Print

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

[RedKing]

WTF, lawyerdude.

Personally I would have taken them up on the original lawsuit, proved it false and collected the $20,000. Never make false claims when courts are involved, especially ones demanding money.

Unfortunately, people often hire lawyers because they say what the client wants to hear. Practicality doesn't factor into it much of the time. You've now got a popular, sympathetic (cancer and wildlife charity supporting) potential defendant. At some point, it might have been better to merely suggest an agreeable solution mutually beneficial to both parties. It would appear "The Oatmeal" wants to make sure his stuff does not appear on "FunnyJunk.com" etc. It would appear "Funnyjunk.com" does not want "The Oatmeal" talking about them. So trade. Funnyjunk makes a conscious and real effort to remove content from its site related to Oatmeal Products, including searching for said content once a week. In return, "The Oatmeal" removes all references to "Funnyjunk.com" from his site.

In other, simpler words, it's a mutual agreement to take crap off of websites. Win-win?

Except at some point it crossed the line into "Who has a bigger schlong?". And now there can be no retreat, no surrender. Only the mightiest of swinging cods will prevail.

[Truean]

WTF, lawyerdude.

Personally I would have taken them up on the original lawsuit, proved it false and collected the $20,000. Never make false claims when courts are involved, especially ones demanding money.

Unfortunately, people often hire lawyers because they say what the client wants to hear. Practicality doesn't factor into it much of the time. You've now got a popular, sympathetic (cancer and wildlife charity supporting) potential defendant. At some point, it might have been better to merely suggest an agreeable solution mutually beneficial to both parties. It would appear "The Oatmeal" wants to make sure his stuff does not appear on "FunnyJunk.com" etc. It would appear "Funnyjunk.com" does not want "The Oatmeal" talking about them. So trade. Funnyjunk makes a conscious and real effort to remove content from its site related to Oatmeal Products, including searching for said content once a week. In return, "The Oatmeal" removes all references to "Funnyjunk.com" from his site.

In other, simpler words, it's a mutual agreement to take crap off of websites. Win-win?

Except at some point it crossed the line into "Who has a bigger schlong?". And now there can be no retreat, no surrender. Only the mightiest of swinging cods will prevail.

See, my clear mistake was thinking about reasonable solutions instead of ones featuring the word "schlong...."

[RedKing]

WTF, lawyerdude.

Personally I would have taken them up on the original lawsuit, proved it false and collected the $20,000. Never make false claims when courts are involved, especially ones demanding money.

Unfortunately, people often hire lawyers because they say what the client wants to hear. Practicality doesn't factor into it much of the time. You've now got a popular, sympathetic (cancer and wildlife charity supporting) potential defendant. At some point, it might have been better to merely suggest an agreeable solution mutually beneficial to both parties. It would appear "The Oatmeal" wants to make sure his stuff does not appear on "FunnyJunk.com" etc. It would appear "Funnyjunk.com" does not want "The Oatmeal" talking about them. So trade. Funnyjunk makes a conscious and real effort to remove content from its site related to Oatmeal Products, including searching for said content once a week. In return, "The Oatmeal" removes all references to "Funnyjunk.com" from his site.

In other, simpler words, it's a mutual agreement to take crap off of websites. Win-win?

Except at some point it crossed the line into "Who has a bigger schlong?". And now there can be no retreat, no surrender. Only the mightiest of swinging cods will prevail.

See, my clear mistake was thinking about reasonable solutions instead of ones featuring the word "schlong...."

Where The Oatmeal is involved, that should probably be one of the first things to think of.

[Truean]

.

[Haspen]

So I have this 'strange', elderly professor in latin grammar.

We had a written exam today in his subject. We were suspicious as it had only three short questions... when he suddenly turned on his personal laptop and put on a track... 'In the Hall of the Mountain King' by Edvard Grieg.

And then he said: "Whoever doesn't finish the exam by the time this music stops, fails." At first we chuckled, but we then noticed he wasn't joking, and I think we all were in some sort of shock.

PS: And yes, I've passed it. Never before I was writing so furiously in my life. Still, I have classes with this man in next semester, I'm already scared ;-;

[Scelly9]

So I have this 'strange', elderly professor in latin grammar.

We had a written exam today in his subject. We were suspicious as it had only three short questions... when he suddenly turned on his personal laptop and put on a track... 'In the Hall of the Mountain King' by Edvard Grieg.

And then he said: "Whoever doesn't finish the exam by the time this music stops, fails." At first we chuckled, but we then noticed he wasn't joking, and I think we all were in some sort of shock.

PS: And yes, I've passed it. Never before I was writing so furiously in my life. Still, I have classes with this man in next semester, I'm already scared ;-;

Awesome.

[Flying Dice]

I had a professor who did the same sort of thing with the Jeopardy theme.

[RedKing]

So I have this 'strange', elderly professor in latin grammar.

We had a written exam today in his subject. We were suspicious as it had only three short questions... when he suddenly turned on his personal laptop and put on a track... 'In the Hall of the Mountain King' by Edvard Grieg.

And then he said: "Whoever doesn't finish the exam by the time this music stops, fails." At first we chuckled, but we then noticed he wasn't joking, and I think we all were in some sort of shock.

PS: And yes, I've passed it. Never before I was writing so furiously in my life. Still, I have classes with this man in next semester, I'm already scared ;-;

Awesome.

What this man said. If I ever get a Ph.D., I am so using that.

[MaximumZero]

WTF, lawyerdude.

Personally I would have taken them up on the original lawsuit, proved it false and collected the $20,000. Never make false claims when courts are involved, especially ones demanding money.

Unfortunately, people often hire lawyers because they say what the client wants to hear. Practicality doesn't factor into it much of the time. You've now got a popular, sympathetic (cancer and wildlife charity supporting) potential defendant. At some point, it might have been better to merely suggest an agreeable solution mutually beneficial to both parties. It would appear "The Oatmeal" wants to make sure his stuff does not appear on "FunnyJunk.com" etc. It would appear "Funnyjunk.com" does not want "The Oatmeal" talking about them. So trade. Funnyjunk makes a conscious and real effort to remove content from its site related to Oatmeal Products, including searching for said content once a week. In return, "The Oatmeal" removes all references to "Funnyjunk.com" from his site.

In other, simpler words, it's a mutual agreement to take crap off of websites. Win-win?

Except at some point it crossed the line into "Who has a bigger schlong?". And now there can be no retreat, no surrender. Only the mightiest of swinging cods will prevail.

See, my clear mistake was thinking about reasonable solutions instead of ones featuring the word "schlong...."

Where The Oatmeal is involved, that should probably be one of the first things to think of.

True. Yet, the logical portion of my brain continuously rebels against the illogic it is consistently plunged into with fevered and whimsical delusions of a world that doesn't do that. It's a survival method really, but not an especially  good long term one. It'll do for now though.

Truean, this is the internet that we're talking about here. C'mon, bro. (No matter what gender tag we're supposed to use, you can still be bro. Vector is bro, Girlinhat is bro, etc. would be bro, but it is gender neutral.)

[Urist Imiknorris]

What do you mean etc. isn't bro?

[MaximumZero]

What do you mean etc. isn't bro?

et al stole its bro status.

[Aklyon]

etc. or .etc?

Because apparently theres proposals for more TLD besides .com, .net, and so on.

[MaximumZero]

.etc would be awesome for a nonsense website.

[Aklyon]

.etc would be awesome for a nonsense website.

But what about .ninja?

[Urist Imiknorris]

I'd prefer.ext, myself.