ChezGiven

I didnt realise N'Gog had signed for Liverpool. I suggested him as a target for us last year. Decent player.

Benitez is a magician man! Each year he disappears from the title race.

The problem is, most of you won't have a grounding in business, so you won't know what an executive director is, however rest assured I'm right. Fuck off. What do you do for a living like? I reckon Danny's been on one of them Learn Direct courses. That or GNVQ Business Studies. Come on fellas Im only kidding, I know you have industry up there now, even banking. How is Northern Rock getting along up there? Gemmill's fucked it.

The problem is, most of you won't have a grounding in business, so you won't know what an executive director is, however rest assured I'm right. Fuck off. What do you do for a living like? I reckon Danny's been on one of them Learn Direct courses. That or GNVQ Business Studies. More like he watched the first series of The Apprentice.

The problem is, most of you won't have a grounding in business, so you won't know what an executive director is, however rest assured I'm right. Fuck off. What do you do for a living like? Oh no. Him and fop are two peas in a pod like.

The problem is, most of you won't have a grounding in business, so you won't know what an executive director is, however rest assured I'm right. Fuck off. What do you do for a living like?

Apparently rapidshare is fairly safe against this. Not water tight.

Look up Sony's root-kit and Phorm for some related stuff, I'm not doing your market research for you. No I simply say what you are - if you take that as an insult, well that is your problem. You on the other hand started flinging around insults when you couldn't counter my arguments and are continuing in that trend. As for being a student? Aye I have been, but do you think I am? Or indeed that is what this is about? Maybe you should read my posts, like I said I've never pirated a song, I want to support the music I like, but I have issues with much DRM (which is basically spyware) as well as how record companies have operated (people often rail at tobacco companies, but record company have done a lot of illegal and bad stuff too), and don't want my rights and privacy to be taken away for a company's profit margin. Like I said would it be "ok" for everyone to monitor a record companies private data just in case they are thinking of doing a root-kit thing again? I guess you must think it would be ok. I'm happy to know that if this is done then people will look into doing it in a way that protects the privacy of law-abiding citizens. Cool. Doesnt change my point of view so lets leave that one there. You have concerns aboout it and thats fine. Yeah i think you're a student as you are extremely immature, particularly as you started slagging off what i do for a living to score points in a debate about music. I called you a wanker for that and stand by it. Its not flinging an insult, its my analysis of your character. I blame Parky really, as he asked me to state what i do for a living in a thread. Since then, every post of yours to me has tried to score a cheap point on this basis. You personalised the debate so i returned in kind. If i did a poll 'Is fop a wanker?' on this forum, only the scousers you arse-lick would vote no. You dont have the bottle to start a thread on the health issue, you skirt around it by making nothing but hollow statements on some ill defined moral platform. I dont see why i should be forced into a debate on something with someone who is doing it in a personalised way. For the record, i speak publicly about these issues with european policy makers so would have no qualms about pasting a student into a corner on a message board on a topic he clearly knows nowt about.

Links on the rulings and proof that these current changes are along a similar line and therefore illegal would show that there is a concern about this issue but that does not counter the right of the artist. You insult me every time you post, but cant take it back. Diddums to the poor spoilt student.

La clunge surely? - you can't get much more feminine than a clunge. aye. Just had a pic-nic with 4 female colleagues in the sun, chebs everywhere.

As you've got no qualifications in law fop, just stating that these changes will mean an invasion of privacy means nothing. The details of how this will be implemented are not available nor how the monitoring of use will be implemented within existing laws. If it is implemented within the law then absolutely nothing of what you're saying stands. To be so sure of your rightness in these circumstances hints at mental illness.

*burps* Nice post and lovely finish. Not sure what music companies have done that is so wrong, certainly no worse than the film industry, the chemicals industry, the oil industry, the plastics industry, the coffee industry, the food industry, the drugs industry, the football industry, the financial industry, the law industry etc etc etc etc. Every company that makes money is open to criticism as they all act in a way that increases their profits. Students tend to hate this as they have no money then forget all about it when they need to pay bills and taxes. Funny that.

What a load of shite fop, i saw that lovely comment the other day from a toon fan about the internet being full of people who put 'fact' in posts and whose need to appear 'right' borders on the insane. How many times have you just stated 'I'm right' in this thread without ever convincing anyone that you are? Anyway, french lunch-break, see you in a couple of hours.

I must admit I'd love to see you try and justify it morally. Much like I'd like to see you try and answer any awkward question. You'll have to state what 'it' is first but am ready to answer any question you have. Start the thread or is that the sound of bottles chinking together?

*witters* Its canny basic, I believe in the right of the artists to make money from the file outputs, no matter what the media. You obviously dont. End of discussion on the matter.

If you break the law, you have no right to privacy from law-makers investigating it. I dont know the specifics of how this will be implemented but if they only investigate suspicious DL'ing then the law is right and your immature whingeing about it not being fair is just that. Start the thread and i'll wipe the floor with you.

I stopped reading his posts when he started to re-cycle the same point about what i may or may not do for a living. You started (back in the NHS thread never mind this one) selectively ignoring all the awkward bits like: Like I said you're a good suit (you tow the company/industry line well) but you are completely at answering the awkward questions or anything outside that line. So are you going to address that point? Aye, thought not. I dont care about your privacy though, i care about my mate's income being eroded by piracy. The question is therefore off topic and irrelevant to me, which is why i didnt focus on it. However, if you want my thoughts, i dont believe people who break the law can complain about losing privacy against law-enforcers. I believe its the same as when you are a criminal and get your phone tapped. If you are innocent, its a breach of privacy, if you are guilty then i dont see the problem. If this proposed change allows people to be identified by name who have not broken the law, then it would not be a passable law or action and wont be implemented. If you want a discussion on AIDS and access to medicines in the developing world, be my guest and start a thread on it setting out clearly what you think the issue is and what questions you have.

I stopped reading his posts when he started to re-cycle the same point about what i may or may not do for a living.

This thread is about AIDS? You're warped. The other question is just bollocks as it doesnt relate to the idea of breach of copyright, its a response to the illegal behaviour.

Start a thread on it.

Again though it's much easier to manage with their GNP and tax burden (which is very different from the UK). But that's still one point just another 7 or 8 to address now. There you go again, utterly clueless response. An insurance based system is made up of multiple competing companies who each organise their own schemes, they arent run by the govt so the tax base and GDP levels are irrelevant. Except that the bigger the economy, the more competitive and efficient the sector. Not the other way round you muppet. There were no other points to respond to in that thread and plenty you didnt address, have a read through again and try dealing with the points made instead of posting analytically hollow nonsense.

And even if that is the case (which is it patently not) that justifies violating the rights of the rest of society does it? 5 pages you've been fly fishing with rights violation argument and you still haven't had a single bite. I think it's time to pack up the bait box and go home for a nip of whisky in front of the fire. You've just sharpened his next presentation for him. He's good at ignoring, but not so good at addressing awkward questions, be they about Singapore relative economic size, the need to produce new drugs, the legal and moral issues of root-kits and privacy invasion, or indeed generic drugs. But he's a good suit, I'll give him that. Singapore's relative economic size makes it more difficult to use risk-diversification in insurance plans, not easier. Ask any economist. I'm at this point in the debate with you http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=492106 You want to progress the debate, put it on an even footing.

I know the amount of people on here who eschew branded clothing, new media devices and going on holiday is astounding. You know the rules.

I know the amount of people on here who eschew branded clothing, new media devices and going on holiday is astounding.