Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,303,866
Generally. But uploading 1,000s of photos for YEARS and then demanding nobody ever post any of them ever again, is not the same as uploading 1 photo and then deciding you don't want it posted.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,303,868
@previous (C) > uploading 1,000s of photos for YEARS and then demanding nobody ever post any of them ever again
Hypothetically, if somebody did that but also liked to post pictures of other people to upset them, they might be considered somewhat hypocritical.
> Generally. But uploading 1,000s of photos for YEARS and then demanding nobody ever post any of them ever again, is not the same as uploading 1 photo and then deciding you don't want it posted.
What's comical is Dave is such a stupid motherfucker. He posts the picture and covers his own face HA HA HA HA Not to mention he was craving attention so much he actually posted her picture. lol
> Generally. But uploading 1,000s of photos for YEARS and then demanding nobody ever post any of them ever again, is not the same as uploading 1 photo and then deciding you don't want it posted.
Anonymous E replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,303,881
Here is something else pathetic about Dave. When he was showed the 6 month old anniversary link he quickly went and deleted the pictures from it. This dumbshit is a real piece of work.
Anonymous E replied with this 1 year ago, 30 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,303,883
@previous (H)
There is even screen captures of them on the page itself. The pictures of his wife had been floating around a month or more before Dave was pointed to the link, Then he promptly deleted the pictures LOL. He's just a dumbshit.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 3 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,303,896
See rule 1:
"While not dox per se, excessively referencing personal details of a user's, even if they themselves have revealed the details, may be considered harassment and consequently deleted."
I'd say repeatedly posting pics of Dave's wife (even after he himself posted it) is covered by this clause. Pic of wife = not dox per se, if posted by him, but still counts as personal details about Dave.
Oh, and if the above is accepted, then it sets a precedent for also regularly deleting Matt's pictures and "not-dox", which get posted even more frequently and excessively.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,303,897
Jesus dude imagine having hair like this and trying to convince yourself that you are somehow not as pathetic as Matt, another user that is 50+ years old, too funny
> See rule 1: > "While not dox per se, excessively referencing personal details of a user's, even if they themselves have revealed the details, may be considered harassment and consequently deleted." > > I'd say repeatedly posting pics of Dave's wife (even after he himself posted it) is covered by this clause. Pic of wife = not dox per se, if posted by him, but still counts as personal details about Dave. > > Oh, and if the above is accepted, then it sets a precedent for also regularly deleting Matt's pictures and "not-dox", which get posted even more frequently and excessively.
He posted them himself, he has told people where he “lives” and a bunch of other personal shit and now he wants to whine that other people are posting it, sad!