What is Digg?Sponsored by FUNimation Enertainment
Amphibian invaders! Can frogs conquer the Earth? view!
funimation.com - Stranded frog platoon battles for Earth and our sushi. Season 1, Part 2 available 11/24
28 Comments
- TecK415, on 05/09/2009, -3/+48Hi there, I'm looking for a one night stand. If you are someone who has feelings, or gets attached after you have amazing sexy time, then you're not for me. You also must like spiders. If you don't like spiders crawling all over your naked body then don't even bother talking to me. Hung over my bed there is a sack full of thousands of spiders, I like to slice it open with my samurai sword mid-orgasm. If you don't like big spiders then I can fill it up with smaller ones, maybe even babies( Babies are cute, right?). But let me know in advance because it will take me at least a few days to harvest them in the wilderness. You see i have tried out this fantasy in the past using the "surprise" tactic on unsuspecting females but it has always ended in failure. -Me, naked, sweating, holding my sword, all alone except for the thousands of spiders scattered over me and my room and the faint but heartbreaking screams of my would be lover running to her car. Any takers?
Call me. 212-660-2245
muah - vsujohn2, on 05/09/2009, -0/+40867-5309
- one504, on 05/09/2009, -0/+30Yahoo profiles? This case is hereby remanded to the court of 2001.
- seventhc, on 05/09/2009, -0/+14Jenny doesn't live there anymore. :-(
- Daxx22, on 05/10/2009, -0/+9o.O
- thespi007, on 05/09/2009, -1/+8911 call me , if its an emergency
- aguita, on 05/10/2009, -0/+7Best comment evar! Will digg up again!
- Daxx22, on 05/10/2009, -0/+6100% justified. Yahoo! had no legal responsibility to remove the profiles until one of their employees (verbal contact) promised to do so. That's why Yahoo! is on the hook now, not because they didn't' take them down in the first place.
- s4g4n, on 05/10/2009, -0/+6do people still draw huge pink penises at Yahoo Graffiti online game.
- pacman122, on 05/10/2009, -1/+6Not since she hooked up with 1-800-Mix-A-Lot
- Laminarcissus, on 05/10/2009, -0/+5Wow, a verbal promise from a PR person! I'm very surprised, PR people have such an impeccable reputation for telling the truth.
- Laminarcissus, on 05/10/2009, -1/+51) For a contract to be valid the person has to have the authority to bind the corporation. For example, a random person in the PR department cannot call people and say "Yahoo promises to pay all your debts," and have it be binding on behalf of Yahoo. There is no evidence that this particular random PR person had the authority to bind Yahoo into contracts.
2) Even if they did, a verbal contract has to be supported by an exchange of consideration -- something of actual value, to be valid. There is a legal difference between verbal contracts and mere promises. Promises can legally be broken, valid verbal contracts can be challenged in a suit. This barely met the level of a promise, much less a verbal contract. - Lindz2000, on 05/10/2009, -0/+4The ex-boyfriend posted the offending profiles, not Yahoo. Why doesn't this stupid woman sue the ex instead of Yahoo? Perhaps the issue here is not her desire to maintain her good name, rather a desire to make lot's of money.
- pickphlow, on 05/10/2009, -0/+4And now the digg comments go 4chan
- jessenoob, on 05/10/2009, -0/+3Damn you Tommy Tutone!
- Skootles, on 05/10/2009, -0/+2Ironic that that's the number for the rejection hotline..
- se1zure, on 05/10/2009, -0/+2I wasn't aware a customer support person had the authority to form contracts for yahoo... Wait, they don't. If I worked as customer support and tell somone yahoo is going to send them $20,000,000 in stocks, there is no obligation for yahoo to actually send that money.
- liquidhalcyon, on 05/10/2009, -0/+2Austin, TX, reporting.
- jgarland79, on 05/10/2009, -0/+1For a good time call 218-339-8069
- scentaroom, on 05/09/2009, -3/+4512-255-xxxx call me
- theredwhyno, on 05/10/2009, -0/+1It's important that this law is on the books, for the sake of free speech. Websites that feature user-created content are treated legally as public forums, thus absolving their owners/operators of liability for said content. If this wasn't the case, social networking sites, or any online forums, for that matter, would be extremely dangerous to run. The law essentially treats websites as public spaces. If you're in the park somewhere, and somebody calls you a disparaging name, you can't sue the city for character defamation; you have to sue the person themselves.
This is why i have little sympathy for companies like SixApart (which runs Livejournal), when they get overzealous about policing their content. Granted, legal protection these days is usually just a function of the number and competency of lawyers one can afford, and somebody with enough money to throw at a lawsuit is almost guaranteed to win, but most people, even opportunistic gold-diggers who see everything as a chance to get a hefty settlement, are unlikely to sue individuals who are less likely to have the amount of cash requisite to making it worth the trouble... - 0tis, on 05/10/2009, -0/+1Read this the other day - legal issues aside, I don't get why Yahoo didn't just take them down when they said they would. It's not that hard, surely?
- finalheaven07, on 05/10/2009, -0/+1Don't call me Shirley.
- hansrodtang, on 05/11/2009, -0/+1Nah, there are no funny/gross pictures.
- travelfool, on 05/10/2009, -0/+0Yahoo should have been on the hook - not because it was initially up on their site but because they provided a means, stated clearly in writing, of how fraudulent postings would be handled. She followed THEIR protocols and Yahoo did not do as they promised.
theredwhyno: but the Internet is NOT a public park. If it were postings, etc would have been available for viewing/hearing only momentarily (as with spoken words). In this case not only is it available for who knows how long, it is also available to a global community. There has to be some kind of balance achieved - public forums cannot wash their hands of all responsibility for what is on their sites.
High time that laws start catching up to the Internet. - JinxCrow, on 05/18/2009, -0/+0Agreed.
Go after the offender, not the medium. - inactive, on 05/10/2009, -1/+0I guess it's moot since that's not illegal to begin with.
- huiminli7, on 05/10/2009, -4/+0are awesome!!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is