What went wrong
- Thread starter Buddha12
- Start date
now THAT'S a great question!!.....do you want me to try and answer it..or go suck on a Seraquel instead....
jdawg will end up running a forum of one
/snicker
it boggle the mind why he persists in this most "laissez faire" of forums given the fucked up fascist sentiment
heil!
i'd reckon jdawg spends every waking minute in that particular fantasy
the fuhrer of sciforums!
heil!
/snicker
it boggle the mind why he persists in this most "laissez faire" of forums given the fucked up fascist sentiment
heil!
i'd reckon jdawg spends every waking minute in that particular fantasy
the fuhrer of sciforums!
heil!
Do whatever you want. I'm just saying, it makes no sense for me to, for example, fight with James R over his lack of moderation in the Science subforum when--were I a site owner--simply handle the problem myself. And what would I have to gain by pretending to be a regular member of the forum? C'mon, you can you do it! Think, QQ...thiiiiiiiiiiink!
I reckon he has heaps of potential though....
sorry but the Seraquel just makes you soooooo...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...oh... uhm... contract of sale, contract of sale....zzzzzzzzzzzz oh uhm, minimum requirements of staff retention and management....zzzzzzzzz...damn seraquel....zzzzz.zzzzz
Ok back at it... have you ever sold a forum with a large membership base before?
Do you know what "Good will" is and how that is retained after sale?
just guessing... you know...
uh oh
everything you had said prior to that made perfect sense
you are so very wrong now,old boy
it's really funny ... here I am trying to protect the good will...for the owners. [ chuckle - what a hoot!]
Just wanna make sure I have this right...
1. I purchased the site
2. The "contract of sale" stipulates that I must pose as a regular forum member
3. I stage public disagreements with staff for the sake of ensuring "good will"
Do I have that about right?
yep... but you always get it right....
I am unsure about how a legal document can force you to pose as a normal member though...that would require legitimatising an act of deception.... and void the contract...
nah you are a normal member because...... you wanna be...
Yeah, you just made that up. If deception of this nature were illegal, then so would be acting. Think of Vince McMahon posing as merely a commentator for his professional wrestling program in the 90s.
Well, yeah, but I also don't have a choice.
The thing worth the owners and staff considering here is that if a sale was made on the condition that certain key persons were retained for the sake of good will value of the contract then any attempt by the new owners to destroy that good will invalidates the contract....thus forfieting said "good will" value.
Are you trying to destroy that "good will" balerion?
In other words, if you are in fact one of the owners or even related to one of the owners and only those key person will know the truth of it, your posting behaviour is tantamount to destroying the good will thus the good will value [cash] can be forfieted therefore releasing those staff from any obligation under the contract.
USA law and Australian Law would be very similar on this point..I am sure
Are you trying to destroy that "good will" balerion?
In other words, if you are in fact one of the owners or even related to one of the owners and only those key person will know the truth of it, your posting behaviour is tantamount to destroying the good will thus the good will value [cash] can be forfieted therefore releasing those staff from any obligation under the contract.
USA law and Australian Law would be very similar on this point..I am sure
I'm not an accountant or a lawyer, so I don't know much about Goodwill. For instance, I have no idea how Goodwill reduction after the sale would hurt the seller. Why would the site owners care about the value of an asset after they've sold it? But even supposing that it's possible, do you really count Wynn and Reikuwulf among those positively affecting the Goodwill of Sciforums? And in any case, if I knew damaging Goodwill would void the contract, why would I try to get my mods and admins to do it? If their own reasons for banning those members are legitimate, then they'd be legitimate for me, as well.
At this point, though, I think you're just putting me on.
and what is more if it ever got to court a presiding judge would have a field day with all your postings...
In fact I am not sure what the law is regarding deliberate acts of internet violence....maybe set a precedent....who knows.
In fact I am not sure what the law is regarding deliberate acts of internet violence....maybe set a precedent....who knows.
That's rich, coming from you.
Balerion, the staff are employed to do what they do. They are operating under the command of their contract, which as I said could be deemed invalid if you are indeed a member or directly related to or allowed to act by the grace of the ownership.
difference is I don't try to rape people of their self-esteem...where as you do....or have been doing
Do you think they do this for a living? It's a hobby. They volunteer. There's no contract.
You seriously need to take your meds. You've already admitted that you were wrong about the rollback, which was the entire basis for your supposition that I was a part-owner of the site--that, and that I apparently operate above the law, but my list of warnings and infractions will disprove that.