calling out Thule

[TMAN]

@thule I am deleting them. Stop posting fucking walls of text you retard

[Thule]

So you are manipulating the thread by deleting my replies to your posts ?Don't like the answer to be public ?

Anyways TMAN like i said the clock is running tic tac tic tac

[TMAN]

So you are manipulating the thread by deleting my replies to your posts ?Don't like the answer to be public ?

Anyways TMAN like i said the clock is running tic tac tic tac

I don’t like walls of text. I’m not removing my tags, do your worst you pleb. Add me calling you a stupid retard to your criminal case.

Fucking window licker

[stompix]

In theory they can charge for travel costs. Luckily for Thule, imaginary lawyers can be paid with Monopoly money.

As my family had a few contracts on delivery for stuff all around Central Europe at one point we did run into problems and had to get some legal consulting. Every time we had to go to their office and not once we even thought of asking them to go to our location. Nor did they once summon the accused to their office, everything was done between lawyers from their office.

I don't know much about Thule or from where he is supposed to be but one thing is clear, he has no clue how laws are applied in the EU and how nationals laws work in an intra civil lawsuit.

@stompix if he lives in Romania you can.

No moron, you can't and this shows how little s*** you know
Romania has decriminalized libel in 2014, this is why I mentioned that country as a starting point, and by its quite stupid laws, you must come with an expertized financial statement that proves you have suffered financial loss for a claim to be accepted in a civil case.

Give it up, it's pretty clear you haven't talked with a lawyer or received counsel from one

[Thule]

In theory they can charge for travel costs. Luckily for Thule, imaginary lawyers can be paid with Monopoly money.

As my family had a few contracts on delivery for stuff all around Central Europe at one point we did run into problems and had to get some legal consulting. Every time we had to go to their office and not once we even thought of asking them to go to our location. Nor did they once summon the accused to their office, everything was done between lawyers from their office.

I don't know much about Thule or from where he is supposed to be but one thing is clear, he has no clue how laws are applied in the EU and how nationals laws work in an intra civil lawsuit.

@stompix if he lives in Romania you can.

No moron, you can't and this shows how little s*** you know
Romania has decriminalized libel in 2014, this is why I mentioned that country as a starting point, and by its quite stupid laws, you must come with an expertized financial statement that proves you have suffered financial loss for a claim to be accepted in a civil case.

Give it up, it's pretty clear you haven't talked with a lawyer or received counsel from one

You just show how stupid you are claiming local law is higher than EU law.
Each law student will confirm you that.
Go tell your history to your moma

Just to show what an ingnorant poser you are

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-law-and-uk/

EU laws in areas for which the EU is responsible override any conflicting laws of member countries.

These people trusted forum members who have no clue about law and make false claims LOL

[suchmoon]

I got no problem with payment since it will be you in the end covering the cost

Awesome. Send me your lawyer's bill - I want to start paying it as soon as possible.

[Thule]

I got no problem with payment since it will be you in the end covering the cost

Awesome. Send me your lawyer's bill - I want to start paying it as soon as possible.

Always a big mouth.Let's see.
At least it will be a big satisfaction for me to punish your abuse.

[TMAN]

I got no problem with payment since it will be you in the end covering the cost

Awesome. Send me your lawyer's bill - I want to start paying it as soon as possible.

Always a big mouth.Let's see.
At least it will be a big satisfaction for me to punish your abuse.

You are the big mouth Thule, all talk no action. Anyway pics of wife or she isn’t real

[suchmoon]

Always a big mouth.Let's see.
At least it will be a big satisfaction for me to punish your abuse.

Come on Thule. Cut the bullshit. Can you at least tell your lawyer to send me a C&D? I'd been trying to start a collection of those from various scammers over the years but they always chicken out.

[stompix]

links to bs

My dear troll, I know I'm wasting my time here but maybe, who knows..

1) I gave you a direct link to the EU justice website where there are all the details on how civil lawsuits happen in the EU
2) You clearly have no experience with those, you have not talked to a lawyer, you have no wife that is a lawyer, probably you have no wife and probably ...add a lot more stuff here
3) Remember this, if you would have talked to a lawyer, the FIRST thing he would have told you would have been to cease all communication with the other party and only discuss through him. Do you honestly want us to believe a lawyer would take your case after you posted home you know the home address of members here and you're going to do whatever you dreamed of?

4) Since civil law is not your point, think about physics better and Newton's third law, as the forum reacts just like that.
You started a mess trying to somehow convince people to clean your trust wall, what you have managed is to expose yourself to even more members, add more red trust and make a lot more people who didn't even know you previously aware what kind of person you are.

You are the big mouth Thule, all talk no action. Anyway pics of wife or she isn’t real

Curiosity killed the cat, and if it won't kill you I'm willing to bet it will make you at least throw up till the next block halving

[Thule]

links to bs

My dear troll, I know I'm wasting my time here but maybe, who knows..

1) I gave you a direct link to the EU justice website where there are all the details on how civil lawsuits happen in the EU
2) You clearly have no experience with those, you have not talked to a lawyer, you have no wife that is a lawyer, probably you have no wife and probably ...add a lot more stuff here
3) Remember this, if you would have talked to a lawyer, the FIRST thing he would have told you would have been to cease all communication with the other party and only discuss through him. Do you honestly want us to believe a lawyer would take your case after you posted home you know the home address of members here and you're going to do whatever you dreamed of?

4) Since civil law is not your point, think about physics better and Newton's third law, as the forum reacts just like that.
You started a mess trying to somehow convince people to clean your trust wall, what you have managed is to expose yourself to even more members, add more red trust and make a lot more people who didn't even know you previously aware what kind of person you are.

You are the big mouth Thule, all talk no action. Anyway pics of wife or she isn’t real

Curiosity killed the cat, and if it won't kill you I'm willing to bet it will make you at least throw up till the next block halving

My beloved Stompix you would have been right if we would have the year 2013 since you gave regulations from 2012 as evidence.
I would recommend looking for up to date regulations.

Sincerly Thule

[nutildah]

So you are manipulating the thread by deleting my replies to your posts ?Don't like the answer to be public ?

Anyways TMAN like i said the clock is running tic tac tic tac

What is your clock running away from? At least it has fresh breath.

[Vod]

Anyways TMAN like i said the clock is running tic tac tic tac

Ummm, didn't you say the same thing to me over and over a few months ago?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5059200.msg47505377#msg47505377

You did nothing then - you'll do nothing now.   

[Quickseller]

He PM’ed me a few days ago asking me to confirm if your country of residence was one of two countries you lived in — he said he found someone to sell your dox and was trying to arrange escrow. I asked him what he was going to do with the information and he responded that he planned on filling a lawsuit (presumably for libel) against you. I told him I was away from my computer and would get back to him. I forgot about his request and he messaged me to follow up, I responded that if he gave me what he received I could confirm if it is correct — I haven’t received a response.

I do think he has a case for libel. Although the amount of damages he would potentially get will not make filing such a lawsuit worth his while.

[actmyname]

My beloved Stompix you would have been right if we would have the year 2013 since you gave regulations from 2012 as evidence.
I would recommend looking for up to date regulations.

Sincerly Thule

Here they are!

Article 71b

The jurisdiction of a common court shall be determined as follows:

(1)

a common court shall have jurisdiction where, under this Regulation, the courts of a Member State party to the instrument establishing the common court would have jurisdiction in a matter governed by that instrument;

(2)

where the defendant is not domiciled in a Member State, and this Regulation does not otherwise confer jurisdiction over him, Chapter II shall apply as appropriate regardless of the defendant’s domicile.

Application may be made to a common court for provisional, including protective, measures even if the courts of a third State have jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter;

(3)

where a common court has jurisdiction over a defendant under point 2 in a dispute relating to an infringement of a European patent giving rise to damage within the Union, that court may also exercise jurisdiction in relation to damage arising outside the Union from such an infringement.

Such jurisdiction may only be established if property belonging to the defendant is located in any Member State party to the instrument establishing the common court and the dispute has a sufficient connection with any such Member State.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32014R0542

Note: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012R1215 is still in force.

(15)

The rules of jurisdiction should be highly predictable and founded on the principle that jurisdiction is generally based on the defendant’s domicile. Jurisdiction should always be available on this ground save in a few well-defined situations in which the subject-matter of the dispute or the autonomy of the parties warrants a different connecting factor. The domicile of a legal person must be defined autonomously so as to make the common rules more transparent and avoid conflicts of jurisdiction.

(16)

In addition to the defendant’s domicile, there should be alternative grounds of jurisdiction based on a close connection between the court and the action or in order to facilitate the sound administration of justice. The existence of a close connection should ensure legal certainty and avoid the possibility of the defendant being sued in a court of a Member State which he could not reasonably have foreseen. This is important, particularly in disputes concerning non-contractual obligations arising out of violations of privacy and rights relating to personality, including defamation.

[Vod]

I do think he has a case for libel. Although the amount of damages he would potentially get will not make filing such a lawsuit worth his while.

Well, one of you needs to file, because right now you are just a couple of confirmed liars.   

You think any lawyer reviewing any of your alt accounts would file?  He/She would lose all respect in the legal community.  Who cares what you think?  Livecoin?

[Quickseller]

I do think he has a case for libel.

Thats absolute bullshit. Libel against who? You can't libel somebody if you don't know who you're libeling. One anonymous accounts words towards another has never been grounds for libel.

libel against Thule. Both TMAN and Thule are pseudo-anon. The negative rating TMAN is damaging to Thule’s reputation in a self explanatory way. The negative rating in itself is saying that Thule is a scammer (or that TMAN strongly believes Thule to be a scammer). I don’t think there is evidence that Thule is a scammer and I don’t think the “strongly believe” clause is sufficient to protect TMAN. Thule has lost income from signature advertising as I understand he unsuccessfully attempted to join at least one campaign. I don’t think he could easily argue damages above potential signature earnings. This would cap any judgment at perhaps a few thousand dollars max.

There are a number of defenses TMAN could argue to lower/eliminate his liability, such as his rating only played a small incremental impact on Thules reputation (a court may find that everyone who left him a negative is jointly and severally liable), that Thule only discusses one type of topic and is unappealing to advertisers, is unappealing to advertisers for another reason, or that Thule is a (limited purpose) public figure as defined by libel law changing the threshold for libel.

It is my understanding that TMAN has a decent amount of money and it is my opinion that TMAN is aware of the risks and has decided to continue libeling Thule understanding the risks.

[TMAN]

I do think he has a case for libel.

Thats absolute bullshit. Libel against who? You can't libel somebody if you don't know who you're libeling. One anonymous accounts words towards another has never been grounds for libel.

libel against Thule. Both TMAN and Thule are pseudo-anon. The negative rating TMAN is damaging to Thule’s reputation in a self explanatory way. The negative rating in itself is saying that Thule is a scammer (or that TMAN strongly believes Thule to be a scammer). I don’t think there is evidence that Thule is a scammer and I don’t think the “strongly believe” clause is sufficient to protect TMAN. Thule has lost income from signature advertising as I understand he unsuccessfully attempted to join at least one campaign. I don’t think he could easily argue damages above potential signature earnings. This would cap any judgment at perhaps a few thousand dollars max.

There are a number of defenses TMAN could argue to lower/eliminate his liability, such as his rating only played a small incremental impact on Thules reputation (a court may find that everyone who left him a negative is jointly and severally liable), that Thule only discusses one type of topic and is unappealing to advertisers, is unappealing to advertisers for another reason, or that Thule is a (limited purpose) public figure as defined by libel law changing the threshold for libel.

It is my understanding that TMAN has a decent amount of money and it is my opinion that TMAN is aware of the risks and has decided to continue libeling Thule understanding the risks.

Have you actually read the tag from me fella?  Whilst this is all fun and games Thule has bigger problems than me tagging them.

[nutildah]

I do think he has a case for libel.

Thats absolute bullshit. Libel against who? You can't libel somebody if you don't know who you're libeling. One anonymous accounts words towards another has never been grounds for libel.

libel against Thule. Both TMAN and Thule are pseudo-anon. The negative rating TMAN is damaging to Thule’s reputation in a self explanatory way. The negative rating in itself is saying that Thule is a scammer (or that TMAN strongly believes Thule to be a scammer). I don’t think there is evidence that Thule is a scammer and I don’t think the “strongly believe” clause is sufficient to protect TMAN. Thule has lost income from signature advertising as I understand he unsuccessfully attempted to join at least one campaign. I don’t think he could easily argue damages above potential signature earnings. This would cap any judgment at perhaps a few thousand dollars max.

There are a number of defenses TMAN could argue to lower/eliminate his liability, such as his rating only played a small incremental impact on Thules reputation (a court may find that everyone who left him a negative is jointly and severally liable), that Thule only discusses one type of topic and is unappealing to advertisers, is unappealing to advertisers for another reason, or that Thule is a (limited purpose) public figure as defined by libel law changing the threshold for libel.

It is my understanding that TMAN has a decent amount of money and it is my opinion that TMAN is aware of the risks and has decided to continue libeling Thule understanding the risks.

The only thing you actually said here was that you dont have the slightest clue how legal proceedings work. In order for TMAN to be guilty of libel, he must have said something that is observably disprovable. He must have said something as a statement of fact that can be proven as untrue. Since he doesn't even know who Thule is, it's impossible to prove or disprove anything about him (even if it's a him). And even if Thules identity was discovered after the fact it wouldn't matter because he made his statements about Thule prior to discovery.

Pretty lame QS, even for you.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

He PM’ed me a few days ago asking me to confirm if your country of residence was one of two countries you lived in — he said he found someone to sell your dox and was trying to arrange escrow. I asked him what he was going to do with the information and he responded that he planned on filling a lawsuit (presumably for libel) against you. I told him I was away from my computer and would get back to him. I forgot about his request and he messaged me to follow up, I responded that if he gave me what he received I could confirm if it is correct — I haven’t received a response.

I do think he has a case for libel. Although the amount of damages he would potentially get will not make filing such a lawsuit worth his while.

Why would you give somebody who is clearly slightly unhinged TMAN’s personal information?

QS, I used to really, really respect you but it seems you’re always around to be semi helpful to the likes of cryptohunter, Thule etc, why?