Maybe you should worry about yourself, Mr. Wolf?
Re: Mr. Nathan, we will let the court determine Foulks' guilt or innocence.
Name: Wolfgang J. Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 10, 08 - 1:15 PM
Cyberstalking - 720 ILCS 5/12-7.5. Cyberstalking. 2001.
(a) A person commits cyberstalking when he or she, knowingly and without lawful justification, on at least 2 separate occasions, harasses another person through the use of electronic communication and:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Example 1:
Re: Re: Re: Why are you afraid to post your real name to these lies and baseless opinions?
Name: MOLR (Masked On-Line-Ranger)
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 11:08 AM
An alternate theory to why I use a fake posting ID: Maybe I am a convicted murder, escaped from a life sentence in the pen and there is nothing I hate more than two-bit snakes who double talk and back peddle like Foulks. Maybe I was convicted of torturing my family to death but was saved from capital punishment because I confessed.
Do you really want to **** me off, little **** ball by suggesting I am afraid? Want to find out if I am bluffing? You're in that hotel on 22nd? You drive out of Carriage Cab on South Wabash? Your mother who got you locked up still lives in Palatine?
-MOLR
Example 2:
Re: Mike Foulks, you are the the man without details.
Name: Wolfgang Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 2:07 PM
Where would you like me to come to make your day? Do you like it sunny side up or scrambled?
I will pass on the spinal inspection, but you are welcome to inspect my new baseball bat.
Boy Mr. Wolf, I sure hope your IP address isn't the same as MOLR, because these two posts sure seem like they fit your example of:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Once again, maybe you should worry about yourself?
Bring it on beeee-itch
Ha! Someone doesn't like their own medicine.
"Bring it on beeee-itch"
Is that the best you can do? As a newcomer to this forum, I've read all your postings and I've gotta say, I'm a little disappointed. I expected a guy of your reputation to come up with something better than grade-school name calling. What's next, "I'm rubber, you're glue?" Or maybe the classic "I know you are but what am I?"
Like I said, before you start calling out others about their behavior on this site, maybe you should think about your own? It seems to me that you have been more than willing to dish it out just as much as you've taken it.
Question for Mr. Nathan...
Despite dropping out of high school, I still get the feeling that the fact that my mother has never lived in Palatine wouldn't be a sufficient defense to "MOLR"'s veiled threat against my mother.
What do you have to say about that, Mr. Nathan?
Do you think that "MOLR" is Wolf Weiss?
I doubt that you could answer "Does it make any difference?" or "Who cares?" to this kind of question again, all things considered.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Maybe you should worry about yourself, Mr. Wolf?
Re: Mr. Nathan, we will let the court determine Foulks' guilt or innocence.
Name: Wolfgang J. Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 10, 08 - 1:15 PM
Cyberstalking - 720 ILCS 5/12-7.5. Cyberstalking. 2001.
(a) A person commits cyberstalking when he or she, knowingly and without lawful justification, on at least 2 separate occasions, harasses another person through the use of electronic communication and:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Example 1:
Re: Re: Re: Why are you afraid to post your real name to these lies and baseless opinions?
Name: MOLR (Masked On-Line-Ranger)
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 11:08 AM
An alternate theory to why I use a fake posting ID: Maybe I am a convicted murder, escaped from a life sentence in the pen and there is nothing I hate more than two-bit snakes who double talk and back peddle like Foulks. Maybe I was convicted of torturing my family to death but was saved from capital punishment because I confessed.
Do you really want to **** me off, little **** ball by suggesting I am afraid? Want to find out if I am bluffing? You're in that hotel on 22nd? You drive out of Carriage Cab on South Wabash? Your mother who got you locked up still lives in Palatine?
-MOLR
Example 2:
Re: Mike Foulks, you are the the man without details.
Name: Wolfgang Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 2:07 PM
Where would you like me to come to make your day? Do you like it sunny side up or scrambled?
I will pass on the spinal inspection, but you are welcome to inspect my new baseball bat.
Boy Mr. Wolf, I sure hope your IP address isn't the same as MOLR, because these two posts sure seem like they fit your example of:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Once again, maybe you should worry about yourself?
I AM Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and Basil Rathbone.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Question for Mr. Nathan...
Despite dropping out of high school, I still get the feeling that the fact that my mother has never lived in Palatine wouldn't be a sufficient defense to "MOLR"'s veiled threat against my mother.
What do you have to say about that, Mr. Nathan?
Do you think that "MOLR" is Wolf Weiss?
I doubt that you could answer "Does it make any difference?" or "Who cares?" to this kind of question again, all things considered.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Maybe you should worry about yourself, Mr. Wolf?
Re: Mr. Nathan, we will let the court determine Foulks' guilt or innocence.
Name: Wolfgang J. Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 10, 08 - 1:15 PM
Cyberstalking - 720 ILCS 5/12-7.5. Cyberstalking. 2001.
(a) A person commits cyberstalking when he or she, knowingly and without lawful justification, on at least 2 separate occasions, harasses another person through the use of electronic communication and:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Example 1:
Re: Re: Re: Why are you afraid to post your real name to these lies and baseless opinions?
Name: MOLR (Masked On-Line-Ranger)
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 11:08 AM
An alternate theory to why I use a fake posting ID: Maybe I am a convicted murder, escaped from a life sentence in the pen and there is nothing I hate more than two-bit snakes who double talk and back peddle like Foulks. Maybe I was convicted of torturing my family to death but was saved from capital punishment because I confessed.
Do you really want to **** me off, little **** ball by suggesting I am afraid? Want to find out if I am bluffing? You're in that hotel on 22nd? You drive out of Carriage Cab on South Wabash? Your mother who got you locked up still lives in Palatine?
-MOLR
Example 2:
Re: Mike Foulks, you are the the man without details.
Name: Wolfgang Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 2:07 PM
Where would you like me to come to make your day? Do you like it sunny side up or scrambled?
I will pass on the spinal inspection, but you are welcome to inspect my new baseball bat.
Boy Mr. Wolf, I sure hope your IP address isn't the same as MOLR, because these two posts sure seem like they fit your example of:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Once again, maybe you should worry about yourself?
Actually you've asked a slew of questions. Insofar as I am without sufficient personal knowledge to be able to answer most of them, I am going to do the best I can with the limited data I have.
First of all, I don't have a clue what you mean by a "veiled threat". How did "MOLR" make a veiled threat against your mother? And who is "MOLR"? And what does your mother living in Palatine have to do with anything, assuming arguendo that she does. And what does "MOLR" need to defend? I guess I have more questions than answers. That's what I have to say about that.
I don't think about who "MOLR" is really. It isn't a matter of concern to me. In fact, I doubt it's a matter of concern to anyone who reads the postings on this website except you. If "MOLR" has criticisms that cut to your raw nerves, take it up with him or her. It's not an issue to me. I have enough to deal with in my life. The reply came from the City in the case of "The Magnificent Seven'. That interests me much more.
Donald Nathan
Dear (Not-so) Informed:
Will you ever learn to tell reality from fantasy?
"An alternate theory to why I use a fake posting ID: Maybe I am a convicted murder, escaped from a life sentence in the pen and there is nothing I hate more than two-bit snakes who double talk and back peddle like Foulks. Maybe I was convicted of torturing my family to death but was saved from capital punishment because I confessed."
This is a fictional character, a phantom can't do any more or less harm then Mad Mike Foulks' imaginary group members, who he recently had to fire because they stopped showing up for his imaginary meetings.
Hey did Ola Shalom ever show up to any of those imaginary meetings, Mikey, Foulksy boy, my Mad Archangel buddy?
What if we were to plead guilty together! Maybe we can "go up" together and be cell mates. If you can get used to my snoring I can get used to your heee-hawing, certainly, son.
A better pen name 'Informed" sir or madam, would be "Un-informed" or "Can't-tell-the-difference-between-truth-and-fiction."
And I do have a new baseball bat. Wanna play? Ooops, did that scare you? Sorry.
What if I can prove I was nowhere near my computer when this or any other message was posted? What if other people (possibly over a dozen at last count) have access to the internet via the same IP from their remote and wide-spread locations?
Guilty by IP association? to borow a phrase, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Maybe you should worry about yourself, Mr. Wolf?
Re: Mr. Nathan, we will let the court determine Foulks' guilt or innocence.
Name: Wolfgang J. Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 10, 08 - 1:15 PM
Cyberstalking - 720 ILCS 5/12-7.5. Cyberstalking. 2001.
(a) A person commits cyberstalking when he or she, knowingly and without lawful justification, on at least 2 separate occasions, harasses another person through the use of electronic communication and:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Example 1:
Re: Re: Re: Why are you afraid to post your real name to these lies and baseless opinions?
Name: MOLR (Masked On-Line-Ranger)
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 11:08 AM
An alternate theory to why I use a fake posting ID: Maybe I am a convicted murder, escaped from a life sentence in the pen and there is nothing I hate more than two-bit snakes who double talk and back peddle like Foulks. Maybe I was convicted of torturing my family to death but was saved from capital punishment because I confessed.
Do you really want to **** me off, little **** ball by suggesting I am afraid? Want to find out if I am bluffing? You're in that hotel on 22nd? You drive out of Carriage Cab on South Wabash? Your mother who got you locked up still lives in Palatine?
-MOLR
Example 2:
Re: Mike Foulks, you are the the man without details.
Name: Wolfgang Weiss
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 2:07 PM
Where would you like me to come to make your day? Do you like it sunny side up or scrambled?
I will pass on the spinal inspection, but you are welcome to inspect my new baseball bat.
Boy Mr. Wolf, I sure hope your IP address isn't the same as MOLR, because these two posts sure seem like they fit your example of:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Once again, maybe you should worry about yourself?
Nowhere does it say in the law you posted that using a fictional name is a valid defense. Again, the language, according to your own post is as follows:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Like I said, no mention of "fictional characters."
As for your IP association idea, I would think that, if all of your postings signed with your own name, including those in this thread, have the same IP address, and the threat made by MOLR also has the same address, you just might have to come up with that defense. Look at this forum - you'd have a lot of defending to do.
Again, maybe you should look at your own behavior before you start criticizing someone else's?
What an iamgination! George L pulls this stunt all the time.
I don't need a valid defense, but you need some basic training in presenting a valid argument.
The Evidence:
Here's the whole message so that the part at the bottom you grabbed out of context to "make your case" (beee-oddtch!)can be reviewed back in context to the subject of the message. This is, in its entirety, MOLR's response to Mike's taunt about being afraid to use his or her real name:
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Why are you afraid to post your real name to these lies and baseless opinions?
Name: MOLR (Masked On-Line-Ranger)
Date Posted: Sep 3, 08 - 11:08 AM
Message:
Obviusly (stet) afraid?
You have some real rough issues to deal with friend.
You can't see, hear, smell, touch or taste me. There is nothing except my posting ID, the (Masked On-Line-Ranger), so how can you tell I am afraid to use my real name?
But somehow you "know" I am afraid? Are you gifted with the power of mental telepathy? Maybe you belong in a carnival freak show instead of behind the wheel of a cab or on this board?
How did you arrive at the conclusion that one who uses a posting ID other than his/her real name is afraid?
Can you read people's minds? Are able to instinctively tell someone is afraid over the internet?
What great treatise on psychology, mental health or medicine explicitly proved that using an on-line ID is proof that one is afraid to use one's real name?
How does that make sense to you? What if I said my name is (name omitted)?
What if my posting ID was Long Ears, or Father of Fools, or Donkey Boy?
If you really believe that using a "fake" posting ID is a sign of fear, you may have some serious problems about interpreting human behavior - your past seems to prove that out.
Your conclusion that I am afraid to use my real name may be a reaction of some kind rooted in your own fears, anxieties and misgivings about the people around you.
Can you prove my previous post contains lies? Just claiming that I lied and that my statements are baseless opinion doesn't prove a thing, except that your are full of it more than others.
All this talk about fear, denial, betrayal. Who did what to whom.
Hey, Mr. Lufallah, let's print all this crap and pass it out to cab drivers.
Let the jury of your peers decide - if they even care at all about the rantings of a small-time crook and con-artist who drives a cab and claims he is anything more than just a small time-crook and con-artist.
An alternate theory to why I use a fake posting ID: Maybe I am a convicted murder, escaped from a life sentence in the pen and there is nothing I hate more than two-bit snakes who double talk and back peddle like Foulks. Maybe I was convicted of torturing my family to death but was saved from capital punishment because I confessed.
Do you really want to **** me off, little **** ball by suggesting I am afraid? Want to find out if I am bluffing? You're in that hotel on 22nd? You drive out of Carriage Cab on South Wabash? Your mother who got you locked up still lives in Palatine?
-MOLR
*****
All I can say is don't watch movies with fictional characters in them, they might scare the hee-haw right out of you.
In case you still don't get it, oh "informed" one, a theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point does not really amount to a threat by any stretch of the imagination, unless you are a paranoid-schizoid delusional Mad Mike Archangel Foulks or his trusted imaginary side-kick, Ola Shalom or his imaginary cc-0 gang members.
Anyway, you need to get over this idea that I threatened anyone. But of course if you can't get passed a simple truth, submit your allegations to the appropriate law enforcement agencies so that I can face my accuser.
Or are you afraid to use your real name, hiding in fear behind your on-line mask "informed and Scared" poster?
Note also, the beeeg difference between Mike's "wish" of my demise and MOLR's theoretical mass murderer. Compare and contrast: Who is doing the talking? What is being said?
Some of your own meds: Maybe you should look at your own behavior before you start criticizing someone else's?
Your argument about the IP association really smells like a "third party tort" argument. Again GOOD LUCK WITH THAT, George.
-wjw
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Nowhere does it say in the law you posted that using a fictional name is a valid defense. Again, the language, according to your own post is as follows:
(1) at any time transmits a threat of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint and the threat is directed towards that person or a family member of that person, or
(2) places that person or a family member of that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint.
Like I said, no mention of "fictional characters."
As for your IP association idea, I would think that, if all of your postings signed with your own name, including those in this thread, have the same IP address, and the threat made by MOLR also has the same address, you just might have to come up with that defense. Look at this forum - you'd have a lot of defending to do.
Again, maybe you should look at your own behavior before you start criticizing someone else's?
There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.
Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.
Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).
I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.
You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.
I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.
But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.
That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.
I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?
If you really believe I, Wolfgang J. Weiss made threats against Mad Mike Foulks, you have a duty to report me to the proper authorities.
However, you need to consider this: I say it was a a fictional serial killer that a person who uses the fake name MOLR or Masked On-Line Ranger made up.
The "maybe" the "alternate theory" in MOLR's statement are not mere hints, elliptical allusions or innuendo.
These terms distinctly describe the nature of the statements and qualify the content of the statements.
One can liken this kind of text to line of actors in a play. The actors are real. The script is real. The action and the spoken words on the stage are fake. Get it? Fake. Unreal. Fiction.
Threats. I suppose if I fart, you would deem it biochemical warfare. What an ignoid.
Go ahead, file a complaint. I dare you. Is that a threat, am I threatening YOU now? Fool.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.
Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.
Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).
I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.
You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.
I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.
But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.
That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.
I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?
I think Mr. Informed's four year-old will be sadly disappointed in his father's incredibly lame thought process by the time he is five.
But of course, I too, think Informed has difficulty separating fiction from truth. This is the same problem Foulks seem to suffer from, it is the same problem Lutfallah and Bullington seem to suffer from.
In a very sadly pathetic, distorted way, Foulks, Lutfallah and Bullington have used this shared inability -- this shared character deficit, lack of judgment and failure to recognize simple common sense -- to separate the real from the false to the determent of those who have undertaken driver organizing activities and to the determent of the various organizations who have participated in these honorable pursuits.
It is obvious that the only reason "Informed" is attacking Mr. Weiss is to take the focus away from -- and the heat off – the cyber stalking felon, Mad Mike Flakey Foulks whose incessant criminal harassment of people who mistakenly believe this is a discussion forum for cab drivers.
To disagree is one thing. To make statements that dispute or even refute another’s contention is one thing. To offer facts and information that lead to conclusions that differ from another’s assertions is one thing. This considered normal, commonly tolerable behavior in discourse made in the spirit of good fellowship and intellectual progress.
But contrary to such ideals, the operators of this forum have given unfettered license to the likes of Foulks and Informed to “defecate on whoever (they) will" as one former contributor has noted.
With regard to Informed’s silly taunts and childish insults it should be noted that they do not a make a case except for followers of the "Long Eared Father of Fools" -- all one of them. Apparent (from his post) Informed is vying for Foulks' lofty position at the top of that solid waste pile.
While I don't need help with lame brained fools like Informed, I thank Mr. Weiss and the others for having the guts to stand up to this kind of foolishness. It is an unclean business, indeed. Sorry for the flak you have to take on my account, Weiss!
I thank Mr. Weiss and others for speaking out about the disgraceful, continual bad-mouthing and name calling and character assassination undertaken by Foulks and others to avenge themselves for statements that dispute their wild claims and sorrowfully wrong conclusions.
A perfect example of this kind of behavior is when Infomed chastises Mr. Weiss for being hypocritical, having missed a most obvious and hilarious mockery of Foulks' obsession about pen names. Mr. Weiss' jibe went right over Informed's sanctimonious head!
The tragedy is, of course, Informed is attempting to protect and defend Foulks and the operators of this website from potential and real danger of legal action. But it will take a whole lot more than his limited thinking aptitude, writing skills and facility to reason to accomplish that.
-Masked On-Line Ranger
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If you really believe I, Wolfgang J. Weiss made threats against Mad Mike Foulks, you have a duty to report me to the proper authorities.
However, you need to consider this: I say it was a a fictional serial killer that a person who uses the fake name MOLR or Masked On-Line Ranger made up.
The "maybe" the "alternate theory" in MOLR's statement are not mere hints, elliptical allusions or innuendo.
These terms distinctly describe the nature of the statements and qualify the content of the statements.
One can liken this kind of text to line of actors in a play. The actors are real. The script is real. The action and the spoken words on the stage are fake. Get it? Fake. Unreal. Fiction.
Threats. I suppose if I fart, you would deem it biochemical warfare. What an ignoid.
Go ahead, file a complaint. I dare you. Is that a threat, am I threatening YOU now? Fool.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.
Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.
Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).
I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.
You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.
I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.
But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.
That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.
I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?
I hope In-for-med(s)is man enough to clean up his man barf.
Moose
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I think Mr. Informed's four year-old will be sadly disappointed in his father's incredibly lame thought process by the time he is five.
But of course, I too, think Informed has difficulty separating fiction from truth. This is the same problem Foulks seem to suffer from, it is the same problem Lutfallah and Bullington seem to suffer from.
In a very sadly pathetic, distorted way, Foulks, Lutfallah and Bullington have used this shared inability -- this shared character deficit, lack of judgment and failure to recognize simple common sense -- to separate the real from the false to the determent of those who have undertaken driver organizing activities and to the determent of the various organizations who have participated in these honorable pursuits.
It is obvious that the only reason "Informed" is attacking Mr. Weiss is to take the focus away from -- and the heat off – the cyber stalking felon, Mad Mike Flakey Foulks whose incessant criminal harassment of people who mistakenly believe this is a discussion forum for cab drivers.
To disagree is one thing. To make statements that dispute or even refute another’s contention is one thing. To offer facts and information that lead to conclusions that differ from another’s assertions is one thing. This considered normal, commonly tolerable behavior in discourse made in the spirit of good fellowship and intellectual progress.
But contrary to such ideals, the operators of this forum have given unfettered license to the likes of Foulks and Informed to “defecate on whoever (they) will" as one former contributor has noted.
With regard to Informed’s silly taunts and childish insults it should be noted that they do not a make a case except for followers of the "Long Eared Father of Fools" -- all one of them. Apparent (from his post) Informed is vying for Foulks' lofty position at the top of that solid waste pile.
While I don't need help with lame brained fools like Informed, I thank Mr. Weiss and the others for having the guts to stand up to this kind of foolishness. It is an unclean business, indeed. Sorry for the flak you have to take on my account, Weiss!
I thank Mr. Weiss and others for speaking out about the disgraceful, continual bad-mouthing and name calling and character assassination undertaken by Foulks and others to avenge themselves for statements that dispute their wild claims and sorrowfully wrong conclusions.
A perfect example of this kind of behavior is when Infomed chastises Mr. Weiss for being hypocritical, having missed a most obvious and hilarious mockery of Foulks' obsession about pen names. Mr. Weiss' jibe went right over Informed's sanctimonious head!
The tragedy is, of course, Informed is attempting to protect and defend Foulks and the operators of this website from potential and real danger of legal action. But it will take a whole lot more than his limited thinking aptitude, writing skills and facility to reason to accomplish that.
-Masked On-Line Ranger
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
If you really believe I, Wolfgang J. Weiss made threats against Mad Mike Foulks, you have a duty to report me to the proper authorities.
However, you need to consider this: I say it was a a fictional serial killer that a person who uses the fake name MOLR or Masked On-Line Ranger made up.
The "maybe" the "alternate theory" in MOLR's statement are not mere hints, elliptical allusions or innuendo.
These terms distinctly describe the nature of the statements and qualify the content of the statements.
One can liken this kind of text to line of actors in a play. The actors are real. The script is real. The action and the spoken words on the stage are fake. Get it? Fake. Unreal. Fiction.
Threats. I suppose if I fart, you would deem it biochemical warfare. What an ignoid.
Go ahead, file a complaint. I dare you. Is that a threat, am I threatening YOU now? Fool.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
There's the famous Wolf Weiss that I was looking for, full of self righteousness and more than capable of deflecting issues under this guise of being the end-all, be-all of truth.
Calling me George L. (wrong, btw) doesn't defend your actions.
Calling me out for using a pen name won't erase all the postings you've made under fake names. (It's pretty obvious which ones are yours and the hypocrisy of you saying someone is afraid to post under their real name is enough to make a man puke).
I need to get over this idea that you threatened anyone? Didn't you bring that up about Mr. Mike? All I did was point out that you are guilty of the same action.
You can try to distort this however you'd like, but the actual truth (not your brand of "it's true cause me and my buddies think so) is that you made threats online against Mr. Mike.
I didn't include your entire post because the threat was made in the last two paragraphs. First you bring up this theory of being a murderer, which by itself doesn't seem like much more than the ridiculous ramblings of someone frustrated with the way their life has turned out.
But then you make this key mistake, the one that makes what you said a threat. You ask him if he wants to find out if you are bluffing, following that threat with information about where he lives, works and where his mother lives.
That's not a "theoretical situation used in an argument to make a point," that's a threat against this man and his family.
I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument than what you've produced so far. I heard you were sharp-minded, but so far you seem no more formidable than my four-year old son. At least he has the excuse of being a toddler. What's yours?
