What is Digg?104 Comments
- Awwzm, on 11/03/2009, -10/+77If you're suing for that, you are delusional. Case dismissed!
- EatingPie, on 11/03/2009, -1/+54While the Facebook part sounds silly, the case is really about defamation. Him calling her "delusional" and "post partum" looks pretty cut-and-dried. The Facebook element will most likely serve as evidence that the defamation had a negative effect on her life.
-Pie - Frankzulla, on 11/03/2009, -0/+47Haha, this is easily my favorite part of the article: "The complaint also states that Gloor admitted to making up the allegations in order to "save his ass" with his wife and his marriage."
- mmurdock77, on 11/03/2009, -12/+52WOMEN LOL
- openthink, on 11/03/2009, -5/+38causing loss of facebook friends? capital offense in many countries...
- awtripp, on 11/03/2009, -0/+28Yeah, the title completely undermines the actual reasoning behind the suit. There could be an actual defamation of character suit here.
- mandarin, on 11/03/2009, -0/+21Read it, looks like defamation. Affairs just give you a lot of trouble in the long run
- TheUberGamer, on 11/03/2009, -0/+19What a misleading title. She is suing for defamation. Buried.
- absolutelytrue, on 11/03/2009, -8/+26What a serious nutbag.
- badqat, on 11/03/2009, -3/+21lol...there are plenty of delusional folks clogging up our court system.
- CaliforniaEagle, on 11/03/2009, -8/+21This is almost as bad as fat kids suing McDonalds for being Fat.
- trutherd, on 11/03/2009, -2/+15The title of this post is both factually inaccurate and misleading. Nowhere in the complaint does it say 'losing Facebook friends.' This is a defamation suit, and if the facts presented are correct then she absolutely has a case.
DON'T PUT SOMETHING IN QUOTES IF IT'S NOT A ***** QUOTE!!! - Peachi, on 11/03/2009, -8/+21She's so crazy, I'm surprised she has any Facebook friends to begin with.
- astyanax, on 11/03/2009, -1/+12I HAVE to dig this article up JUST because the title spells 'losing' correctly, it's like an Internet epidemic of typoing that word.
- 11oops, on 11/03/2009, -3/+14Suing for defamation makes you delusional? I don't know about that... or perhaps you just commented based on the article's title.
- twohoundogs, on 11/03/2009, -0/+10Damn someone actually read past the headline.
- ipodman715, on 11/03/2009, -7/+17...BELONG IN THE KITCHEN LOL
- mizzrym, on 11/03/2009, -0/+9Sensationalist title. She is suing for defamation of character. The facebook stuff is just part of that.
- akpanga, on 11/03/2009, -1/+10I'm with you on that.
- inactive, on 11/03/2009, -3/+11http://img.moronail.net/img/3/6/1636.jpg
- ileftfark, on 11/03/2009, -2/+9I think I know why you're saying this: http://twitter.com/anabna
If you are indeed still involved in a suit like this, it would be in your best interest to keep your sexist comments to yourself until the thing is over.
Do you just like the attention? - badqat, on 11/03/2009, -0/+7Seems he'd have been better off to just leave it alone. He obviously "felt" something for her, since he was carrying out an illicit affair with the woman.
Instead of saving "his ass" he might have toasted it a bit more. - ileftfark, on 11/03/2009, -1/+7Only if he paid for it. Otherwise, she'd be a run of the mill cheating slut.
- Netmindstorm, on 11/03/2009, -3/+8Based on the article, he [Gloor] should have just called her a "cheating whore" to avoid the defamation portion of the lawsuit.
- jserio, on 11/03/2009, -0/+5"The complaint asserts that Gloor's communications caused several friends and acquaintances to "block [Swatos] from communicating with her through the social networking site Facebook.""
How poorly written. So HE caused her friends to block HER from talking to HER? Jennifer needs to brush up on her editorial skills. - 11oops, on 11/03/2009, -1/+6Welcome to Digg. The new 4chan.
- mywhitenoise, on 11/03/2009, -7/+12I wish Facebook would just die off already.
- Lucas123, on 11/03/2009, -1/+6You should see what they do to you in Iran for that. It'll give you nightmares.
- nomadxx7, on 11/03/2009, -2/+6Good sleuthing ileftfark
- gaymathman, on 11/04/2009, -0/+4The submitter sensationalized this, but as her lover was her employer, that caused problems when he told potential future employers for the lady that she was ***** crazy. FTA:
"Swatos claims Gloor told several people, including a potential employer and previous clients, that she was "crazy" and "delusional." " - resolva, on 11/03/2009, -3/+7Haha is all i can say!
- KeseChartier, on 11/03/2009, -2/+6God, I love the internet.
- haikuFU, on 11/03/2009, -2/+6How do you know she was with him? She might just be a crazy bitch. There are a lot of those.
- valarking, on 11/03/2009, -6/+10agreed (except for your sexist opening comment, shame on you)
buried as inaccurate - madrona, on 11/03/2009, -0/+4I assume short for 'post partum depressive' categorizing her as crazy
- axb156, on 11/03/2009, -3/+7Holy f-ing *****! It is her! This bitch is legitimately insane, case closed.
- gethane, on 11/03/2009, -4/+7do you actually read digg comments? As a woman it feels fairly hostile here on pretty much any article that might include a woman for any reason.
- JumboJ3t, on 11/03/2009, -3/+6who cares
- nepidae, on 11/03/2009, -4/+7Stop giving a ***** what people on the internet think of you and just post your comments. No one actually cares that "as a woman" you feel a certain way.
- LordofShadows, on 11/03/2009, -3/+6Probably just pms
- DD46MAN, on 11/03/2009, -0/+3You mean I can own my own real estate company, screw all the hot agents and fire them when I'm done with no leagal recourse?
Just make up some story that they were not working out and I'm off the hook. I love America!!!! - gethane, on 11/03/2009, -2/+5since you seem confused, i was replying to the post that "shame[d] on her" for her sexist comments. Iif you read comments on digg they are almost always sexist towards women and yet you don't see "shame on you" over and over when male diggers post sexist comments. Instead they end up with dozens or hundreds of diggs. And guess what, I don't give a ***** what you think I should or shouldn't say on the internet.
- zimzum66, on 11/03/2009, -1/+4How hot was the agent and how ugly is is wife?
- ultraseamus, on 11/03/2009, -1/+4Well, that is a safe assumption. You can also safely assume that most of all comments on any topic on Digg are from men. I think the better assumption is that most of the negative comments are from people who never made it past the summery. For instance, I have not, and do not intend on reading the article, sounds boring.
- Phoenix99, on 11/03/2009, -3/+6BAZINGA! I do believe we have an attention whore in our midst.
- ricker2005, on 11/03/2009, -0/+3Would the people doing the screening actually be required to understand the lawsuit or would they just comment based on sensationalist headlines like you're doing?
- steviesteveo, on 11/04/2009, -0/+2And falsely alleging that someone is mentally ill is -totally- accepted as potentially defamatory.
- rytyshy, on 11/04/2009, -0/+2The one who should be suing is the woman who wrote the referenced article. This Digg post makes it seem like the picture attached to the article is of the woman in the story, but it is of the woman who wrote the story.
- steviesteveo, on 11/04/2009, -0/+2This is a great summary, I agree with that wholeheartedly. It's good for the lulz to say she's suing because of the Facebook friends but that doesn't mean it's accurate.
- nomadxx7, on 11/04/2009, -2/+4Well anabna has deleted her twitter account... or at least under anabna
-
Show 51 - 100 of 111 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 