Full Version: ORV Kentucky Video Stills
Considering Matt distributed the video long before Craig or Loren I was wondering how he planned to sue himself.
QUOTE(Blackdog @ Feb 9 2007, 02:16 PM) 
He's quite the little investigator, he already has two replies for something he could have done himself. I'm quite sure he already knew how to contact these gentlemen and if not he wouldn't need to offer a reward.
This is just another publicity stunt and a cry for attention that has been used many times by some other less than reputable "bigfooters".
I'd actually like to see it go to court.
MM: Your Honor, these guy's stole my bigfoot video, I was gonna get rich off of that!!
Judge: You're kidding right?
MM: No sir, I have a law degree... so there.
Judge: Uh, huh...I don't see a bigfoot. How did you get this video, maybe this court should visit the film site.
MM: Well, Judge, you would never have been allowed on the trip in the first place ...
We're selective about who we permit to assist with these efforts, and you would not have made the cut.
It's not just a matter of whether you could afford the fee (which you probably could not ...). It's a matter of how much you could assist with a strenuous, complicated, reactive field effort.
These trips are only for *productive* people, Judge. You could not be very productive if you spend hours and hours and days on end in courtrooms like this one, along with a whole lot of other unproductive rejects who can only waste their hours and days deliberating mindless, tittering blather, driven by feelings of powerlessness and social isolation ... and often addictions to various substances like perscription painkillers.
Do you know anyone like that, Your Honor ?? ;-)
No, you wouldn't make the cut for a BFRO expedition, so you don't need to make a choice in that regard. I'll make it for you. You only need to waste a few more precious hours of your life trying come up with yet another pointless decision in another pointless trial, along with the rest of the pathetic "regulars" here ...
Judge: Bailiff....whack his pee-pee!
(sorry old Cheech and Chong reference, but then again I'm old... Or was it George Carlin? Told ya I was old :new_lmaosmiley: )
This is just another publicity stunt and a cry for attention that has been used many times by some other less than reputable "bigfooters".
I'd actually like to see it go to court.
MM: Your Honor, these guy's stole my bigfoot video, I was gonna get rich off of that!!
Judge: You're kidding right?
MM: No sir, I have a law degree... so there.
Judge: Uh, huh...I don't see a bigfoot. How did you get this video, maybe this court should visit the film site.
MM: Well, Judge, you would never have been allowed on the trip in the first place ...
We're selective about who we permit to assist with these efforts, and you would not have made the cut.
It's not just a matter of whether you could afford the fee (which you probably could not ...). It's a matter of how much you could assist with a strenuous, complicated, reactive field effort.
These trips are only for *productive* people, Judge. You could not be very productive if you spend hours and hours and days on end in courtrooms like this one, along with a whole lot of other unproductive rejects who can only waste their hours and days deliberating mindless, tittering blather, driven by feelings of powerlessness and social isolation ... and often addictions to various substances like perscription painkillers.
Do you know anyone like that, Your Honor ?? ;-)
No, you wouldn't make the cut for a BFRO expedition, so you don't need to make a choice in that regard. I'll make it for you. You only need to waste a few more precious hours of your life trying come up with yet another pointless decision in another pointless trial, along with the rest of the pathetic "regulars" here ...
Judge: Bailiff....whack his pee-pee!
(sorry old Cheech and Chong reference, but then again I'm old... Or was it George Carlin? Told ya I was old :new_lmaosmiley: )
:laugh: This is must read stuff.
Excellent Blackdog !!!!!!! :laugh:
:yeahthat:
good one BD! :icon_really_happy_guy:
good one BD! :icon_really_happy_guy:
QUOTE(counselor @ Feb 9 2007, 04:53 PM)
Matt is blustering and making public threats because he can't do much else.
If you have an issue with me Matt, you have my email. Drop me a line and we'll talk about your concerns, Lawyer to Layperson.
If you have an issue with me Matt, you have my email. Drop me a line and we'll talk about your concerns, Lawyer to Layperson.
Matt must have rethought his post about you and Craig being "not bright" Counselor, it is no longer posted on his forum.
http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=369352
Counselor,
Matt's default mode of persuasion is intimidation. I see nothing new here. I doubt you have anything to worry about (not that you were ever worried).
Matt's default mode of persuasion is intimidation. I see nothing new here. I doubt you have anything to worry about (not that you were ever worried).
Anyone ever wonder how many other things they report on are faked ? just about every one of their outings have some sort of sighting happen on them. They need that to happen to keep getting fools to pay to go on them. If nothing ever happened no one would be willing to pay to go camping. To me this is just another case of the BFRO trying to get new people interested in them so they will pay to go camping with them.
Also it is funny to me that if they think this film is so good why is it not posted on their site ?
Also it is funny to me that if they think this film is so good why is it not posted on their site ?
Uh, excuse me, I have one small question.
Since the BFRO obviously gave the video at some point to one of my very best friends named Craig Woolheater, how can the BFRO sue said Craig Woolheater for copyright infringement?
This is crazy.
Nuts.
Since the BFRO obviously gave the video at some point to one of my very best friends named Craig Woolheater, how can the BFRO sue said Craig Woolheater for copyright infringement?
This is crazy.
Nuts.
Craig and Loren aren't the only ones MM 'leaked' the video to...before it was on Cryptomundo!
He might give that a thought!
He might give that a thought!
M.M. may not recognize the Fair Use provissions of the Federal Copyright law - but the courts do. Loren and Craig presented the video for educational purposes and research. At no place is there a 1-800 number to call or the price you would need to shell out for this ....... crap.
You need the circled C to indecate that the material is copyrighted. That is what is required as a warning to those how may try to use the material. If I was going to film anything that could be that importent, that copyright notice would be there. Hell, I would engrave the circle C on the lens if I needed to.
You need the circled C to indecate that the material is copyrighted. That is what is required as a warning to those how may try to use the material. If I was going to film anything that could be that importent, that copyright notice would be there. Hell, I would engrave the circle C on the lens if I needed to.
QUOTE(micahn @ Feb 9 2007, 08:32 PM)
Also it is funny to me that if they think this film is so good why is it not posted on their site ?
It's a great video!
You just need the magic kool aid to effectively view the squatch in the footage!
QUOTE(wudewasa @ Feb 9 2007, 10:42 PM)
It's a great video!
You just need the magic kool aid to effectively view the squatch in the footage!
You just need the magic kool aid to effectively view the squatch in the footage!
And a big ol' plate of pancakes goes great with the show too! :eek3dance:
:popcorn2:
This should be interesting to watch. Could you imagine if this does go to trial what MM would be like on the stand. :new_lmaosmiley:
This should be interesting to watch. Could you imagine if this does go to trial what MM would be like on the stand. :new_lmaosmiley:
Getting back to the video...Who set up the camera? Whoever did, they were lousy at framing the shot. I have a camera set up behind my house and the deer feeder is the center of the frame. That way, I can see the deer from whatever direction they come from. Also, I noticed a "light" coming from the right side of the shot. Since it's an IR camera, I would have to assume it's an IR illuminator of some kind. Was there another camera over to the right or was someone shining a flashlight while she was setting out the pancakes? How anyone could ascertain any kind of details from that, is beyond me. Much less seeing the "bigfoot licking their fingers"?? Okaaaaaaaaaay. 
QUOTE(darkwinglh @ Feb 9 2007, 02:16 PM)
Over at the BFRO forum, Navigator just posted a bounty on two of our favorite people for the release of this footage.
The Other Board where it's at
If anyone knows how to contact our favorite people, let them know.
Thanks
Darkwing
Click to view attachment
The Other Board where it's at
If anyone knows how to contact our favorite people, let them know.
Thanks
Darkwing
Click to view attachment
Matt's ranting lawsuit thread apparently has been removed from the board.
Wonder why??? :doh:
There are several possibilities here I think.
1. The actual owner of the video from Canada called mm and asked 'why is my video that I paid for all over the internet"? With that in mind, mm had to come up with something to allay the blame somewhere else, hence the threats etc. since removed from his site.
2. Considering the poor quality and value of the film (what animal PICKS UP a plate and eats from it, extremely poor quality video, insufficient illumination, poor camera angle, I mean really, a little sleeping medication in the syrup would have possible solved this mystery, don't you think?) this may just have been mm's way OF HAVING THE VIDEO EVALUATED, I mean we just did it for him! This way he knows what he needs to do when he makes another fake video more believable.
3. Perhaps mm needed to make a big fuss over the video, in order to get more 'hits' on his site, and try to keep folks away from the other sites, by threatening to sue.
4. mm may actually want the video to stay off the internet, if enough people see what he considers evidence of bigfoot, it may cut into his business, you can get 'evidence' like this in your own back yard (obviously) so why go on a trip?
Just thinking out loud
1. The actual owner of the video from Canada called mm and asked 'why is my video that I paid for all over the internet"? With that in mind, mm had to come up with something to allay the blame somewhere else, hence the threats etc. since removed from his site.
2. Considering the poor quality and value of the film (what animal PICKS UP a plate and eats from it, extremely poor quality video, insufficient illumination, poor camera angle, I mean really, a little sleeping medication in the syrup would have possible solved this mystery, don't you think?) this may just have been mm's way OF HAVING THE VIDEO EVALUATED, I mean we just did it for him! This way he knows what he needs to do when he makes another fake video more believable.
3. Perhaps mm needed to make a big fuss over the video, in order to get more 'hits' on his site, and try to keep folks away from the other sites, by threatening to sue.
4. mm may actually want the video to stay off the internet, if enough people see what he considers evidence of bigfoot, it may cut into his business, you can get 'evidence' like this in your own back yard (obviously) so why go on a trip?
Just thinking out loud
QUOTE(darkwinglh @ Feb 9 2007, 02:16 PM)
Over at the BFRO forum, Navigator just posted a bounty on two of our favorite people for the release of this footage.
The Other Board where it's at
If anyone knows how to contact our favorite people, let them know.
Thanks
Darkwing
Click to view attachment
The Other Board where it's at
If anyone knows how to contact our favorite people, let them know.
Thanks
Darkwing
Click to view attachment
I got the board when I clicked the link, but it just said "error".
The message came out fine when I clicked to enlarge. So they're suing but they don't know where to find them? Oh.
This whole thing is texbook Matt. He loves to stir the BFF pot and then sit back and watch the fireworks. If he doesn't get the big explosion he's going for he'll throw in some insults to fan the flames.
QUOTE(ARsquatch @ Feb 10 2007, 08:55 AM)
This whole thing is texbook Matt. He loves to stir the BFF pot and then sit back and watch the fireworks. If he doesn't get the big explosion he's going for he'll throw in some insults to fan the flames.
I agree AR. For someone who claims he dislikes this board so much, he sure likes to give us topics to discuss - usually him. What a piece of work. LMAO.
I wonder if Mr. Moneymaker could get into legal problems himself for posting someones full name and address on the internet (without their permission) and calling it a bounty? Especially after someone posted they would like to deliver the papers to these people personally. Hummmm.....
Maybe the attorney for the "Canadian Party" sent Mr. MoneyMaker a letter saying "WOULD YOU SHUT THE H*&^^ UP!!! Now that I could see happening. :laugh:
I would imagine that if he had a legal leg to stand on, he would have never said anything in a public forum to begin with. Now that everyone has called his bluff, he is pulling out to save face.
lol you apparently don't know Matt (Honcho) Moneymaker. He distributed the video to apparently quite a few people even though the copyright (according to his posts) belongs to a wealthy Canadian. He cannot resist the urge to stir the pot. The only thing he will not do is post his diatribe here on the BFF since the odds are not stacked in his favor and he cannot control the backlash he generates.
QUOTE(Melissa @ Feb 10 2007, 10:53 AM)
I wonder if Mr. Moneymaker could get into legal problems himself for posting someones full name and address on the internet (without their permission) and calling it a bounty? Especially after someone posted they would like to deliver the papers to these people personally. Hummmm.....
I was wondering if it might not just qualify as intimidation or harassment to say those things Matt did. Surely someone beside Counselor might work in the legal profession? *hint hint*
:eek3dance:
QUOTE(GuyInIndiana @ Feb 10 2007, 12:06 PM)
I was wondering if it might not just qualify as intimidation or harassment to say those things Matt did. Surely someone beside Counselor might work in the legal profession? *hint hint*
:eek3dance:
:eek3dance:
There won't be any legal advice posted on a forum - but I can't imagine going before a judge and whining that someone stole my client's Bigfoot video.
"That's right your honor, we want damages for theft of a bigfoot video ."
"Uh, Counselor, can I see you in chambers......"
Next scene - a very, very quiet courtroom.
"Yes judge, I understand, yes we will be dismissing the action here and I will refile it in - uh - that place you told me to shove it."
QUOTE
"RE : KY
We all owe a deep debt of gratitude to Gregg Clay (Investigator - KY) and Adrian Erickson (Investigator - BC).
In between his family responsibilities and his environmental surveying job, Gregg Clay has repeatedly made the hour long drive to the property and consistently handled the owners with great style and finesse.
Matt "
It's the real deal, and we're likely to get a lot more of it from this
location".
"It's definitely not a guy in a costume."
"Here's what you are going to do, Francisco. You are going to go back on
the BFF and have the last word on that thread about me. You are going
to help me fight fire with fire. You are going to say that:
1) You've from someone currently in the BFRO about what was said on the
BFF, and you now realize their attitudes are driven by plain old
rivalry and jealously. You are going to use the words "rivalry" and
"jealousy" in your post, because THAT IS THE REALITY.
2) That BFRO members say the BFRO is a much better organization now
that those people, with those attitudes and those lies, have been
ejected from it.
3) The BFRO is growing, and will grow with good people no matter how
much they try to discourage it on the BFF.
4) You are going to say that you will not be posting anything on the
BFF anymore because you want to do field research with people, and not
just play games on message boards.
You will have to make these points in your own words, to correct what
you already implied or agreed with or encouraged.
If you do not do this, today, then I have to assume that you're a very
big risk to have involved in any bigfoot field research.
If you don't think I can pull the plug on you quickly, comprehensively,
and permanently, after the sh*t you wrote about me on that message
board, then try me.
No one who actually does bigfoot research in the field will want to
touch you with ten foot pole if I merely tell them to look up your
posts on the BFF. They'll be pretty shocked by what you wrote, and
you'll be radioactive.
You may have lost a lot of friends today, because you got suckered by a
handful of lying losers. I'm giving you one opportunity to recover.
Matt"
We all owe a deep debt of gratitude to Gregg Clay (Investigator - KY) and Adrian Erickson (Investigator - BC).
In between his family responsibilities and his environmental surveying job, Gregg Clay has repeatedly made the hour long drive to the property and consistently handled the owners with great style and finesse.
Matt "
It's the real deal, and we're likely to get a lot more of it from this
location".
"It's definitely not a guy in a costume."
"Here's what you are going to do, Francisco. You are going to go back on
the BFF and have the last word on that thread about me. You are going
to help me fight fire with fire. You are going to say that:
1) You've from someone currently in the BFRO about what was said on the
BFF, and you now realize their attitudes are driven by plain old
rivalry and jealously. You are going to use the words "rivalry" and
"jealousy" in your post, because THAT IS THE REALITY.
2) That BFRO members say the BFRO is a much better organization now
that those people, with those attitudes and those lies, have been
ejected from it.
3) The BFRO is growing, and will grow with good people no matter how
much they try to discourage it on the BFF.
4) You are going to say that you will not be posting anything on the
BFF anymore because you want to do field research with people, and not
just play games on message boards.
You will have to make these points in your own words, to correct what
you already implied or agreed with or encouraged.
If you do not do this, today, then I have to assume that you're a very
big risk to have involved in any bigfoot field research.
If you don't think I can pull the plug on you quickly, comprehensively,
and permanently, after the sh*t you wrote about me on that message
board, then try me.
No one who actually does bigfoot research in the field will want to
touch you with ten foot pole if I merely tell them to look up your
posts on the BFF. They'll be pretty shocked by what you wrote, and
you'll be radioactive.
You may have lost a lot of friends today, because you got suckered by a
handful of lying losers. I'm giving you one opportunity to recover.
Matt"
I don't ever want to go into the woods with someone like this. I especially don't want to PAY
to go with someone who considers this video as 'evidence'.
Hopefully prospective campers can research mm and find out beforehand what he is like.
He may actually have to take up honest gainful employment!
QUOTE(sasquatchin @ Feb 10 2007, 03:02 PM)
He may actually have to take up honest gainful employment!
Maybe he could open a kool aid stand?!
QUOTE(sasquatchin @ Feb 10 2007, 03:02 PM)
He may actually have to take up honest gainful employment!
Who would hire him?
It's funny, all these years I have been following bigfoot I have gotten more and more into it. To the point where I check the BFRO every day to see what new reports are there and what's being discussed in the forum. MM, however has always given me a bit of an uneasy feeling. There was something about him, the way he runs the site, especially the way his forum is moderated. He likes being a little hitler in his own little world. There is no doubt about that. I also didn't like the way it was implied from time to time that the BFRO has all this evidence under review that is not released to the public!!! Why the hell not? What are people showing up here every day for if you guys are holding back the real poop? Do they at least show this stuff to the guys who go on the $300 camping trips? Not from what I gather. What is he doing with the 12 grand that he gets from one of these expeditions. He says overhead!!! Overhead??? I've been camping all my life and it never cost me anything to take a group of people into the woods, especially if they had to bring all their own equipment and pay for everything themselves (food, lodging) once they got there. What's to stop people from going to where the trip is and just shadowing the group the whole time anyway. For free. Will they shoot you (probably will if you catch one of the minions producing the tree knocks to scare the campers). I guess you'll miss out on the special training talk from MM himself: "don't put pancakes in your pockets around these things guys, it could be dangerous!"
Then this crap comes up the other day and I see a post about how the wrath of God is coming in the form of lawsuits!!! Loren Coleman and Woolheater. Two names I've heard of and am under the impression are actually trying to get something done. Now its starting to stink. I go through and read all the background threads here and Crypto. Now I'm thinking what kind of an idiot would try to sue for half a mil over that!!! I try to ask nice why he has been sitting on this for a year and a half. Boom, hits me with the ban-stick!!! Now I get him completely. How dare I question the intentions of the LORD OF THE BIGFOOT SEARCH?
I feel sorry for all the volunteers that are doing all his legwork for him, but they do make the public part of his site pretty worth while. I now know, however, that his name belies his true intentions. He is at best incompetent (witness his video stake out) and most likely a charlatan. I'm glad he never got a penny of mine.
BTW: I happened to find this site about a week ago when someone posted a link from that forum to this one. I lurked around for a while and then commented that the traffic and content over here was pretty impressive. My comment and the original link were deleted. This was another experience that started raising an eyebrow.
Then this crap comes up the other day and I see a post about how the wrath of God is coming in the form of lawsuits!!! Loren Coleman and Woolheater. Two names I've heard of and am under the impression are actually trying to get something done. Now its starting to stink. I go through and read all the background threads here and Crypto. Now I'm thinking what kind of an idiot would try to sue for half a mil over that!!! I try to ask nice why he has been sitting on this for a year and a half. Boom, hits me with the ban-stick!!! Now I get him completely. How dare I question the intentions of the LORD OF THE BIGFOOT SEARCH?
I feel sorry for all the volunteers that are doing all his legwork for him, but they do make the public part of his site pretty worth while. I now know, however, that his name belies his true intentions. He is at best incompetent (witness his video stake out) and most likely a charlatan. I'm glad he never got a penny of mine.
BTW: I happened to find this site about a week ago when someone posted a link from that forum to this one. I lurked around for a while and then commented that the traffic and content over here was pretty impressive. My comment and the original link were deleted. This was another experience that started raising an eyebrow.
Welcome to the BFF Miterman. That's a humdinger of a first post. 
QUOTE(sasquatchin @ Feb 10 2007, 03:02 PM)
"RE : KY
We all owe a deep debt of gratitude to Gregg Clay (Investigator - KY) and Adrian Erickson (Investigator - BC).
In between his family responsibilities and his environmental surveying job, Gregg Clay has repeatedly made the hour long drive to the property and consistently handled the owners with great style and finesse.
Matt "
It's the real deal, and we're likely to get a lot more of it from this
location".
"It's definitely not a guy in a costume."
"Here's what you are going to do, Francisco. You are going to go back on
the BFF and have the last word on that thread about me. You are going
to help me fight fire with fire. You are going to say that:
1) You've from someone currently in the BFRO about what was said on the
BFF, and you now realize their attitudes are driven by plain old
rivalry and jealously. You are going to use the words "rivalry" and
"jealousy" in your post, because THAT IS THE REALITY.
2) That BFRO members say the BFRO is a much better organization now
that those people, with those attitudes and those lies, have been
ejected from it.
3) The BFRO is growing, and will grow with good people no matter how
much they try to discourage it on the BFF.
4) You are going to say that you will not be posting anything on the
BFF anymore because you want to do field research with people, and not
just play games on message boards.
You will have to make these points in your own words, to correct what
you already implied or agreed with or encouraged.
If you do not do this, today, then I have to assume that you're a very
big risk to have involved in any bigfoot field research.
If you don't think I can pull the plug on you quickly, comprehensively,
and permanently, after the sh*t you wrote about me on that message
board, then try me.
No one who actually does bigfoot research in the field will want to
touch you with ten foot pole if I merely tell them to look up your
posts on the BFF. They'll be pretty shocked by what you wrote, and
you'll be radioactive.
You may have lost a lot of friends today, because you got suckered by a
handful of lying losers. I'm giving you one opportunity to recover.
Matt"
I don't ever want to go into the woods with someone like this. I especially don't want to PAY
to go with someone who considers this video as 'evidence'.
Hopefully prospective campers can research mm and find out beforehand what he is like.
He may actually have to take up honest gainful employment!
We all owe a deep debt of gratitude to Gregg Clay (Investigator - KY) and Adrian Erickson (Investigator - BC).
In between his family responsibilities and his environmental surveying job, Gregg Clay has repeatedly made the hour long drive to the property and consistently handled the owners with great style and finesse.
Matt "
It's the real deal, and we're likely to get a lot more of it from this
location".
"It's definitely not a guy in a costume."
"Here's what you are going to do, Francisco. You are going to go back on
the BFF and have the last word on that thread about me. You are going
to help me fight fire with fire. You are going to say that:
1) You've from someone currently in the BFRO about what was said on the
BFF, and you now realize their attitudes are driven by plain old
rivalry and jealously. You are going to use the words "rivalry" and
"jealousy" in your post, because THAT IS THE REALITY.
2) That BFRO members say the BFRO is a much better organization now
that those people, with those attitudes and those lies, have been
ejected from it.
3) The BFRO is growing, and will grow with good people no matter how
much they try to discourage it on the BFF.
4) You are going to say that you will not be posting anything on the
BFF anymore because you want to do field research with people, and not
just play games on message boards.
You will have to make these points in your own words, to correct what
you already implied or agreed with or encouraged.
If you do not do this, today, then I have to assume that you're a very
big risk to have involved in any bigfoot field research.
If you don't think I can pull the plug on you quickly, comprehensively,
and permanently, after the sh*t you wrote about me on that message
board, then try me.
No one who actually does bigfoot research in the field will want to
touch you with ten foot pole if I merely tell them to look up your
posts on the BFF. They'll be pretty shocked by what you wrote, and
you'll be radioactive.
You may have lost a lot of friends today, because you got suckered by a
handful of lying losers. I'm giving you one opportunity to recover.
Matt"
I don't ever want to go into the woods with someone like this. I especially don't want to PAY
to go with someone who considers this video as 'evidence'.
Hopefully prospective campers can research mm and find out beforehand what he is like.
He may actually have to take up honest gainful employment!
And while I am typing up my first post sasquatchin is posting this!!!! OMFG!!!
That "little hitler" comment sure seems to fit doesn't it?
I can't believe I ever considered taking that guy seriously.
I agree Miterman, heck of a first post. Welcome to the BFF. Feel free to voice your opinions here. :new_thumbsupsmileyanim:
QUOTE(GuyInIndiana @ Feb 10 2007, 12:06 PM)
I was wondering if it might not just qualify as intimidation or harassment to say those things Matt did. Surely someone beside Counselor might work in the legal profession? *hint hint*
:eek3dance:
:eek3dance:
Well, I am not an attorney.
http://pcworld.about.com/news/Jan132006id124373.htm
Writing annoying, anonymous online posts or e-mails could land you in jail for as long as two years. That's according to the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005, which was signed into law last week.
According to a section of the act, anyone who uses the Internet anonymously "with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person" can be tried for violating federal telecommunications law and face fines or jail.
________________________________________________________________________________
__
And, yes - I cant imagine why this would not apply to men, who have had their personal information discussed on an internet website, or blog. But, I am not an attorney.
QUOTE(JayleeD @ Feb 10 2007, 05:48 PM)
I agree Miterman, heck of a first post. Welcome to the BFF. Feel free to voice your opinions here. :new_thumbsupsmileyanim:
Thank you all for the welcome!
:smile:
QUOTE(Miterman @ Feb 10 2007, 01:20 PM)
BTW: I happened to find this site about a week ago when someone posted a link from that forum to this one. I lurked around for a while and then commented that the traffic and content over here was pretty impressive. My comment and the original link were deleted. This was another experience that started raising an eyebrow.
... and they don't like it when you mention to Google "forum" and "bigfoot" after editing your own post, because the link you post shows up as *************.com :new_hmmsmiley02:
Alan
QUOTE(Melissa @ Feb 10 2007, 06:31 PM)
Well, I am not an attorney.
http://pcworld.about.com/news/Jan132006id124373.htm
Writing annoying, anonymous online posts or e-mails could land you in jail for as long as two years. That's according to the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005, which was signed into law last week.
According to a section of the act, anyone who uses the Internet anonymously "with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person" can be tried for violating federal telecommunications law and face fines or jail.
________________________________________________________________________________
__
And, yes - I cant imagine why this would not apply to men, who have had their personal information discussed on an internet website, or blog. But, I am not an attorney.
http://pcworld.about.com/news/Jan132006id124373.htm
Writing annoying, anonymous online posts or e-mails could land you in jail for as long as two years. That's according to the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005, which was signed into law last week.
According to a section of the act, anyone who uses the Internet anonymously "with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person" can be tried for violating federal telecommunications law and face fines or jail.
________________________________________________________________________________
__
And, yes - I cant imagine why this would not apply to men, who have had their personal information discussed on an internet website, or blog. But, I am not an attorney.
I have long wondered how that would apply if a person were to be accused of drug use, or worse, on an open forum... :new_whistle:
hmmm.. interesting... is that law retroactive back to oh.. say 2005? If some inflammatory nasty things were said about someone *cough*trailer-trash*cough* back in 2005 could the offender be charged? What's the statute of limitations on something like that?
QUOTE(ARsquatch @ Feb 10 2007, 09:25 PM)
hmmm.. interesting... is that law retroactive back to oh.. say 2005? If some inflammatory nasty things were said about someone *cough*trailer-trash*cough* back in 2005 could the offender be charged? What's the statute of limitations on something like that?
That's a really good question also...
Brings up all kinds of things to think about...such as what constitutes defemation of character?
QUOTE(ARsquatch @ Feb 10 2007, 08:25 PM)
hmmm.. interesting... is that law retroactive back to oh.. say 2005? If some inflammatory nasty things were said about someone *cough*trailer-trash*cough* back in 2005 could the offender be charged? What's the statute of limitations on something like that?
Oh, thats a bit over my head. There are Jurisdiction issues and the question of when the clock starts ticking (when it was seen or discovered, I think).. I couldnt even imagine taking on a case such as Internet Harassment.. LMAO
An attorney would know much more about the specifics.
Probably just as well. I don't think I'd want to dig that old bone up and air it out again.
QUOTE(nightwing @ Feb 10 2007, 06:30 PM)
That's a really good question also...
Brings up all kinds of things to think about...such as what constitutes defemation of character?
Brings up all kinds of things to think about...such as what constitutes defemation of character?
Posting on a publicly accessible internet connection/page/forum would consitute defamation. Especially if it were to flow over into a person's professional life...i.e. the person being defamed coworker happens to read what is written and brings it up to a supervisor/boss and disciplinary action is taken as a result.
There has to be a demonstable effect from the aledged action however. I.e suspension, termination etc that the defamed can use as concrete evidence to support. And the defamed has the burden of proof placed upon him/her to prove the allegegations are false. With the accusation of drug use, a simple drug screen would surfice. With other circumstances, such as heresay evidence, affidavids and notorized statements would do......
I'm not sure as to the implications on credability with regards to BF research as it falls into a grey area. As we all are aware, we are involved in a search for something that generally is believed not to exist, at least by the scientific body as a whole, so it would be hard to define what is considered credible to determine the basis for defamation in this case....IMHO....
LOL!!!
Over at the turdball site, whenever anyone brings up this footage they are quickly silenced and the post is deleted.
He claims its his own prized footage, yet he won't even let his minions discuss it. They still, however, continue to hold him up as ATILLA THE SASQUATCH HUNTER. He has quite a hold on them.
:doh:
Over at the turdball site, whenever anyone brings up this footage they are quickly silenced and the post is deleted.
He claims its his own prized footage, yet he won't even let his minions discuss it. They still, however, continue to hold him up as ATILLA THE SASQUATCH HUNTER. He has quite a hold on them.
:doh:
Miterman - are they minions or underlings? 
QUOTE(PinelandsResearcher @ Feb 13 2007, 09:17 PM)
Miterman - are they minions or underlings?
sycophants :allhail:
QUOTE(PinelandsResearcher @ Feb 13 2007, 06:17 PM)
Miterman - are they minions or underlings?
I thought minions were mini onions? Which of course, makes MM the big stinker! :laugh:
QUOTE(Hairy Man @ Feb 13 2007, 10:33 PM)
I thought minions were mini onions? Which of course, makes MM the big stinker! :laugh:
Unless you like onions on your pancakes.
QUOTE(Hairy Man @ Feb 13 2007, 09:33 PM)
I thought minions were mini onions?
LMAO!!!
I tell ya, I wish I were a better writer. In a few years when the BFRO is dead and gone, all this stuff would make for a great book. "The Death of the BFRO-How Greed,Malice,Hatred and Stupidity Destroyed the Top Dog in Bigfoot Research" I'll even throw in a few pancake recipes,you know,just to spice things up.
Corey
Corey
QUOTE(DevouredbyVermn @ Feb 14 2007, 10:28 AM)
I tell ya, I wish I were a better writer. In a few years when the BFRO is dead and gone, all this stuff would make for a great book. "The Death of the BFRO-How Greed,Malice,Hatred and Stupidity Destroyed the Top Dog in Bigfoot Research" I'll even throw in a few pancake recipes,you know,just to spice things up.
Corey
Corey
Don't forget censorship!!!! :icon_bang:
How about ......toadies?
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! keep it going!!!! lol!!!!!
QUOTE(DevouredbyVermn @ Feb 14 2007, 10:28 AM)
I tell ya, I wish I were a better writer. In a few years when the BFRO is dead and gone, all this stuff would make for a great book. "The Death of the BFRO-How Greed,Malice,Hatred and Stupidity Destroyed the Top Dog in Bigfoot Research" I'll even throw in a few pancake recipes,you know,just to spice things up.
Corey
Corey
How funny. Is that why you wanted in just a month ago?
QUOTE(WISQUATCH @ Feb 9 2007, 11:23 PM)
:popcorn2:
This should be interesting to watch. Could you imagine if this does go to trial what MM would be like on the stand. :new_lmaosmiley:
This should be interesting to watch. Could you imagine if this does go to trial what MM would be like on the stand. :new_lmaosmiley:
He'd stutter.
Hey! Who the heck is this jimf dude???? :biggrin:
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.