED hard to win any PC on those grounds.

RS> Tell him to go and fuck himself. He's got buckleys doing
RS> anything from Melburg anyway, and wouldnt have a hope in hell
RS> of ever getting a 'court order' in this particular case anyway.

PE> He's pretty keen to ring me from Melbourne.

Taint expensive, he may even have used that Optus $2 special.
Hardly what you might call a huge investment. And that only
is better than the normal Optus rate after 19 minutes anyway.

He wont be bothering with any 'court order' anyway, he rang
me last night. I told him to go and fuck himself myself |-)

PE> BTW, I went looking to see who "Andrew Blume" was.

I notice he aint in my nodelist, but then I havent bothered to
actually apply those nodelist updates I have been getting TICed.

Here is the bottom of his messages

   -- Andrew R Blume  *  Ph 0411515604  *  tardis{at}ozramp.net.au

   --- BigKahunaMail 1.20X+

   PATH: 632/536 635/727 728 50/99 712/624 711/808 934

PE> Is this of any use (keep it under your hat)?

Thanks for that, could be useful |-)


Here is the bit that caused Timmy to chuck a tantrum.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
AB> Tim (other partner)

And your bum buddy too by the sounds of it.

AB> is going to buy out all of my share in the business
AB> except for 5%-15%. I'll be moving to a weekly pay system,

So it doesnt actually make the slightest sense for us to be
paying you Austudy Andy, whatever the law currently allows.

AB> and have day-to-day operation of the office.

Which consists of you and your bum buddy, and an unpaid 'staff member'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
@EOT:

---