Guestbook:
CleanUpLuxor wrote at Dec 27, 2008 at 13:03 o\clock:
بc[rں°¾)ںم^ٍ}”Aىک Nc<u&ûي 0¼µئeç¨ëش•G¾ç<w@üûü(¥~ك؛î؛3وˆ{م0جsOآ=ےّ'
Ho. Ho. Ho. (Guest) wrote at Dec 27, 2008 at 08:06 o\clock:
Hahahahahahahaha
So predictable, never mind, carry on.... We shall see who gives up first...
So predictable, never mind, carry on.... We shall see who gives up first...
Tincandle (Guest) wrote at Mar 28, 2008 at 05:26 o\clock:
Now where has your sense of humour gone. It was not Leafy that as vulgar. It was bringing in some poor defenceless gorilla that was vulgar. :) :)
Luxorpinkpiggytales wrote at Mar 27, 2008 at 13:47 o\clock:
The Leafy wannabees who are desperate for their five minutes of fame are threatening to sue us for slander again today. Our characters (as we repeatedly state) are fictional and anybody wanting to relate to them is delusional or guilty. Libel cases are for the rich only as costs run into hundreds of thousands of pounds and damages have to be proven. If anyone really is a Leafy or Sandy type character then no damage could possibly occur to their 'good' name.
What we fail to understand is why any Leafy wannabee would want to spend 15 hours a day flooding this site with rubbish instead of living a life.
What we fail to understand is why any Leafy wannabee would want to spend 15 hours a day flooding this site with rubbish instead of living a life.
Luxorpinkpiggytales wrote at Mar 27, 2008 at 12:40 o\clock:
Tincandle We are sorry that you found Wednesday's entry distasteful. Where is your sense of humour? Nobody makes anybody read anything here and our entries are fictional and meant to entertain. Perhaps we can amuse you with another entry at some other time.
Tincandle (Guest) wrote at Mar 27, 2008 at 12:30 o\clock:
I am sorry but I do find that Wednesdays Diary entry by Leafy very distasteful.The author/ess has a very vulgar mind!
Luxorpinkpiggytales wrote at Mar 27, 2008 at 12:29 o\clock:
We have to delete them as they keep naming names and there are other odious fantasy sites that do that - not this one.
Luxorpinkpiggytales wrote at Mar 27, 2008 at 11:09 o\clock:
Admittedly the post from CleanupLuxor was really funny but we had to delete it because as usual it named individuals. Sorry folks. Sorry also for the mess that Cleanupluxor is making of our Guestbook.
Ramses (Guest) wrote at Mar 26, 2008 at 14:53 o\clock:
Am I missing something here? How can defamation charges be levelled by a fictional character? When even the writers are unknown. Even D.H. Lawrence wasn't accused by Lady Chatterley when she upped sticks and had a ball. Where is this bonk head coming from. As my friend Ruby says, 'If dat Leafy or any of dem deadlegs without dat pot to p**s in, done want level charges at me isa goin send dem maa address in dis ere Harlem, and the best of luck ya morons.
Luxorpinkpiggytales wrote at Mar 26, 2008 at 14:23 o\clock:
Cleanupluxor - you have repeated your post five times. Was that for emphasis? We loved part of it though:_
Thus, a delivery service cannot be held liable if ......
Claimant is incapable of further defamation–e.g., the claimant's position in the community is so poor that defamation could not do further damage to the plaintiff. Such a claimant could be said to be "libel-proof," since in most jurisdictions, actual damage is an essential element for a libel claim.
Thus, a delivery service cannot be held liable if ......
Claimant is incapable of further defamation–e.g., the claimant's position in the community is so poor that defamation could not do further damage to the plaintiff. Such a claimant could be said to be "libel-proof," since in most jurisdictions, actual damage is an essential element for a libel claim.
Write guestbook entry:
Attention: guestbook entries on this weblog have to be approved by the weblog\s owner.
