Conquer Club

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 3:09 pm**

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:
FredVIII wrote:i already told you the only time i gave max my password was over half a year ago when i needed him to sit for me and i changed my password straight away afterwards.

what has me confused is, if Max is such a great account hack expert, how did he not hack your new account yet?

Or anyone else's....

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 3:21 pm**

.... can't we all just.... get along? :cry:

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 3:47 pm**

Bones2484 wrote:
JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:
FredVIII wrote:i already told you the only time i gave max my password was over half a year ago when i needed him to sit for me and i changed my password straight away afterwards.

what has me confused is, if Max is such a great account hack expert, how did he not hack your new account yet?

Or anyone else's....

if you guys want to make a seperate accusation of fredVIII. i would suggest making a different form.

the only thing in this form is that he trolled a game. and that was a game i asked him for help in. we could have kept it in live chat. but since he was on foe, it wasnt needed. until others came into the game to troll.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 3:53 pm**

ronc8649 wrote:the only thing in this form is that he trolled a game.

Wrong. Again.

From the form wrote:Oh and btw, I have screen shots of Jeff admitting that he gave max his password proving that Jeff lied about being hacked.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 4:15 pm**

Even the title of the thread is only FredVIII, not FredVIII wuz trollin mai gamez!!!!

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 4:59 pm**

Serbia wrote:Even the title of the thread is only FredVIII, not FredVIII wuz trollin mai gamez!!!!

ok, i admit that the title had nothing but his name. but the complaint filed was only against his trolling i believe.

usually whenever i report something, i am forced to make a complete form. just ask owenshooter.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:29 pm**

guys i dunno why he only went for my other account by what he said here it looks like some how because he had had a previous jeff hardy account password he was able to get access whenever he wanted, if anyone undersatnds what he means better than me please speak up...

game chat wrote:2009-03-14 23:20:49 - Jeff Hardy: i took ccs advice and changed my password and didnt tell anyone
2009-03-14 23:20:53 - Jeff Hardy (max): hmm...now i dont know whether or not he is agreeing with me
2009-03-14 23:20:56 - Jeff Hardy: you still got on.
2009-03-14 23:21:33 - Jeff Hardy (max): because I had your password from before that
2009-03-14 23:21:42 - Jeff Hardy: a different one
2009-03-14 23:21:45 - Jeff Hardy (max): one login and you are on someones account
2009-03-14 23:22:01 - Jeff Hardy: the one i had been using months ago
2009-03-14 23:22:16 - Jeff Hardy: you telling me you never logged off
2009-03-14 23:22:32 - Jeff Hardy: since september or whenever it was i gave you my password
2009-03-14 23:22:32 - Jeff Hardy (max): I never said that
2009-03-14 23:23:27 - Jeff Hardy: talk some sence then
2009-03-14 23:23:44 - Jeff Hardy: you claim i told you my password but that was in september for you to account sit for me
2009-03-14 23:23:49 - Jeff Hardy: and i changed it after that
2009-03-14 23:24:02 - Jeff Hardy (max): to anyone knowing what I am talking about, it makes perfect sense
2009-03-14 23:24:43 - Jeff Hardy: only for you then

yes i gave max my password, but like i said before and in chat here, that was a long time ago for him to account sit for me and i changed the password afterwards!

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:50 pm**

game chat wrote:2009-03-15 01:01:57 - Jeff Hardy: max we are both banned
2009-03-15 01:02:18 - Jeff Hardy: i know im planning on leaving the site
2009-03-15 01:02:36 - Jeff Hardy: are you to sad to do the same?
2009-03-15 01:02:41 - Jeff Hardy(max): the difference is that I am not going to multi
2009-03-15 01:02:51 - Jeff Hardy (max): unlike you jeff

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:55 pm**

killerpit4e wrote:
game chat wrote:2009-03-15 01:01:57 - Jeff Hardy: max we are both banned
2009-03-15 01:02:18 - Jeff Hardy(max): i know im planning on leaving the site
2009-03-15 01:02:36 - Jeff Hardy(max): are you to sad to do the same?
2009-03-15 01:02:41 - Jeff Hardy(max): the difference is that I am not going to multi
2009-03-15 01:02:51 - Jeff Hardy (max): unlike you jeff

i fixed it for ya

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:06 pm**

FredVIII wrote:
killerpit4e wrote:
game chat wrote:2009-03-15 01:01:57 - Jeff Hardy: max we are both banned
2009-03-15 01:02:18 - Jeff Hardy(max): i know im planning on leaving the site
2009-03-15 01:02:36 - Jeff Hardy(max): are you to sad to do the same?
2009-03-15 01:02:41 - Jeff Hardy(max): the difference is that I am not going to multi
2009-03-15 01:02:51 - Jeff Hardy (max): unlike you jeff

i fixed it for ya

That is called libel

Here is the continuation of chat:

game chat wrote:2009-03-15 01:02:41 - Jeff Hardy: the difference is that I am not going to multi
2009-03-15 01:02:51 - Jeff Hardy: unlike you jeff
2009-03-15 01:03:10 - Jeff Hardy: but of course, drinking and partying is for sad people, cc 14/7 is for people with awesome lives
2009-03-15 01:03:24 - Jeff Hardy: *24
2009-03-15 01:03:49 - Jeff Hardy: i have no idea what that mean
2009-03-15 01:03:57 - Jeff Hardy: meant
2009-03-15 01:04:28 - Jeff Hardy: but I do know that you said that if you were banned you are going to multi
2009-03-15 01:04:35 - Jeff Hardy: so watch out cc admins

-so I guess it was you who said that Jeff

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:12 pm**

dunno how you worked that one out but whatever

i see theres a bandwagon here, all gang up against jeff, and i dont want to be the odd one out so ill stop posting in here

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:18 pm**

its called libel
its a felony in the US

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:29 pm**

FredVIII wrote:dunno how you worked that one out but whatever

i see theres a bandwagon here, all gang up against jeff, and i dont want to be the odd one out so ill stop posting in here

I don't blame you I would probably plea the fifth too if I was in your shoes.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:06 pm**

I guess this also shows your edits to my post were libelous?

(the black is covering Jeff rl name so that I am not posting personal information)

Other than the unfairly banned part, it looks like all of this was just part of your plan to start over on another account :-k

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:07 pm**

killerpit4e wrote:its called libel
its a felony in the US

A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.

BLUE Jeffs above publication was not meant to show that the chat had said "Jeff Hardy(max)" but that the Jeff's that he has labeled with the "(max)" are what he claims are the posts made by max while his account was hacked and not by Jeff himself. Ergo your attack already falls short because it fails to meet the primary criterion of the above definition.

RED Jeffs above quote did not damage anybody's reputation as all it does is increase his own reputation. Although one may argue that this does indirectly say demon is a liar and max is a hacker, by the publication must say so directly. For example the publication could have said "Demon is a liar" or "This is max an did hacked this account." Because of the lack of this we can obviously see that the above post fails the second criterion of libel

Before accusing someone of a felony read up a bit more on law

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:25 pm**

a.sub wrote:
killerpit4e wrote:its called libel
its a felony in the US

A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.

BLUE Jeffs above publication was not meant to show that the chat had said "Jeff Hardy(max)" but that the Jeff's that he has labeled with the "(max)" are what he claims are the posts made by max while his account was hacked and not by Jeff himself. Ergo your attack already falls short because it fails to meet the primary criterion of the above definition.

RED Jeffs above quote did not damage anybody's reputation as all it does is increase his own reputation. Although one may argue that this does indirectly say demon is a liar and max is a hacker, by the publication must say so directly. For example the publication could have said "Demon is a liar" or "This is max an did hacked this account." Because of the lack of this we can obviously see that the above post fails the second criterion of libel

Before accusing someone of a felony read up a bit more on law

While you are correct in your statement that Jeff was claiming it was max that commented in chat, it was not max speaking. He is claiming that max was making a statement that he never said- hence it is a false publication

Furthermore, Jeff claims it was max who said he was leaving the site and instigating issue with Jeff. By making that statement, he is not only causing max to look like a liar
(as he has no intention of leaving) but also saying that he is responsible for instigating issue with jeff. That is potentially damaging to max's reputation, making it libel

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:38 pm**

killerpit4e wrote:
a.sub wrote:
killerpit4e wrote:its called libel
its a felony in the US

A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.

BLUE Jeffs above publication was not meant to show that the chat had said "Jeff Hardy(max)" but that the Jeff's that he has labeled with the "(max)" are what he claims are the posts made by max while his account was hacked and not by Jeff himself. Ergo your attack already falls short because it fails to meet the primary criterion of the above definition.

RED Jeffs above quote did not damage anybody's reputation as all it does is increase his own reputation. Although one may argue that this does indirectly say demon is a liar and max is a hacker, by the publication must say so directly. For example the publication could have said "Demon is a liar" or "This is max an did hacked this account." Because of the lack of this we can obviously see that the above post fails the second criterion of libel

Before accusing someone of a felony read up a bit more on law

While you are correct in your statement that Jeff was claiming it was max that commented in chat, it was not max speaking. He is claiming that max was making a statement that he never said- hence it is a false publication

Furthermore, Jeff claims it was max who said he was leaving the site and instigating issue with Jeff. By making that statement, he is not only causing max to look like a liar
(as he has no intention of leaving) but also saying that he is responsible for instigating issue with jeff. That is potentially damaging to max's reputation, making it libel

BLUE already covered when i said about indirect and direct slander reprodouced below

Jeffs above quote did not damage anybody's reputation as all it does is increase his own reputation. Although one may argue that this does indirectly say demon is a liar and max is a hacker, by the publication must say so directly. For example the publication could have said "Demon is a liar" or "This is max an did hacked this account." Because of the lack of this we can obviously see that the above post fails the second criterion of libel

RED if you cant prove that it wasnt max on Jeff's account its your word against his and this is a dispute of which neither proven a lie. A stalemate by lack of evidence is not illegal. until you can come up with substantial evidence that its not max then its not libel

once again not libel

EDIT: spelling mistakes

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:39 pm**

Killer since when did you become all knowing? Just a serious question. Honestly that does not look like a Killer post at all.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:45 pm**

Bruceswar wrote:Killer since when did you become all knowing? Just a serious question. Honestly that does not look like a Killer post at all.

The only reasons why my posts seem all knowing is because well i was on my onje week live chat ban I decided to inform myself before saying anything stupid

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:49 pm**

Bruceswar wrote:Killer since when did you become all knowing? Just a serious question. Honestly that does not look like a Killer post at all.

LMAO

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2009 3:30 pm**

this is getting really good.. wow...-0

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:40 pm**

i'm calling colombo, and matlock on this one.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:15 pm**

we should start a live sitcom and use it to bank a profit

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2009 12:41 pm**

Thrilling stuff...ZZZZzzzZZZ .Another $25 fee coming CC's way.
Ka-------Chingggg !

Posted: **Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:50 am**

I get sick and we have 5 pages for this thread.

"The accused are suspected of:

Other: Trolling. Putting him on foe was not enough, now he follows me around and tells people how to play against me in game chat."

- We will be needing more than 1 game for this. And FredVIII, if you really want a disciplinary action, please do continue to annoy people for your own enjoyment.

Moving forward, screenshot says:
So basically, I trusted you with my password and you used it to gain access to (cut)... lol.

Based from that "sentence", I can say that is not enough to prove or make us do anything about it. Demonfork, you gave us a small part of what the whole conversation really is. I believe there is more than just that screenshot. No action is necessary right now if this all just going to be based on 1 line of a probably more revealing chat conversation.

The fact is, max got hold of the Jeff Hardy account. It got banned and now he has this FredVIII account.

We are also aware that these things can also be edited, however, demonfork, if you know more or if you can reveal the whole conversation or story, then we can move forward with it. Even the posting of a can of worms is somewhat 'amusing'.

Conquer Club

FredVIII [noted]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]

Re: FredVIII [Pending]