Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

But fiction is meant to be entertaining, and this certainly fits the role.

[mainiac]

Mainiac, I don't know if you've noticed, but I made a conscious decision not to post in this thread mainly because of you.  Because I couldn't even neutrally pose a question for thoughts anymore without getting snapped at, which is exactly what triggered the last thread locking down.  I managed to keep it up for almost 60 pages and was trying to ween myself off of paying attention at all to break the urge... but now I can't resist breaking that decision to say - fucking really?  That is all.

So yeah, it was satire.  But if it makes you want to say "fucking really" when I talk this way about independents, maybe you should reflect a little about the way people talk about republicans and democrats.

[martinuzz]

Facebook lost a court case in the US, making it possible for parents whose children bought things online in Facebook games like Farmville or Candy Crush, or other in-app purchases, to get a full refund.

In California, a group of parents had teamed up to file a lawsuit against Facebook, pointing at the Family Code in Californian law, which protects children against being exploited by commercial parties.

In theory, this verdict opens the door for 100s of thousands of parents to claim money from Facebook.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/27/facebook-refund-children-app-purchases-lawsuit?CMP=twt_gu

So kids, go ahead and buy stuff online now, it's free once your parents claim it back. Just say you thought it was virtual money. (jk, don't burden your parents with tiresome lawsuits)

[Frumple]

Man... doublechecked to be sure. BFEL, sorry. Someone's been lying their ass off to you, again. The closest sanders came to an endorsement in march was saying what it'd take for it to happen. He didn't actually endorse, at all. That didn't happen until... shit, a couple weeks ago? Something like that.

And that's... completely unsurprising, mart. Contracts made by underage people (i.e. a kid buying something off facebook) are voidable (i.e. they're legit, but the underage party can pull out at any time, for any or even no reason, after which both parties generally have to return whatever was involved). Can only assume that family code thing is a further expansion of that.

[scriver]

Mainiac, I don't know if you've noticed, but I made a conscious decision not to post in this thread mainly because of you.  Because I couldn't even neutrally pose a question for thoughts anymore without getting snapped at, which is exactly what triggered the last thread locking down.  I managed to keep it up for almost 60 pages and was trying to ween myself off of paying attention at all to break the urge... but now I can't resist breaking that decision to say - fucking really?  That is all.

So yeah, it was satire.  But if it makes you want to say "fucking really" when I talk this way about independents, maybe you should reflect a little about the way people talk about republicans and democrats.

His point was that your attacks against everyone who disagrees with you went beyond "different opinions arguing" and into "can't stand differing opinions" territory. It's not about any random one saying that about independents, it's about you, personally, saying it, after your behaviour in this and the previous thread.

[martinuzz]

And that's... completely unsurprising, mart. Contracts made by underage people (i.e. a kid buying something off facebook) are voidable (i.e. they're legit, but the underage party can pull out at any time, after which both parties generally have to return whatever was involved). Can only assume that family code thing is a further expansion of that.

Well yeah, it's not that surprising, except in this case the products cannot be returned after voiding, since they've already been used up. What surprises me most is that it took nearly 5 years for the court to rule in the case, which was filed in 2012.

[mainiac]

His point was that your attacks against everyone who disagrees with you went beyond "different opinions arguing" and into "can't stand differing opinions" territory. It's not about any random one saying that about independents, it's about you, personally, saying it, after your behaviour in this and the previous thread.

IT WAS SATIRE.  Holy shit.  Read the goddamn text again.  How can you not see that.  I intentionally undermined my "argument" repeatedly.

I was mocking the shitty, intolerant attitude he was showing.  Why can you only see intolerance when it's directed at your side?  I would expect it to make a little difference which is why I was doing the satire but I wasn't expecting this level of obdurate response.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

free speech doesn't mean you're free from consequences satire hurts people the same as being serious

is not joke joke not real

SERIOUS

BUSINESS

[Frumple]

Well yeah, it's not that surprising, except in this case the products cannot be returned after voiding, since they've already been used up. What surprises me most is that it took nearly 5 years for the court to rule in the case, which was filed in 2012.

*shrugs* Refund for equivalent value, maybe less the few cents it cost the company to process the data. Want to say there's something similar for services, too, but I'm not exactly a contract law specialist

As for the time, that's... fairly normal for anything beyond the most perfunctory of business-related legal stuff. Longer happens pretty often, too... not that unusual for a major-ish case (or even just one where one of the folks involved are being particularly stubborn) to take over a decade. There's a reason legal fees like to bankrupt less well off folks.

I actually had a teacher that spent something like... ten, fifteen years trying to get money out of their spouse after a divorce. Eventually just gave up. Wasn't worth the time, effort, and legal fees. When one party wants to stall, there's a lot of room in the US legal system to stall.

E: Though, to be fair, the spouse in question spent a fair chunk of that time in prison. Still.

[mainiac]

Too Late the TRIGgERiNG has haPPened

An army of one gorillian social injustice warriors will rIse up to fight the PersOn who hurt their feElings... I mean supressed free speech because they aren't filthy SJW, they love freedom so much

FEAR THE SIW

[BorkBorkGoesTheCode]

I imagine once new-rightism takes supremacy, the roles will switch round again
It's similar to how for example the left and right were opposed to mass surveillance, but under Obama the left supported Obama's decision to label Edward as traitor, and the right rushed to defend civil liberties from Obama. Didn't really make sense to make it a left-right issue cos it was Bush as continued by Obama, but there you go, it certainly was looked at it like one. Cycles, it all goes on in cycles

It appears they support whatever empowers their parties.

[scriver]

His point was that your attacks against everyone who disagrees with you went beyond "different opinions arguing" and into "can't stand differing opinions" territory. It's not about any random one saying that about independents, it's about you, personally, saying it, after your behaviour in this and the previous thread.

IT WAS SATIRE.  Holy shit.  Read the goddamn text again.  How can you not see that.  I intentionally undermined my "argument" repeatedly.

I was mocking the shitty, intolerant attitude he was showing.  Why can you only see intolerance when it's directed at your side?  I would expect it to make a little difference which is why I was doing the satire but I wasn't expecting this level of obdurate response.

I know it was satire. It has been stated several times. What I was trying to clarify was that Salmon's reaction wasn't about it coming from "the other side" against independents, so your "reflect a little" quip is off mark. It wasn't about how the "sides" act or what they say. It was about how you have acted and what you said. That is why SalmonGod got upset. Not because "his side was the one intolerance was directed at".

Also lol @ "my side".

[martinuzz]

John Hickley will be released, after 35 years of prison and psychiatric institution.

inb4 "just in time" jokes

[mainiac]

It wasn't about how the "sides" act or what they say.

I dont even know what post you are talking about anymore.

[smjjames]

His point was that your attacks against everyone who disagrees with you went beyond "different opinions arguing" and into "can't stand differing opinions" territory. It's not about any random one saying that about independents, it's about you, personally, saying it, after your behaviour in this and the previous thread.

IT WAS SATIRE.  Holy shit.  Read the goddamn text again.  How can you not see that.  I intentionally undermined my "argument" repeatedly.

I was mocking the shitty, intolerant attitude he was showing.  Why can you only see intolerance when it's directed at your side?  I would expect it to make a little difference which is why I was doing the satire but I wasn't expecting this level of obdurate response.

I know it was satire. It has been stated several times. What I was trying to clarify was that Salmon's reaction wasn't about it coming from "the other side" against independents, so your "reflect a little" quip is off mark. It wasn't about how the "sides" act or what they say. It was about how you have acted and what you said. That is why SalmonGod got upset. Not because "his side was the one intolerance was directed at".

Also lol @ "my side".

It was probably one of those cases that needed a /sarcasm or /satire tag to make things abundantly clear.

Coming from Maniac though, it did sound somewhat sarcastic.

And yeah, I really hate that 'free to play _{but with paid content}' AKA 'pay to win' stuff.