Dr. Disrespect permanently banned from Twitch

thats differant..
also alterior motives on twitch part. possibly due to the mixer stuff, i think played a part in it also.

sex sells as they say. Poki mon woman as examplem, and some of the contraversy around her donations.
 
Are you sure you actually use the internet outside of these forums?
True enough.
I lost all faith in social media a long time ago. When the internet first appeared I thought it was the best thing to ever happen - the people have a voice! But it soon because clear that the majority people have an opinion, but don't have a clue (or they want to sell you something). They are forming opinions and arguing from the padded luxury of their armchair, with no relevant experience or fact. It's just a mindless free-for-all of droning rubbish. This site tends to be a better than others, I might add, which is the only reason I come back! But, er, no, I don't really use social media at all.

I find it strange that Twitch banned him for the reasons they described yet on their platform they allow scantly clad women to groom teenage boys

It is odd considering that 15% of offenders are women. The public have this perception that it's always men, which is not true.

Anyway, getting back to the point, I have absolutely no sympathy for him. Any public figure must set an example and be squeaky clean.
 
Last edited:
True enough.
I lost all faith in social media a long time ago. When the internet first appeared I thought it was the best thing to ever happen - the people have a voice! But it soon because clear that the majority people have an opinion, but don't have a clue (or they want to sell you something). They are forming opinions and arguing from the padded luxury of their armchair, with no relevant experience or fact. It's just a mindless free-for-all of droning rubbish. This site tends to be a better than others, I might add, which is the only reason I come back! But, er, no, I don't really use social media at all.



It is odd considering that 15% of offenders are women. The public have this perception that it's always men, which is not true.

Anyway, getting back to the point, I have absolutely no sympathy for him. Any public figure must set an example and be squeaky clean.
all valid points.
but you dont have to be on social media so see other examples besides those graphs. memes are a good example of items your likely to have seen as well. either here or else were.

on :
Anyway, getting back to the point, I have absolutely no sympathy for him. Any public figure must set an example and be squeaky clean.
makes you wonder why we still have poloticians.
 
Reminder that forums are social media.
Technically yes, but realistically no.

It's the same as saying that an iMac is a PC, it is correct under the textbook definition of the phrase, but it's also completely different to what society views the phrase as and the context in which it's actually used.


should be classed as treason. all those wasted centers, just thrown away as "waste"
They never existed, the mints are formed in a ring.
 
Last edited:
dont lissen to this person clearly a politician!
should be classed as treason. all those wasted centers, just thrown away as "waste"
Aren’t they the people who put the holes in the mints?
@ubersonic for full transparancy, and so there is no confusion.
my posts and i believe @MoNkeE's are jokes/satire.

i am aware the polo's as example dont have holes in the middle drilled or cut out, and that they are cast that way in the factories.
In @MoNkeE 's post i beleive (correct me if i am incorrect) the reference was in relation to the financial Mint i.e. the Treassure/Bank of England and how the goverments have caused problems and "draining the country dry" so to speak.

but the point was theory vs reality dont meat, at least very often, and not well.
and we have publc figures in goverment(s) who do not set a good example. the recent one in the US, Russia/Ukraine/Israil/Hamas/China any one?, as examples and there are a load in our own goverment in the UK (past present future) from fraud to sexual harrasment, abuse of power, insider trading to name a few i am sure. Although i am not aware of any murders at this time, and if there are its news is supressed, Joanne Cox?

its just the serverity of what that they have done. Hence the :
makes you wonder why we still have poloticians.
you wont get people who are squeaky clean. even your average Joe i am sure can be found to have broken some law either accidentally/onpurpose, deliveratly or other wise at some point in their lives.
Using copy righted images, using freeware for corporate usage (it was the 80s/90s it was a differant time..), downloading a youtube video/recording tv or radio can as example be classed as a crime (how many people take the mick with fare usage?).

while the subject at hand is very charged, we dont yet have the full details to make a fully informed (i.e. how servere) the issue is. and the full circumstances around it.
Again. That is not to say he is inocent! or any one person(s) or group(s) are inocent or Defending him/them. Only that people want to assertain the full guilt of ALL Parties involved.
You would think / i would hope those people with pitch forks would want full justice not just partial justice.

People have come very close to slinging accusations in some cases in this thread for their incorrect beleif of what they THINK they have read, either online or writen by members of the forum.
the situation on this case and subject are being driven by the usuall internet tendencys of People spinning it the way they want. from fake resports / emails / claims / potential swattings. obsuring facts or swamping facts with fake information &/or partial lies (the most effective form as ther is some truth there to make people doubt).



This :
Any public figure must set an example and be squeaky clean.
is a noble sentiment and one we should all be striving for. ideal world or not. but no one or thing is perfect.


Edit 07-0724 : instead of bumping. but i see people have started going after the wife, posting on insta and x account abuse.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I don't think he can be sued.

Does everyone remember Huw Edwards, he resigned from the BBC this year on medical grounds. To this day The Sun has not been sued for printing basically lies and against the wishes of the not-a-victim. Why? They never said a name until he was forced to out himself as being the unnamed presenter.


Post aged like milk in the sun...

Guess we now know why the Sun haven't faced any court claims in regards to their reporting on this matter.

 
Post aged like milk in the sun...

Guess we now know why the Sun haven't faced any court claims in regards to their reporting on this matter.


The Sun cancelled the TV interview with the parents and basically set fire to the story when the alleged person being abused sent a message through a lawyer denying it all and accusing their parents of manipulation.

Are you stating that this is the same story.

Because if I look up this new story on The Sun they say he resigned after a glittering career spanning almost 40 years and they don't say a single word about the previous story: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/29542093/bbc-huw-edwards-charged-indecent-images-children/

So if you can clear up if this is the same story which it doesn't seem to be, you could say that.
 
The Sun cancelled the TV interview with the parents and basically set fire to the story when the alleged person being abused sent a message through a lawyer denying it all and accusing their parents of manipulation.

Are you stating that this is the same story.

Because if I look up this new story on The Sun they say he resigned after a glittering career spanning almost 40 years and they don't say a single word about the previous story: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/29542093/bbc-huw-edwards-charged-indecent-images-children/

So if you can clear up if this is the same story which it doesn't seem to be, you could say that.

I'm saying that Huw would have been aware that he was under investigation for possessing indecent image(s) and so it would not have been wise to launch defamation proceedings in such circumstances.
 
Last edited:
I'm saying that Huw would have been aware that he was under investigation for possessing indecent image(s) and so it would not have been wise to launch defamation proceedings in such circumstances.

There's no gloating or digging up the original story in this new one so I strongly suspect it's stone dead. But the question at the time was how do you put into words, a civil case that The Sun wronged you by accusing an unnamed BBC presenter. Is that even defamation when it's so broad.
 
Yup, and glad, he was 100% innocent all long, and he is talking about it now, he had no case to answer, for a start, the person he was chatting to was a adult, and he did not even sex txt or share images or anything, just a begrudged employee causing trouble and making stuff up.
 
Back
Top Bottom