• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
    • B.J. Porter

      Moderation Team Change   06/16/2017

      After fifteen years of volunteer moderation at SA, I will no longer be part of the moderation team. The decision to step aside is mine, and has been some time in the works but we did not wish to announce it in advance for a number of reasons. It's been fun, but I need my time back for other purposes now. The Underdawg admin account will not be monitored until further notice, as I will be relinquishing control of it along with my administrative privileges. Zapata will continue on as a moderator, and any concerns or issues can be directed to that account or to the Editor until further notice. Anyone interested in helping moderate the forums should reach out to Scot by sending a PM to the Editor account. Please note that I am not leaving the community, I am merely stepping aside from Admin responsibilities and privileges on the site.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

pogen

Anarchy Occupation

85 posts in this topic

Wow, that Nicole person is an idiot. So, basically, she failed to make a sale so she publicly trashes her potential customer.

 

After all this I doubt if any event organizer would touch her with a ten foot pole. The world abounds with mediocre photogs, after all. Why go with a proven psycho who will defame you or sue you if everything does not go her way?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTD2COqwHm4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BINGO

 

"Editorial" team didn't come out smelling like roses either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that Nicole person is an idiot. So, basically, she failed to make a sale so she publicly trashes her potential customer.

 

After all this I doubt if any event organizer would touch her with a ten foot pole. The world abounds with mediocre photogs, after all. Why go with a proven psycho who will defame you or sue you if everything does not go her way?

 

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now being unwilling to recognise they screwed up, amazing!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

The best way to handle it would be an apology to MHYC on the FP, and removing the "Closed Shop" story from the FP.

 

No doubt the threat to sue came from your "representative" in Sydney. She does that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

Just to be clear, Nicole threatened legal action?

 

Can we go over and occupy her website?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

Seems fair to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have I got this right, the woman who wrote this about the DM/SA case is threatening legal action because her rant back fired on her, from reading between the lines there was a lot more dirt on her than was let out of the bag in the deleted threads??

 

For future reference of what was written what could have invoked legal action?

 

"I ask the question, is it really worth it? The way I see it is; the only people "winning" here in this case are the lawyers! It is the lawyers bleeding the dollars from both sides, that's what lawyers do. Lawyers don't care who wins the case or which party has been wronged."

 

From here:

http://sailingimages...ithin-the-sport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She sounds like she would make someone a great ex-wife. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

I'm a little late with this but I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant. I'm sure "The Advocate" could back me up on that point.

 

So I have to ask - who is/are "WE"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

I'm a little late with this but I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant. I'm sure "The Advocate" could back me up on that point.

 

So I have to ask - who is/are "WE"?

I seem to recall the same JS. Seems an inconsistency there. Hmmm.... <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

I'm a little late with this but I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant. I'm sure "The Advocate" could back me up on that point.

 

So I have to ask - who is/are "WE"?

I seem to recall the same JS. Seems an inconsistency there. Hmmm.... <_<

 

not quite right fellas....Clean said nothing more than "believe what you want" about the authorship of the FP article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

I'm a little late with this but I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant. I'm sure "The Advocate" could back me up on that point.

 

So I have to ask - who is/are "WE"?

I seem to recall the same JS. Seems an inconsistency there. Hmmm.... <_<

 

not quite right fellas....Clean said nothing more than "believe what you want" about the authorship of the FP article.

 

If our say so. I'm going sailing today either way. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going sailing today either way. B)

 

ahhhh shadddup ya bastage....it's freakin miserable here today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

The best way to handle it would be an apology to MHYC on the FP, and removing the "Closed Shop" story from the FP.

 

No doubt the threat to sue came from your "representative" in Sydney. She does that.

Yep threats of legal action after the Southport incident! And thats just the tip of the iceberg:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going sailing today either way. B)

 

ahhhh shadddup ya bastage....it's freakin miserable here today.

 

no it aint.. rain has cleared.. there's a moderate southerly.

 

I'm off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

Thanks, Ed, for keeping this thing going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant.

 

They say the first thing to go is the memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant.

 

They say the first thing to go is the memory.

mabey youres? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, mine is still surprisingly good. Evo accused me of writing the NS piece. I told him I did not, and that I only edited it. Then Johnny said he remembered me saying something quite fanciful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, mine is still surprisingly good. Evo accused me of writing the NS piece. I told him I did not, and that I only edited it. Then Johnny said he remembered me saying something quite fanciful.

How about just admitting you fucked up, your use of NS as the SA Australian correspondent has turned out to be a huge mistake. HTFU and say sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

The best way to handle it would be an apology to MHYC on the FP, and removing the "Closed Shop" story from the FP.

 

No doubt the threat to sue came from your "representative" in Sydney. She does that.

Yep threats of legal action after the Southport incident! And thats just the tip of the iceberg:(

Have seen Southport mentioned several times during this shitfight but no one has told the story. Care to share? Via PM if you'd prefer to.keep the savage beast at bay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was sex involved. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She sounds like she would make someone a great ex-wife. B)

mmm, NO

 

you wouldnt survive it and be the same person

 

at Cairns High Court case the PD alleges, at the end of the relationship she pulled 19 odd withdrawals of $10,000 odd each via a mobile and PIN

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, mine is still surprisingly good. Evo accused me of writing the NS piece. I told him I did not, and that I only edited it. Then Johnny said he remembered me saying something quite fanciful.

Christ mate

 

 

we have the original from NS (on her site), yours is a shortened version of it no doubt, but in that it got the SAME message across in fewer paragraphs, thus more straight to the point, harder hitting

 

this however (2 vers) is hardly the point, YOU conspired with HER to put the vindictive revenge Article on the Front Page

 

You and HER are BOTH equally the ' hard done by' plaintiffs in that article, which of course involved the threat of 'Negative' publicity

 

this (revenge) was borne out by both YOU and HER via the article being published

 

neither of you can point the finger singularly at each other

 

then she Facebooks YOUR work sniding the caption " MHYC a lesson learnt ! " , geddit

 

take YOUR smear against the sailors down, they have even hosted you there and put you up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

Thanks ED..

 

Who'd thunk the rest of it would happen? SAD

 

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn Clean should have sent her his pink flag and and International Media sign. That would have solved everything just like at the Chi-Mac.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, mine is still surprisingly good. Evo accused me of writing the NS piece. I told him I did not, and that I only edited it. Then Johnny said he remembered me saying something quite fanciful.

 

 

 

 

So, care to elaborate why my account was locked out? Did the FP article parody simply cut too close to the bone?

 

I don't do sock puppets - interesting to see a few others have not been locked out - so I can only assume it was the artice. Even those against the occupy thingy liked it - So what's up?

 

 

Previously melb_paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

The best way to handle it would be an apology to MHYC on the FP, and removing the "Closed Shop" story from the FP.

 

No doubt the threat to sue came from your "representative" in Sydney. She does that.

Yep threats of legal action after the Southport incident! And thats just the tip of the iceberg:(

Have seen Southport mentioned several times during this shitfight but no one has told the story. Care to share? Via PM if you'd prefer to.keep the savage beast at bay.

 

Owner/ crew head back to boat in early am. Argument starts with individual who was asleep on boat. Individual told to pack bags and leave. Complaints then made to Qld and NSW police. Owner / crew threatened with legal action. Misguided rule 69 protest lodged with cyca.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote]

 

 

 

Gee Vego are you a sock puppet too ....?

 

That's an awfully nice way to put the incident , you failed to mention that the "boat owner" asked said "guest" to leave as it was his boat and she was a "guest" ( she refused)also that when qld police were approached they knew nothing of the said "guest" or a thing about the incident , now seriously a malicious nasty story of sexual harassment and multiple offenders of women's rights police would jump straight on it IMHO ......., someone must swallow for their lawyer to get him involved with such a ludicrous scheme and participate ,

 

Puppet maybe , literally lawyer loves his prostrate tickled by being a NS puppet ;P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote]

 

 

 

Gee Vego are you a sock puppet too ....?

 

That's an awfully nice way to put the incident , you failed to mention that the "boat owner" asked said "guest" to leave as it was his boat and she was a "guest" ( she refused)also that when qld police were approached they knew nothing of the said "guest" or a thing about the incident , now seriously a malicious nasty story of sexual harassment and multiple offenders of women's rights police would jump straight on it IMHO ......., someone must swallow for their lawyer to get him involved with such a ludicrous scheme and participate ,

 

Puppet maybe , literally lawyer loves his prostrate tickled by being a NS puppet ;P

LOL. He's back!!.....but for how long???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alrighty then,

 

 

I wonder if anyone else got booted apart from me. No reply from Ed (he's be on-line, in the same forum topics while I made a couple of posts under this sock puppet - and I don't normally do puppets).

 

Didn't mention anything about the 'other party' in the parody article at all.

 

Havent made any accusations about the other party previously, other than linking to a site that she had posted (twitter).

 

I'd have thought SA management would have the guts to say why, even if though don't have the guts to retract what now seems a highly questionable article.

 

 

 

previously melb_paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She sounds like she would make someone a great ex-wife. B)

mmm, NO

 

you wouldnt survive it and be the same person

 

at Cairns High Court case the PD alleges, at the end of the relationship she pulled 19 odd withdrawals of $10,000 odd each via a mobile and PIN

 

how about at the end of life, not the relationship?

 

ooops grab it while you can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont understand why their cant be an honest article on the front page detailing events, timeline, apologies, and when the lawyers got called in etc.thus laying it all out so clean and Ed dont look totally like the bad guys, after all they cant get sued more for telling the truth can they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She sounds like she would make someone a great ex-wife. B)

No reference on the net to what happened the following day? Adjourned maybe??

mmm, NO

 

you wouldnt survive it and be the same person

 

at Cairns High Court case the PD alleges, at the end of the relationship she pulled 19 odd withdrawals of $10,000 odd each via a mobile and PIN

 

how about at the end of life, not the relationship?

 

ooops grab it while you can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont understand why their cant be an honest article on the front page detailing events, timeline, apologies, and when the lawyers got called in etc.thus laying it all out so clean and Ed dont look totally like the bad guys, after all they cant get sued more for telling the truth can they?

 

 

Sounds fair!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take that bitches..................................................................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2ilwnk.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take that bitches..................................................................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2ilwnk.jpg

 

Sooo, LB15 do tell us - who's your daddy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take that bitches..................................................................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2ilwnk.jpg

 

Sooo, LB15 do tell us - who's your daddy?

 

 

WTF!!!!!!!

That does it!

I am sueing everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really the threat of legal action that caused the thread to be pulled or the association with the individual involved?

 

Considering a review of the terms ... Seems to me that by posting or contributing an individual would be bound by the below and elevating SA of liability.

 

I am sure there is a lawyer out there to confirm if this would actually stand up in court.

 

9. Limitation of Liability

 

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, SAILING ANARCHY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES SUFFERED AS A RESULT OF USING, MODIFYING, CONTRIBUTING, COPYING, DISTRIBUTING, DOWNLOADING MATERIALS OR CONTENT FROM THE WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES. IN NO EVENT SHALL SAILING ANARCHY BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, EXTRAORDINARY, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOSS OF DATA, REVENUE, PROFITS, USE OR OTHER ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE) HOWEVER ARISING, WHETHER FOR BREACH OR IN TORT, EVEN IF SAILING ANARCHY HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADEQUATE PROTECTION AND BACKUP OF DATA AND/OR EQUIPMENT USED IN CONNECTION WITH THE WEBSITE AND WILL NOT MAKE A CLAIM OF ANY NATURE AGAINST SAILING ANARCHY INCLUDING FOR LOST DATA, INACCURATE OUTPUT, WORK DELAYS OR LOST PROFITS RESULTING FROM THE USE OF THE WEBSITE. YOU AGREE TO HOLD SAILING ANARCHY ENTIRELY HARMLESS FROM, AND YOU COVENANT NOT TO SUE SAILING ANARCHY OR ITS AFFILIATES, SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS, FOR, ANY CLAIMS RELATED TO THE SAILING ANARCHY WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES.

 

10. Indemnification.

 

You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Sailing Anarchy, its officers, directors, employees, agents, licensors, suppliers, and Licensors (collectively the Service Providers) from and against all losses, expenses, damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, resulting from any breach of this Agreement, any Sailing Anarchy policy or any activity related to your account (including negligent or wrongful conduct) by you or any other person accessing the Website using your Internet account or any action by you with respect to your use of the Website or social media sites that violates any law, regulation or any of our policies.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really the threat of legal action that caused the thread to be pulled or the association with the individual involved?

 

Considering a review of the terms ... Seems to me that by posting or contributing an individual would be bound by the below and elevating SA of liability.

 

I am sure there is a lawyer out there to confirm if this would actually stand up in court.

 

9. Limitation of Liability

 

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, SAILING ANARCHY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES SUFFERED AS A RESULT OF USING, MODIFYING, CONTRIBUTING, COPYING, DISTRIBUTING, DOWNLOADING MATERIALS OR CONTENT FROM THE WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES. IN NO EVENT SHALL SAILING ANARCHY BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, EXTRAORDINARY, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOSS OF DATA, REVENUE, PROFITS, USE OR OTHER ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE) HOWEVER ARISING, WHETHER FOR BREACH OR IN TORT, EVEN IF SAILING ANARCHY HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADEQUATE PROTECTION AND BACKUP OF DATA AND/OR EQUIPMENT USED IN CONNECTION WITH THE WEBSITE AND WILL NOT MAKE A CLAIM OF ANY NATURE AGAINST SAILING ANARCHY INCLUDING FOR LOST DATA, INACCURATE OUTPUT, WORK DELAYS OR LOST PROFITS RESULTING FROM THE USE OF THE WEBSITE. YOU AGREE TO HOLD SAILING ANARCHY ENTIRELY HARMLESS FROM, AND YOU COVENANT NOT TO SUE SAILING ANARCHY OR ITS AFFILIATES, SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS, FOR, ANY CLAIMS RELATED TO THE SAILING ANARCHY WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES.

 

10. Indemnification.

 

You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Sailing Anarchy, its officers, directors, employees, agents, licensors, suppliers, and Licensors (collectively the Service Providers) from and against all losses, expenses, damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, resulting from any breach of this Agreement, any Sailing Anarchy policy or any activity related to your account (including negligent or wrongful conduct) by you or any other person accessing the Website using your Internet account or any action by you with respect to your use of the Website or social media sites that violates any law, regulation or any of our policies.

 

 

 

if an elephant farts in africa, with high altitude vortex conditions across the Indian and Tasman, and a sea temp of 19 in Auckland, with the start boat carrying a standard burgee, national flag and start sequence flags, button, webber and vettel 1,2,3 at the Melbourne GP, will it be a boat or pin end to the start of the vovlo? should be an easy one for ya lost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really the threat of legal action that caused the thread to be pulled or the association with the individual involved?

 

Considering a review of the terms ... Seems to me that by posting or contributing an individual would be bound by the below and elevating SA of liability.

 

I am sure there is a lawyer out there to confirm if this would actually stand up in court.

 

9. Limitation of Liability

 

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, SAILING ANARCHY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES SUFFERED AS A RESULT OF USING, MODIFYING, CONTRIBUTING, COPYING, DISTRIBUTING, DOWNLOADING MATERIALS OR CONTENT FROM THE WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES. IN NO EVENT SHALL SAILING ANARCHY BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, EXTRAORDINARY, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOSS OF DATA, REVENUE, PROFITS, USE OR OTHER ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE) HOWEVER ARISING, WHETHER FOR BREACH OR IN TORT, EVEN IF SAILING ANARCHY HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADEQUATE PROTECTION AND BACKUP OF DATA AND/OR EQUIPMENT USED IN CONNECTION WITH THE WEBSITE AND WILL NOT MAKE A CLAIM OF ANY NATURE AGAINST SAILING ANARCHY INCLUDING FOR LOST DATA, INACCURATE OUTPUT, WORK DELAYS OR LOST PROFITS RESULTING FROM THE USE OF THE WEBSITE. YOU AGREE TO HOLD SAILING ANARCHY ENTIRELY HARMLESS FROM, AND YOU COVENANT NOT TO SUE SAILING ANARCHY OR ITS AFFILIATES, SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS, FOR, ANY CLAIMS RELATED TO THE SAILING ANARCHY WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES.

 

10. Indemnification.

 

You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Sailing Anarchy, its officers, directors, employees, agents, licensors, suppliers, and Licensors (collectively the Service Providers) from and against all losses, expenses, damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, resulting from any breach of this Agreement, any Sailing Anarchy policy or any activity related to your account (including negligent or wrongful conduct) by you or any other person accessing the Website using your Internet account or any action by you with respect to your use of the Website or social media sites that violates any law, regulation or any of our policies.

 

 

 

if an elephant farts in africa, with high altitude vortex conditions across the Indian and Tasman, and a sea temp of 19 in Auckland, with the start boat carrying a standard burgee, national flag and start sequence flags, button, webber and vettel 1,2,3 at the Melbourne GP, will it be a boat or pin end to the start of the vovlo? should be an easy one for ya lost

 

1/3rd of the way up from the pin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote]

 

 

 

Gee Vego are you a sock puppet too ....?

 

That's an awfully nice way to put the incident , you failed to mention that the "boat owner" asked said "guest" to leave as it was his boat and she was a "guest" ( she refused)also that when qld police were approached they knew nothing of the said "guest" or a thing about the incident , now seriously a malicious nasty story of sexual harassment and multiple offenders of women's rights police would jump straight on it IMHO ......., someone must swallow for their lawyer to get him involved with such a ludicrous scheme and participate ,

 

Puppet maybe , literally lawyer loves his prostrate tickled by being a NS puppet ;P

 

This is still a very polite way of putting it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know if Clean were really her friend he would have advised her to chill and do better next time rather than giving her the gun and bullet for the aforesaid foot-shooting.

 

actually we did just that and then heavily edited her rant. the thread was what it was until we got threatened with legal action, so it was shut down. and we ran the counterpoint to nicole's pov on the fp last night. seemed the best way to handle it.

 

I'm a little late with this but I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant. I'm sure "The Advocate" could back me up on that point.

 

So I have to ask - who is/are "WE"?

 

JS, Agreed strongly to the point Clean said he edited nothing but punctuation and grammar. So Scott's claims of heavy editing are either a mistake, a misinterpretation or a lie.

 

One would really think the two of them would chat amongst themselves to get a story straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

not quite right fellas....Clean said nothing more than "believe what you want" about the authorship of the FP article.

Sorry Evo but you are wrong on this one, I suspect you didn't see the post, a number of us did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant.

 

They say the first thing to go is the memory.

 

I know JS's, god bless him, may be on the way out out, but mine aint, you said it mate other than what is in my post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant.

 

They say the first thing to go is the memory.

mabey youres? :)

 

+1, very funny my friend!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really the threat of legal action that caused the thread to be pulled or the association with the individual involved?

 

Considering a review of the terms ... Seems to me that by posting or contributing an individual would be bound by the below and elevating SA of liability.

 

I am sure there is a lawyer out there to confirm if this would actually stand up in court.

 

9. Limitation of Liability

 

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, SAILING ANARCHY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES SUFFERED AS A RESULT OF USING, MODIFYING, CONTRIBUTING, COPYING, DISTRIBUTING, DOWNLOADING MATERIALS OR CONTENT FROM THE WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES. IN NO EVENT SHALL SAILING ANARCHY BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, EXTRAORDINARY, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOSS OF DATA, REVENUE, PROFITS, USE OR OTHER ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE) HOWEVER ARISING, WHETHER FOR BREACH OR IN TORT, EVEN IF SAILING ANARCHY HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADEQUATE PROTECTION AND BACKUP OF DATA AND/OR EQUIPMENT USED IN CONNECTION WITH THE WEBSITE AND WILL NOT MAKE A CLAIM OF ANY NATURE AGAINST SAILING ANARCHY INCLUDING FOR LOST DATA, INACCURATE OUTPUT, WORK DELAYS OR LOST PROFITS RESULTING FROM THE USE OF THE WEBSITE. YOU AGREE TO HOLD SAILING ANARCHY ENTIRELY HARMLESS FROM, AND YOU COVENANT NOT TO SUE SAILING ANARCHY OR ITS AFFILIATES, SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS, FOR, ANY CLAIMS RELATED TO THE SAILING ANARCHY WEBSITE OR SOCIAL MEDIA SITES.

 

10. Indemnification.

 

You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Sailing Anarchy, its officers, directors, employees, agents, licensors, suppliers, and Licensors (collectively the Service Providers) from and against all losses, expenses, damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, resulting from any breach of this Agreement, any Sailing Anarchy policy or any activity related to your account (including negligent or wrongful conduct) by you or any other person accessing the Website using your Internet account or any action by you with respect to your use of the Website or social media sites that violates any law, regulation or any of our policies.

 

 

I have been thinking along the same lines. SA's lawsuit was because of editorial comment.

 

The reason for pulling the thread was again lawsuit. Even though this time it was the general public making comment, not SA.

 

I call bullshit. The thread was pulled because bullshit stories were unravelling at a great rate, and was done for SA's own PR reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does seem to change her name a lot:

 

 

JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT-KIPPIN (from: 2007-10-16); JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT (from: 2006-05-03); JORDANNA NICOLE TAYLOR-STEVENS (from: 2005-08-26); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-04-10); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-03-09); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 2000-07-03); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 1999-11-01)

 

 

 

http://businessprofiles.com/details/judiann-nicole-scott-kippin/AU-42929484810

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not quite right fellas....Clean said nothing more than "believe what you want" about the authorship of the FP article.

Sorry Evo but you are wrong on this one, I suspect you didn't see the post, a number of us did.

 

nah mate...didn't see Al confirm anything and there was reason to watch as Ms Scott was saying he wrote the whole damned thing. Big Al was avoiding the question. Clear as a bell on this for a few reasons TA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does seem to change her name a lot:

 

 

JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT-KIPPIN (from: 2007-10-16); JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT (from: 2006-05-03); JORDANNA NICOLE TAYLOR-STEVENS (from: 2005-08-26); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-04-10); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-03-09); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 2000-07-03); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 1999-11-01)

 

 

 

http://businessprofiles.com/details/judiann-nicole-scott-kippin/AU-42929484810

 

Crikey wot an interesting lady... love these characters, a few in the sport but she is right up there!

 

Her website is good. Not sure if 'Tryandsueme' is a competitor or an ex of some description. Another illuminating story there methunks

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for the 69 details.

 

i.e. RRS69 - not the other 69 (or maybe it was a 68?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does seem to change her name a lot:

 

 

JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT-KIPPIN (from: 2007-10-16); JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT (from: 2006-05-03); JORDANNA NICOLE TAYLOR-STEVENS (from: 2005-08-26); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-04-10); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-03-09); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 2000-07-03); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 1999-11-01)

 

 

 

http://businessprofiles.com/details/judiann-nicole-scott-kippin/AU-42929484810

 

Crikey wot an interesting lady... love these characters, a few in the sport but she is right up there!

 

Her website is good. Not sure if 'Tryandsueme' is a competitor or an ex of some description. Another illuminating story there methunks

 

:D

 

 

Neither !!! I wouldn't touch her with your dick , an the whole southport incident happened because my mate wouldn't touch her with his dick either !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does seem to change her name a lot:

 

 

JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT-KIPPIN (from: 2007-10-16); JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT (from: 2006-05-03); JORDANNA NICOLE TAYLOR-STEVENS (from: 2005-08-26); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-04-10); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-03-09); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 2000-07-03); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 1999-11-01)

 

 

 

http://businessprofiles.com/details/judiann-nicole-scott-kippin/AU-42929484810

 

Crikey wot an interesting lady... love these characters, a few in the sport but she is right up there!

 

Her website is good. Not sure if 'Tryandsueme' is a competitor or an ex of some description. Another illuminating story there methunks

 

:D

 

 

Neither !!! I wouldn't touch her with your dick , an the whole southport incident happened because my mate wouldn't touch her with his dick either !!!

 

Sounds a bit like what happened in Airlie. Bloke refused to "take one for the team".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does seem to change her name a lot:

 

 

JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT-KIPPIN (from: 2007-10-16); JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT (from: 2006-05-03); JORDANNA NICOLE TAYLOR-STEVENS (from: 2005-08-26); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-04-10); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-03-09); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 2000-07-03); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 1999-11-01)

 

 

 

http://businessprofi.../AU-42929484810

 

Crikey wot an interesting lady... love these characters, a few in the sport but she is right up there!

 

Her website is good. Not sure if 'Tryandsueme' is a competitor or an ex of some description. Another illuminating story there methunks

 

:D

 

 

Neither !!! I wouldn't touch her with your dick , an the whole southport incident happened because my mate wouldn't touch her with his dick either !!!

 

and strangely enough that was the root of the problem on Fiasco as well.Got nocked back by a few of the lads and then all hell broke loose.Hell hath no fury like a women scorned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does seem to change her name a lot:

 

 

JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT-KIPPIN (from: 2007-10-16); JUDIANN NICOLE SCOTT (from: 2006-05-03); JORDANNA NICOLE TAYLOR-STEVENS (from: 2005-08-26); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-04-10); JUDIANN NICOLE GIBBS (from: 2005-03-09); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 2000-07-03); JUDITH ANN SCHULZ (from: 1999-11-01)

 

 

 

http://businessprofi.../AU-42929484810

 

Crikey wot an interesting lady... love these characters, a few in the sport but she is right up there!

 

Her website is good. Not sure if 'Tryandsueme' is a competitor or an ex of some description. Another illuminating story there methunks

 

:D

 

 

Neither !!! I wouldn't touch her with your dick , an the whole southport incident happened because my mate wouldn't touch her with his dick either !!!

 

and strangely enough that was the root of the problem on Fiasco as well.Got nocked back by a few of the lads and then all hell broke loose.Hell hath no fury like a women scorned.

 

 

I mean if she shaved and washed it every now and then she may stand a chance ...... Ummm no still wouldn't ;P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for the 69 details.

 

So am I.

 

P.S. I still couldn't believe (if what has been said during past days is true) that some photog considers herself more important than sailing as a sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that some photog considers herself more important than sailing as a sport.

 

 

You don't know many journos, do you? "It's the medium, not the message." ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She sounds like she would make someone a great ex-wife. B)

mmm, NO

 

 

 

Just to be clear, by "great ex-wife" I mean "psychotic vengeful bitch". I am, unfortunately, an expert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant.

 

They say the first thing to go is the memory.

mabey youres? :)

 

+1, very funny my friend!

 

Cache is a wonderful thing

post-720-060110700 1332147010_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that some photog considers herself more important than sailing as a sport.

 

You don't know many journos, do you? "It's the medium, not the message." ;)

 

In sailing field, no, not that many.

Those that I know, are:

1. male

2. ex-competitors

No problems with them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Clean saying in the original (now deleted) thread that he/we had not changed or rewritten anything in her rant.

 

They say the first thing to go is the memory.

mabey youres? :)

 

+1, very funny my friend!

 

Cache is a wonderful thing

So Clean. How is YOUR memory? I think yours went first. You just proved yourself to be a liar. And Evo's memory not too good either.

 

Thanks BG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, c'mon "CLEAN" let's hear a response.

 

BRB; gotta pop some corn.

 

Romain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just put the dog out....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, to be clear, I see the decision to post the original article as another example of carelessness with facts said about other people and total failure to meet the most minimal standards for journalism.

 

That said, I don't see where Clean has necessarily lied.

 

Why not: Clean edited only for punctuation, as he said; Scot then edited out some but nowhere near all of the bad journalism (to say the least) and published the remainder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-1322-067700000 1332185292_thumb.png

post-1322-005800700 1332185531_thumb.png

post-1322-056577700 1332185540_thumb.png

 

Three different version of the truth....

 

 

When one tells the truth, it is easy to remember...

 

When one tells untruths, one MUST remember what one says...

 

(or at least write it down for future reference - and check one's notes before shooting off one's mouth)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If granting that Scot likes the editorial "we" to describe his own actions, how are Clean's and Scot's posts necessarily different versions of the truth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-1322-067700000 1332185292_thumb.png

post-1322-005800700 1332185531_thumb.png

post-1322-056577700 1332185540_thumb.png

 

Three different version of the truth....

 

 

When one tells the truth, it is easy to remember...

 

When one tells untruths, one MUST remember what one says...

 

(or at least write it down for future reference - and check one's notes before shooting off one's mouth)

 

yes John...and sometimes there are things better than writing it down.

 

why are you questioning what I wrote and remember? you appear to be shooting your mouth off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If granting that Scot likes the editorial "we" to describe his own actions, how are Clean's and Scot's posts necessarily different versions of the truth?

 

Do you think "edited for punctuation" and "heavily edit her rant" mean the same thing, Trenace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's that? Never heard of him! :)

 

No, I think that Clean and Scot are two distinct individuals, and Scot has a tendency to refer to his Editorial actions with the royal "we."

 

So, it's possible that Clean edited only punctuation, Scot edited further, and Scot described this as "we edited heavily."

 

I don't call people liars when there's a plausible explanation where they are not, myself.

 

EDIT: It actually doesn't take even that. The correct quote is "we did just that and then edited heavily."

 

Very easy for the heavy part of the editing to be the act of a single person in that statement, and also possible for such editing to be nothing but deletions, or deletions and trivial clean-ups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's that? Never heard of him! :)

 

 

 

"Trenace" oversteps the mark & gets the flick, -- rearrange the letters and "narecet" magically appears as a sockpuppet for the now flicked "Trenace".

 

We're not completely stupid you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your case, Johnny, actually I think no one "knew" you're not completely stupid.

 

"Socks" are added accounts; this is my only active account. The word is "replacement" or "new," not "sock." But you've never been accurate with words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your case, Johnny, actually I think no one "knew" you're not completely stupid.

 

A bit pissed off are we. But you're not in NS's league, by a long shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pissed off?

 

No, not pissed off at you Johnny... you're just tiresome and have zero sense of humor. And no, you don't have Australian humor either. Australian humor is quite funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pissed off?

 

No, not pissed off at you Johnny... you're just tiresome and have zero sense of humor. And no, you don't have Australian humor either. Australian humor is quite funny.

 

Sockpuppet? Or not? Answering yourself?

post-1322-065097200 1332205543_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See what I mean?

 

No sense of humor.

 

(But I bet you don't see it.)

 

At any rate, one semi-but-not-very interesting thing about having the old account blocked was that I lost my Ignore list. So I started seeing your stuff again, as well as a few others. Some of the others actually had interesting stuff. You didn't, of course. Back you go, as you are truly a waste of time if anyone ever was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See what I mean?

 

No sense of humor.

 

(But I bet you don't see it.)

 

At any rate, one semi-but-not-very interesting thing about having the old account blocked was that I lost my Ignore list. So I started seeing your stuff again, as well as a few others. Some of the others actually had interesting stuff. You didn't, of course. Back you go, as you are truly a waste of time if anyone ever was.

 

Isn't he half pissed off that his weak cover is blown. Even NS covered her tracks better than "trenace' and his sockpuppet "naracet". Not funny - just pathetic kid stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!! Just wow!! Having read and posted in thousands of threads here, this one may be the most absurdly pointless.

 

 

 

Has any one of you stepped away from your keyboard and actually gone sailing in the last many many months//

 

 

 

I want my ten minutes back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites