Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2013/05/13 04:25:52
Subject: Update on BoK v Battle Foam - settled out of court - starts on pg 18
***The last thread was locked due to it going off topic and engaging in personal attacks. Please stay on topic***
Nicolas Hayden vs. Battle Foam and Romeo Filip.
What has come before
This was fairly well covered in the last thread, but here is a very brief summary. BoK wrote a blog post. Battle Foam sent a C&D. The C&D came with a demand to pay legal fees and respond by a certain point of time or else a law suit would be filed. BoK instead obtained representation and filed for declaratory relief.
Mr. Filip has done two podcasts where he discusses the lawsuit. Show 60 of 40kradio, at around the 60 minute mark, and at the 11th Company. It is clear he is passionate about his business and is upset at the blog post. He makes some interesting statements about how he views the C&D letter that was sent to Mr. Hayden, and about old school business values.
Litigation
According to the court's docket Battlefoam has filed an answer, a cross-complaint, and a motion to stay or dismiss. The court has scheduled a hearing for the motion on the 1st of July. Clearly Mr. Filip is not backing down. We are missing the actual filings. Hopefully one of the parties makes them available publicly, or someone else gets them from the courthouse.
Answer:
An answer is a response by the defendant. Basically it will admit or deny the elements in the complaint, and then go on to plead Battle Foam’s defence and lay out material facts supporting that defence.
Cross-Complaint:
A cross complaint is a new cause of action. It is effectively a new lawsuit arising out of the same basic facts or connected to the first lawsuit. It appears to be targeting Mr. Hayden and a Jane Doe. From the court’s docket we can see that a new cross-defendant has been added, a Jane Doe Hayden.
Perhaps going after a relative of Mr. Hayden's either for deeper pockets, or to up the potential consequences and costs of litigation? Mr. Filip hasn't mentioned anyone else as defaming him in either of his two interviews.
Motion to Stay / Dismiss due to forum non conveniens:
This is a motion by Battlefoam asking the California court to not hear the case. Battle Foam will argue that the proper court to hear this case is one in Arizona. If you read through Mr. Hayden's initial complaint you'll see a jurisdiction section where he argues why California has proper jurisdiction. This is jurisdiction simpliciter - the court can hear the complaint (it's not the tax court for example which has no business hearing this sort of claim). Forum non conveniens is a slightly different argument, it says, yes the court could hear the case, but it shouldn't because there is better / more convenient / more proper venue elsewhere.
Forum non conveniens is a common law doctrine allowing a court to decline to hear a case if the court finds that the lawsuit is more appropriately and justly tried in a different location. It is latin for inconvenient court / forum not agreeing. It is a highly discretionary power, the court can choose to decline to hear the case or not hear the case as it sees fit. Courts generally consider (although the specifics vary from state to state country to country):
The residence of the parties
The location of evidence and witnesses
Public policy
The relative burdens on the court systems (in the US)
The plaintiff's choice of forum
How changing the forum would affect each party's case.
It is interesting to note that Battle Foam is capable of engaging in litigation in states other than Arizona and has done so in the past. In fact, only a few years ago it argued against having its lawsuit against Outrider Hobbies heard in Arizona, preferring to have it heard in New Hampshire:
In the alternative, [Outrider Hobbies] moves the court to transfer venue to the District of Arizona. [Battle Foam] objects and asserts that this court may properly exercise specific personal jurisdiction over Wade.
Also interesting to note that a cross-complaint has been filed. Civil procedure is an arcane and tricky business that changes from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In my jurisdiction it would be hard to argue forum non conveniens while at the same time filing a cross-complaint against a third party in that jurisdiction. But California almost certainly has different rules – perhaps filing the motion for the stay allows the filing of other pleadings.
If we get to see the filings it should be explained in them.
Lastly, now that a complaint has been filed by Battle Foam, Mr. Hayden may have recourse to California's anti-SLAPP statute.
***The last thread was locked due to it going off topic and engaging in personal attacks. Please stay on topic***
This message was edited 14 times. Last update was at 2013/06/29 04:29:45
H.B.M.C. wrote: Can someone at least explained, without hyperbole, why a C&D was sent over a blog post?
I've seen the blog post described as venomous, but haven't been able to read it myself because it was taken down. The C&D itself says the blog post falsely stated that Mr. Filip did the following:
threatened customers
lied to current and former customers and business partners
consistently defaulted on business arrangements
I don't know BoK's readership numbers, but if a few hundred people saw it, that's something to be concerned about. If you heard about these claims from a bunch of your customers or business partners, I could see being interested in putting a stop to it. In a small hobby, and in business your reputation is important.
Mr. Filip and his lawyer chose to take a fairly aggressive stance in their C&D, but you don't have to write your first one that way. We also don't know if Mr. Filip contacted Mr. Hayden prior to the C&D to ask him to take down the post.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2013/05/13 05:21:52
Thanks for the summary of where the case is up to, czakk.
Trying to get the case relocated is an interesting gambit, but I'd imagine his lawyers would have to have a pretty compelling case for that to happen, no?
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Trying to get the case relocated is an interesting gambit, but I'd imagine his lawyers would have to have a pretty compelling case for that to happen, no?
Especially considering a previous wish to have court cases held outside of Arizona. Would that precedent of being willing to travel from Arizona influence the court's decision as to whether or not BF's place of residence (which is Arizona right? I could be misunderstanding this) is an issue worth sending it back to Arizona for.
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
czakk wrote: I've seen the blog post described as venomous, but haven't been able to read it myself because it was taken down. The C&D itself says the blog post falsely stated that Mr. Filip did the following:
threatened customers
lied to current and former customers and business partners
H.B.M.C. wrote: Can someone at least explained, without hyperbole, why a C&D was sent over a blog post?
I've seen the blog post described as venomous, but haven't been able to read it myself because it was taken down. The C&D itself says the blog post falsely stated that Mr. Filip did the following:
threatened customers
In the 40k Radio interview Romeo says that people are welcome to come talk to him on his porch, but that they may get punched in the face. (I'd nail down the exact quote but the streaming interface is a bit too awkward to navigate.) I suppose that isn't quite evidence since it happened after the blog post that started this (and it also isn't directed against customers so much as against some arbitrary person Romeo finds offensive.)
Does anyone know of any forum posts, interviews, or the like where Romeo has done similar things? For the other two bullets (lying and defaulting)?
Romeo did threaten forum users in the Infinity forum, though. I don't know if they're considered customers but it is true that he has threatened people.
heartserenade wrote: Romeo did threaten forum users in the Infinity forum, though. I don't know if they're considered customers but it is true that he has threatened people.
Do you happen to have a link to the thread (or an archive of it?) I don't doubt you (frankly, I don't doubt any of the claims are true,) but I'm curious to see evidence. Or at least evidence that someone pretending to be Romeo did this stuff... I'm not going to hunt down logs to try and determine it really is him.
heartserenade wrote: Romeo did threaten forum users in the Infinity forum, though. I don't know if they're considered customers but it is true that he has threatened people.
Do you happen to have a link to the thread (or an archive of it?) I don't doubt you (frankly, I don't doubt any of the claims are true,) but I'm curious to see evidence. Or at least evidence that someone pretending to be Romeo did this stuff... I'm not going to hunt down logs to try and determine it really is him.
Not sure if there is more than one to refer to...but the one which I recall would have been back in December 2012...it was deleted from the official forums, but subsequently was restarted on dozens of other forums. I am guessing that enough circumstantial evidence remains in that regard that it would be allowed. It all sort of stemmed from the O-12 podcast from the same period that he went into a rant about Infinity the game.
If no one else has it saved, I believe the comments were significant enough to cause me to save the thread...though, it would be one of thousands of files in the period...so hopefully I won't need to search my archives for it.
heartserenade wrote: Romeo did threaten forum users in the Infinity forum, though. I don't know if they're considered customers but it is true that he has threatened people.
Do you happen to have a link to the thread (or an archive of it?) I don't doubt you (frankly, I don't doubt any of the claims are true,) but I'm curious to see evidence. Or at least evidence that someone pretending to be Romeo did this stuff... I'm not going to hunt down logs to try and determine it really is him.
I believe he made threats via e-mail. It was posted on the last thread about this same subject. As was said in the first post, it's locked now. Lemme go find it.
Or, you know, not. Things like that were exactly what got the last thread locked. --Janthkin
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/05/13 16:39:03
I had read the article on BOK. There is another article on there that talks about Battlefoam's practices - the more legal and verifiable instances, but this article focused on Romeo's public and business practices. It basically talked about several situations involving Romeo that are probably fairly well-known. The few that I remember it talking about were:
*An event where Battlefoam was offering prizes. It turned out to be more than expected and Romeo became upset. He supplied the prize bags, but no foam.
*A customer had ordered a bag (or had a bag repaired). Romeo had agreed to bring the bag to an event for the customer to save on shipping. Romeo didn't and then insisted the customer pay for shipping on the bag. The customer argued with him for some time to get Romeo to honor the previous agreement.
*I believe the whole Infinity forums situation was on there also.
Like I said, probably nothing that hasn't been discussed before, or things that weren't big enough to come into the community eye. I'm guessing the article is probably mostly or completely true, but Romeo is betting that Nick doesn't have evidence to back it up, since a lot of it is word of mouth. The biggest one for me is the whole Infinity forum debacle and although the thread has been deleted there are still people who remember it and have saved snippets of it.
I find it funny how so few people read the article (or cared). And now after the C&D has been sent, it's only going to bring more attention to these past accounts. I think it would have been wise to not demand the $2500 in attorney fees in the C&D. It probably would have resulted in a more quiet and peaceful solution.
carboncopy wrote: I think it would have been wise to not demand the $2500 in attorney fees in the C&D. It probably would have resulted in a more quiet and peaceful solution.
The problem with Shock and Awe tactics is that sometimes the results are shockingly awful.
carboncopy wrote: I had read the article on BOK. There is another article on there that talks about Battlefoam's practices - the more legal and verifiable instances, but this article focused on Romeo's public and business practices. It basically talked about several situations involving Romeo that are probably fairly well-known. The few that I remember it talking about were:
*An event where Battlefoam was offering prizes. It turned out to be more than expected and Romeo became upset. He supplied the prize bags, but no foam.
*A customer had ordered a bag (or had a bag repaired). Romeo had agreed to bring the bag to an event for the customer to save on shipping. Romeo didn't and then insisted the customer pay for shipping on the bag. The customer argued with him for some time to get Romeo to honor the previous agreement.
*I believe the whole Infinity forums situation was on there also.
Like I said, probably nothing that hasn't been discussed before, or things that weren't big enough to come into the community eye. I'm guessing the article is probably mostly or completely true, but Romeo is betting that Nick doesn't have evidence to back it up, since a lot of it is word of mouth. The biggest one for me is the whole Infinity forum debacle and although the thread has been deleted there are still people who remember it and have saved snippets of it.
I find it funny how so few people read the article (or cared). And now after the C&D has been sent, it's only going to bring more attention to these past accounts. I think it would have been wise to not demand the $2500 in attorney fees in the C&D. It probably would have resulted in a more quiet and peaceful solution.
Agreed. That is the sad irony of this legal debacle. It has brought this to the attention of a LOT more people, myself included. It wasn't a good PR move in my opinion.
TLDR version: people on that thread talking about what Romeo did in that deleted Infinity thread where he reacted violently on criticisms and allegedly threatened people (and those people shared copy-pastes of the e-mails Romeo sent).
TLDR version: people on that thread talking about what Romeo did in that deleted Infinity thread where he reacted violently on criticisms and allegedly threatened people (and those people shared copy-pastes of the e-mails Romeo sent).
Ahh yes, that thread has another instance on there I remember:
Then you have the case of Romeo promising a lifetime discount for anyone tattooing Battlefoam on their body. Well one sad individual did such a thing and Romeo denied ever making the offer. So, with email trail in hand the tattooed man got into a haggling argument over the percentage of the discount, with I think a final agreement settling at 30% off.
Wow, Romeo is doubling down. This will probably end badly for Battlefoam. It is not as if BoK has crappy lawyers.
Romeo could have let this thing drop, and in a perfect world I would hope that his lawyers gave him good advice about how to proceed given the circumstances. However, no matter what you say, if the client wants to do it...
That said, I very often find that attorneys are quite reluctant to tell a client what they really think about a lawsuit. That's part of the reason I have a job.
Filing a lawsuit is like going to war. Once you start shooting it is hard to stop, and in the end everyone gets hurt. This thing could have ended with little more than elevating levels of military preparedness. BoK used some inflammatory rhetoric, Battlefoam conducted military exercises in response, BoK fueled jets and made a statement condemning BF in the UN, and BF responded by sinking a warship and putting its ICBMs on alert.
It is now a shooting war, and in my mind, Romeo was the first one to go hot.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/05/13 15:05:35
Kirasu: Have we fallen so far that we are excited that GW is giving us the opportunity to spend 58$ for JUST the rules? Surprised it's not "Dataslate: Assault Phase"
AlexHolker: "The power loader is a forklift. The public doesn't complain about a forklift not having frontal armour protecting the crew compartment because the only enemy it is designed to face is the OHSA violation."
AlexHolker: "Allow me to put it this way: Paramount is Skynet, reboots are termination attempts, and your childhood is John Connor."
@carbon copy: So being an impartial person here some of your statements I feel are miss placed especially the one in regards to prize support. I'm not sure at what point in recent years that events felt they were owed prize support but I find statements such as yours rather disturbing. It is nice of him to give anything for free and to hold suit against him for not giving the foam with the bag is rather menial. I can understand where some will have issues with him but I think some people are overly critical of him. You don't have to like romeo but he has a killer staff that is super helpful and nice and they make a great product. Also I will say this he is patinate about gaming and his company as so many of us are, and on a one on one he's a great guy I have found SK even though he is rough around the edges I say cut the guy a break.
Listen, my children, as I pass onto you the truth behind Willy Wonka and his factory. For every wonka bar ever created in existance, Mr. Wonka sacraficed a single Oompa Loompa to the god of chocolate, Hearshys. Then, he drank the blood of the fallen orange men because he fed them a constant supply of sugary chocolate so they all became diabetic and had creamy, sweet-tasting blood that willy could put into each and every Wonka bar. That is the REAL story behind willy wonka's Slaughter House!
czakk wrote: I've seen the blog post described as venomous, but haven't been able to read it myself because it was taken down. The C&D itself says the blog post falsely stated that Mr. Filip did the following:
threatened customers
lied to current and former customers and business partners
consistently defaulted on business arrangements
Thank you for explaining.
Next question though:
Are any of the above three items true?
That's what the litigation and C&D are all about, and will be decided in court.
Empchild wrote: @carbon copy: So being an impartial person here some of your statements I feel are miss placed especially the one in regards to prize support. I'm not sure at what point in recent years that events felt they were owed prize support but I find statements such as yours rather disturbing. It is nice of him to give anything for free and to hold suit against him for not giving the foam with the bag is rather menial. I can understand where some will have issues with him but I think some people are overly critical of him. You don't have to like romeo but he has a killer staff that is super helpful and nice and they make a great product. Also I will say this he is patinate about gaming and his company as so many of us are, and on a one on one he's a great guy I have found SK even though he is rough around the edges I say cut the guy a break.
As stated, I'm only going off of memory of what I read in the article. These aren't my accounts. I think the point of the article wasn't just that there was no foam in the free bags, but the situation as a whole and how it was handled by Romeo.
But I agree, I think it was all pretty menial, which I'm surprised such a legal move was made by Battlefoam, and with such an extravagant demand of legal fee compensations. Please keep in mind BoK isn't holding suit for the alleged business practices, but are merely filing to have the court say the article isn't defamatory.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/05/13 15:33:27
Dysartes wrote: Thanks for the summary of where the case is up to, czakk.
Trying to get the case relocated is an interesting gambit
One thing I noticed in my very cursory look at anti-SLAPP stuff is that Arizona's seems to apply only to speech involving the government. California's is broader and can apply to speech involving topics of public interest as well as speech involving the government.
The Arizona anti-SLAPP statute applies to legal actions involving “a party’s exercise of the right of petition.” A.R.S. § 12‑751 defines “exercise of the right of petition” as
any written or oral statement that falls within the constitutional protection of free speech and that is made as part of an initiative, referendum or recall effort or that is all of the following:
Made before or submitted to a legislative or executive body or other governmental proceeding.
Made in connection with an issue that is under consideration or review by a legislative or executive body or any other governmental proceeding.
Made for the purpose of influencing a governmental action, decision or result.
To challenge a lawsuit as a SLAPP, you need to show that the plaintiff is suing you for an "act in furtherance of [your] right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue."Although people often use terms like "free speech" and "petition the government" loosely in popular speech, the anti-SLAPP law gives this phrase a particular legal meaning
...
3. any written or oral statement or writing made in a place open to the public or a public forum in connection with an issue of public interest...
....
Many different kinds of statements may relate to an issue of public interest. California courts look at factors such as whether the subject of the disputed statement was a person or entity in the public eye, whether the statement involved conduct that could affect large numbers of people beyond the direct participants, and whether the statement contributed to debate on a topic of widespread public interest.
California's statute may apply to the situation, Arizona's definitely would not.
If California's statute covers this situation think we can expect to see the following happen:
1) Mr. Hayden or Ms Jane Doe Hayden files a motion to strike the cross-complaint.
2) Discovery ceases (if it has started).
3) Court hearing on the motion within 30 days of filing.
According to the DMLP site the following happens at the motion:
1) Mr. Hayden has the burden of showing that his speech is covered by the statute (public interest, public topic, public eye)
2) If Mr. Hayden is successful, Mr. Filip then has the burden of producing evidence to support his lawsuit and show he has a minimal chance of success. This is a stretch on my part, but if you listen to the 11th Company podcast, Mr. Filip mentions sworn affidavits from folks quoted in the article. That might come into play here.
If Mr. Hayden's motion to strike is considered to be a waste of time, he can be ordered to pay costs to Mr. Filip. If the lawsuit is deemed to be a SLAPP suit, Mr. Filip will pay costs to Mr. Hayden. Is Mr. Filip in the public eye and is Battle Foam a topic of public interest? In side the hobby I would say yes, but I don't think anyone outside would know or care about the matter.
Some other stuff I don't know about 1) If there is a motion to strike, will the court move the hearing on Mr. Filip's motion to stay or dismiss to the same day as the hearing on the motion to strike?
2) What happens to the action for declaratory relief if the motion to strike is successful?
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2013/05/13 17:00:37
carboncopy wrote: Ahh yes, that thread has another instance on there I remember:
Then you have the case of Romeo promising a lifetime discount for anyone tattooing Battlefoam on their body. Well one sad individual did such a thing and Romeo denied ever making the offer. So, with email trail in hand the tattooed man got into a haggling argument over the percentage of the discount, with I think a final agreement settling at 30% off.
After I closed the last thread, I received the below PM from a newly-registered user, who wanted to post it in the (now-locked) thread. I make no claims as to the source, other than to note that the user's information does not match with any BF-related accounts on Dakka.
bftbg79 wrote:Greetings all who are reading this. It has been brought to my attention that Tasty Taste from Blood of Kittens has included me a post, lashing out at Battlefoam/Romeo. I do not subscribe to his site, know him personally, or even have him on my Facebook as a random con-goer I have met. With that being said, I could not pick him out of a lineup much less did I ever give interview to him about being the “Battlefoam tattoo guy”. If I had been interviewed, I doubt, to use Tasty Tastes words, “this sad individual” would not have found a place in his posting. Romeo and I met at Adepticon several years ago. The 40k radio, lifetime boota membership had been going on, if you tattooed the logo onto your body. So I jokingly threatened to get a Battlefoam tattoo on my arm, since it did a far superior job keeping my mini’s safe, as opposed to the other bags I had been using. He then said to me that if I got said tattoo he would give me a discount for life. This intrigued and amused me, so we discussed it further. We had a good laugh, and then went about our convention business. Two months later I shoot Romeo an email, with picture of the tattoo. He calls me up, excited, makes good on his promise of a lifetime discount. There was no, again to use Tasty Taste’s words, “haggling argument”. Later that month I call in for my first order. This is where there seems to be the most confusion. Romeo had not written anything down, or told his staff how much of a discount I was to be getting. The staff originally thought it was just a 365 day a year Golden Boota discount. So a back and forth amongst Romeo and his staff began to establish the amount. During this time, both Romeo and his staff, were professional, polite, and never told me no. In the end, something that was discussed half in jest and agreed upon over a handshake was honored by Romeo. There was no argument, no hard feelings, or any mistreatment. Romeo could have very well claimed no such agreement was made, or just played ignorance to the deal. Instead he made good on his word, and honored the original agreement without any complaint or resistance on the matter. So I apparently fail to see the issue here. If I had to find fault on any of this, it was that Romeo and I did not write down the initial agreement. Does this make Romeo a bad person? Hardly. Given the circumstances, I fail to see how this can be part of this argument to vilify someone. Romeo and Battlefoam have come out in spades on this matter and I have never had issue with either service or products. I cannot vouch for anything else in Tasty Tastes post as I was not there to witness any of it, nor have I spoken directly with anyone who was there. It would look poorly on me to do so, and discredit me if I did not follow up on stories or facts. What I do have the authority to speak on is that the one part involving me, and how it was twisted. It was insulting to me, and goes to show why I don’t follow this individual’s online posting. I do not intend to speak further on this matter outside of legal proceedings, as, quite frankly, there is now no further need to do so. Now if you excuse me, I am going back to the hobby we all share and enjoying myself.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/05/13 16:48:28
Some jurisdictions have rules that allow a defendant to seek a security for costs order from out of state corporate plaintiffs. Essentially it forces the plaintiff (cross-complainant in this case) to pay money into court prior as a bond for costs in case they lose. Because it ties up actual money for the duration of the trial it can be a strong deterrent to going through with a lawsuit.
It also deters entities with little or no cash on hand from filing lawsuits. So you can't just set up a corporation to sue people, put in just enough money to pay lawyers and then walk away and not pay if you are unsuccessful. Not that this is the case with Battle Foam, it is just one of the reasons the rule exists.
I'll do a quick search and see if California has that rule.
(a)When the plaintiff in an action or special proceeding resides out of the state, or is a foreign corporation, the defendant may at any time apply to the court by noticed motion for an order requiring the plaintiff to file an undertaking to secure an award of costs and attorney's fees which may be awarded in the action or special proceeding...
(b)The motion shall be made on the grounds that the plaintiff resides out of the state or is a foreign corporation and that there is a reasonable possibility that the moving defendant will obtain judgment in the action or special proceeding...
(c)If the court, after hearing, determines that the grounds for the motion have been established, the court shall order that the plaintiff file the undertaking in an amount specified in the court's order as security for costs and attorney's fees.
...
(g)An order granting or denying a motion for an undertaking under this section is not appealable.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/05/13 17:31:36
carboncopy wrote: Ahh yes, that thread has another instance on there I remember:
Then you have the case of Romeo promising a lifetime discount for anyone tattooing Battlefoam on their body. Well one sad indivdual did such a thing and Romeo denied ever making the offer. So, with email trail in hand the tattooed man got into a haggling argument over the percentage of the discount, with I think a final agreement settling at 30% off.
After I closed the last thread, I received the below PM from a newly-registered user, who wanted to post it in the (now-locked) thread. I make no claims as to the source, other than to note that the user's information does not match with any BF-related accounts on Dakka.
Taking the user at face value, it wouldn't nescessarily further claims of defamation or libel. The "facts" dont always have to be true, just believed to have been true. The tattoo story was circulating before the BoK blog post, so they might have been passing on what they believed to be true (as opposed to other things that are demonstratably true like prior lawsuits, forum posts and what not).
On the forum post issue...
Spoiler:
Posted Today, 05:37 PMEnough is enough. I have sat back and let you guys get under my skin for way to long. You all ask why a person that should be looking at this as a professional and a business person not taking the high road? The fact is that you can’t take the high road with people that are low lives. Yes, I called some of you low lives, Killionaire. The fact that some of you have the INTERNET balls to sit on a forum and talk crap about me, and our show is a total joke. To then come back and say that I used our podcast to voice our opinions and that was stooping to low is laughable. So you all get to bash me behind my back and on public forums but I can’t do it on our own show. Get a clue and get a life. We asked for your suggestions, we never asked for your hate or disgusting comments. Let me break a few more things down for you. I did this show for the love of the game, something that many of you have stripped away completely. To be honest I don’t even care to play Infinity anymore because it means I may actually run into some of you at a tournament. The vile you all spew at hard working people is a complete joke and crime. This whole thing started when I accepted an invitation by my friends to come on D6G to help with their show. I had 10 mins to prep for that interview and no I did not have my rule book with me. And no, I don’t know all the Infinity rules, and NO WE ARE NOT THE GOD DAMB OFFICIAL PODCAST OF ANYTHING! How many more times do we have to say that. Quit using that as your excuse to defend BS post that attack me personally. I welcome you to attack me in person at any number of events I attend each year. Fact is that none of the loud mouth trolls on here ripping me apart would even peep a word in person. That’s the problem with forums and this one in particular. Infinity tries to make itself sound better than the rest but good members allow for bad members to turn this into another 40k forum. Trolling the hosts of a free show that you choose to download and then ripping the main host when he replies back and gives you his side. Get real. And for the ones that want facts. Here they are. ____________________________________Chromedog - Posted 27 December 2012I did like their descriptor of Romeo.The Sham-WOW! of foam.(Over here, we find those adverts (and the Sham-WOW! guy) incredibly irritating though. More likely to drive customers away than attract them.)I like the D6G podcast, but the main reason I listen to O-12 is because of Kip and Tom, NOT Romeo. ___________________________________I did not know that selling your products and letting the world know about your hard work is considered a bad thing. ---------------------------------------------------------E-Warden – Posted 29 December 2012I'm in full agreement with the Romeo issue. Unfortunately I think he detracts from the 0-12 podcast and I'm from here (NY.)____________________________________Thanks for the support E-Warden, nothing like jumping on the bandwagon and crapping on people when they are down. ____________________________________Hindenburg – Posted 30 December 2012Bringing players to a game on false pretenses because you can't facts straight isn't exactly great. Especially when you make mistakes that make it seem like a WORSE game. ____________________________________Really, a worse game. Because I get a fact wrong people will find Infinity to be a worse game. Come on with the drama already.____________________________________Killionaire – Posted 30 December 2012And as usual, Romeo gets more or less every single thing wrong that comes out of his mouth.____________________________________As usual Killionaire your running around on every forum you can sniffing my panties. Hey clown, feel free to call, email, skype, or better yet say something to me in person. I know you’re the biggest internet tough guy there is. Your BS artist ass has been talking crap about me for years on every forum that your mom lets you sign up for. Please, please for the sake of everything holy. Come see me at any convention I am at. Email me your name or just post it so everybody knows who you are. You by far are the driving force in this whole thing. You have been creating drama on me for so long I can’t even remember. Oh, and I have a few favors called in to find out who you are. In due time my friend in due time. ____________________________________As for the other posts I hope you got enough evidence Rivethead, not that I owe you anything. Not that you’ll actually see things from all sides. Not that you’ll help put the flames out instead of adding fuel. As for moving forward I have. Thanks for the memories and thanks to the following members.ChromedogE-WardenHindenburgRivetheadKillionaireYou just killed O-12. Take pride in knowing you personally shut down a good thing for the game of Infinity. Crickets trolls, crickets. We have better things to do with our off time.
Pardon the formatting, that was pulled out of my index file and the thread itself is on a back up drive. Didn't even recall him calling out Chromedog at the time, I assume it will be the same Chromedog who is a member here too.
Hey clown, feel free to call, email, skype, or better yet say something to me in person. I know you’re the biggest internet tough guy there is. Your BS artist ass has been talking crap about me for years on every forum that your mom lets you sign up for. Please, please for the sake of everything holy. Come see me at any convention I am at. Email me your name or just post it so everybody knows who you are. You by far are the driving force in this whole thing. You have been creating drama on me for so long I can’t even remember. Oh, and I have a few favors called in to find out who you are. In due time my friend in due time.
Well, that sounds like his podcast interviews.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/05/13 17:56:24
To blame others for your actions especially forum posts is like another way of saying "I am not responsible for my actions: you are!"
He is also setting himself up for risk of someone "wanting" him to hit them with witnesses and being thrown in jail. I suspect it is just talk or we would have heard of some jail time earlier.
Well, with this guy it is like buying music from artists that are nasty pieces of work: can you separate the person from the product?
All this mess inspired me to make my own foam miniature carriers FOR MY OWN USE and I can assure no lasers were involved.
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte
