Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Joey Barton loses in court
Comments
-
Go anti-woke go broke 😂Garrymanilow said:Glorious. How can it possibly be getting funnier?!8 -
Aluko needs to chat to Vine’s lawyer. Then it gets even funnierGarrymanilow said:Glorious. How can it possibly be getting funnier?!3 -
Why follow him on twitter.0
-
I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.13 -
Yeah no need for these two to be airing their dirty laundry in public like this - Be a bit more classy, and do it out of the spotlight if they've truly got grievances.
Instead with the world we're living in now, with the cost of living that the ordinary person has to go through, and we've got two very minor Celebrities thinking they're the centre of attention1 -
Jeremy Vine is essentially the same animal that Joey Barton is. Both chucking red meat out to a known audience and if anything Vine is worse for the idiotic videos he posts when he is cycling and the faux outrage and disingenuous ways he broadcasts. At least with Barton you know what you are getting and he is a lot more.... clumsy isn't the right word but let's say raw. He clearly doesn't have much of a brain or a filter like Vine does but they essentially do the same thing.6
-
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
15 -
I still think of him speaking English with a French accent.2
-
.0
- Sponsored links:
-
Even if they did want it kept quiet, the press would be all over it FA. The whole thing has been public from the day Barton decided to slag off women in football.ForeverAddickted said:Yeah no need for these two to be airing their dirty laundry in public like this - Be a bit more classy, and do it out of the spotlight if they've truly got grievances.
Instead with the world we're living in now, with the cost of living that the ordinary person has to go through, and we've got two very minor Celebrities thinking they're the centre of attention
2 -
Barton calling people paedophiles because they disagree with him is the same as Vine posting videos about cycling and presenting a radio show?Carter said:Jeremy Vine is essentially the same animal that Joey Barton is. Both chucking red meat out to a known audience and if anything Vine is worse for the idiotic videos he posts when he is cycling and the faux outrage and disingenuous ways he broadcasts. At least with Barton you know what you are getting and he is a lot more.... clumsy isn't the right word but let's say raw. He clearly doesn't have much of a brain or a filter like Vine does but they essentially do the same thing.
Don't see it myself.
10 -
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
0 -
If you have an ounce of sense you don't post stuff in the public domain that's defamatory.Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.8 -
Would you feel the same if you had someone telling 1000's of people, many of whom believe 'no smoke without fire' that you touched kids?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
23 -
Wow, what a weird take.
5 -
You wouldn't care if someone commented again and again on your YouTube videos, making accusations as serious as the ones Barton posted about?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.It's a lot more harmful than "they're just words" and "playground remarks".13 -
Seen the word thrown around plenty of time on social media, work spaces, football etc. I don't think people care about playground insults, generally speaking.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
If you have an ounce of sense you don't post stuff in the public domain that's defamatory.Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
It would be an absurd comment to make. No one as good looking as me is getting called a nonce, or is anyone believing it.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Would you feel the same if you had someone telling 1000's of people, many of whom believe 'no smoke without fire' that you touched kids?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
Only truthful comments could get under my skin, so no, 1000s of people calling me a word that isn't the truth could not get under my skin.
Although knowing there could potentially be thousands of pounds coming my way in that hypothetical scenario, I could probably pretend to be offended by someone calling me a made up insult?2 -
I'm no fan of either of them but Barton brought this on himself. People get attacked for being paedophiles so being called one then having your address put out there for any one to read is a tad too far. If it were just words between 2 adults no one would care much apart from the one being insulted. Barton had/has and Vine too, millions of followers so its no longer between just the 2 of them, people get involved in Twitter threads, thousands of them. Vine, for the most part, takes a bit of ribbing well. I have and so have many, mocked his bike videos he posts and he takes it in good spirit and sometimes give you a like for your efforts. He does come across as someone who purposely antagonises but thats his job but he knows where the line is.Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
Sometimes things go wrong, https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society , old story but worth baring in mind.
75K, so far, is a lot of money but words sometimes have consequences and I would expect the sum of money reflect Bartons wealth.5 -
Why would I let a comment that isn't the truth bother me? It's a word on the Internet. I've been called slurs because of my alias, all sorts, none of it bothers me as it isn't the truth.stoneroses19 said:
You wouldn't care if someone commented again and again on your YouTube videos, making accusations as serious as the ones Barton posted about?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.It's a lot more harmful than "they're just words" and "playground remarks".
A serious accusation is someone saying something along the lines of they've seen me doing x activity and providing that information to the law or in the eyes of the public. Someone coming on my YouTube video and typing something like 'football vlog nonce' would just be ridiculous and nonsense.
It's kind of besides my original point now anyway and going off track, which is that IF people who go around sticking cameras in people's faces and creating a rod can decide how offending a comment is, it gives them serious power to do what they want on a camera (to an extent) to members of the public with 0 repercussions.
Complicated subject, but my belief is it doesn't warrant a 75k fine, and could lead down a very tricky path.1 - Sponsored links:
-
It’s the perfect case of free speech having consequences, and a good test of people’s understanding of it.It’s very different being called a sex offender if you’re a middle aged man in the public eye, than if you’re a regular citizen. It wouldn’t affect my livelihood (no one would see it anyway) but it could Vine’s.Happy to be corrected, but I do believe his actions around counter suing may have exposed him to greater damages.@Chippycafc I don’t know if you are a Twitter user but it’s pretty much impossible to avoid the views of some people. You have two feeds, one of those you follow and the other is a suggested one. The one that you follow is fine, but clearly can be an echo chamber. The suggested feed brings you new content to follow based on what you’ve looked at before, but also gives you the chance to say you want to see less of something in order to tune your algorithm. I have asked to see less of joey Barton and Laurence fox, yet ever 3 or 4 days a tweet will reappear. Its really hard to not follow it.7
-
It's not a £75k fine. It's £75k in damages. Big difference.
Barton was warned but doubled down to get more attention and followers on social media.
If anyone was trying to be clever and use social media to build a reputation and make money, it was Barton but because he isn't as smart as he thinks he is he went too far and got sued.
He'll still try to make a reputation and money out of this because that was always his plan.6 -
He could do with someone giving him a good hiding,shutting up his big mouth.Mendonca In Asdas said:He seems to have a really short fuse, and keeps putting his foot in it, could do with some counciling in how to treat people, would be money better spent imo.0 -
Braziliance said:
Seen the word thrown around plenty of time on social media, work spaces, football etc. I don't think people care about playground insults, generally speaking.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
If you have an ounce of sense you don't post stuff in the public domain that's defamatory.Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
It would be an absurd comment to make. No one as good looking as me is getting called a nonce, or is anyone believing it.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Would you feel the same if you had someone telling 1000's of people, many of whom believe 'no smoke without fire' that you touched kids?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
Only truthful comments could get under my skin, so no, 1000s of people calling me a word that isn't the truth could not get under my skin.
Although knowing there could potentially be thousands of pounds coming my way in that hypothetical scenario, I could probably pretend to be offended by someone calling me a made up insult?
Stop being naive or suddenly making it into a joke.
You know in this world of social media that people believe all sorts of rumours put out there.
If you were famous,(sorry mate you aren't) then millions of people hearing about a "celebrity" called a "nonce on a bike" really would bother you because the ,'no smoke without fire' would kick in. I'm don't do twitter etc and I heard about this as a news story.
Most of us know Joey Barton is a violent cretin ever since he stubbed a cigar in the academy player's face/eye and violents will never be far away when he loses it.
75k and Barton has got off light. Hopefully Vine donates the money to the victims of crime or their families if they were left bereaved.
6 -
Sorry but this an absolutely incorrect take. Just wildly out of step with reality and law. Jeremy Vine is a public figure, he has 786,000 followers on Twitter, has 6.8 million people listen to his radio show and had over 13.3m viewers of his Channel 5 show. It's not just words and playground remarks when you're that famous, if you don't address the comments then perception becomes reality in people's minds and it can affect you personally, socially and monetarily.Braziliance said:
Why would I let a comment that isn't the truth bother me? It's a word on the Internet. I've been called slurs because of my alias, all sorts, none of it bothers me as it isn't the truth.stoneroses19 said:
You wouldn't care if someone commented again and again on your YouTube videos, making accusations as serious as the ones Barton posted about?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.It's a lot more harmful than "they're just words" and "playground remarks".
A serious accusation is someone saying something along the lines of they've seen me doing x activity and providing that information to the law or in the eyes of the public. Someone coming on my YouTube video and typing something like 'football vlog nonce' would just be ridiculous and nonsense.
It's kind of besides my original point now anyway and going off track, which is that IF people who go around sticking cameras in people's faces and creating a rod can decide how offending a comment is, it gives them serious power to do what they want on a camera (to an extent) to members of the public with 0 repercussions.
Complicated subject, but my belief is it doesn't warrant a 75k fine, and could lead down a very tricky path.
Defamation law requires that a person be defamed in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or damages their reputation. Barton calling Vine a 'raving bacon' and saying 'if you see this fella by a primary school call 999' as well as asking 'Did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?' is a serious accusation. He wrote 'Elvis was a Nonce As well' and 'Have you been on Epstein Island? Are you going to be on these flight logs? Might as well own up now because I’d phone the police if I saw you near a primary school on ya bike.' There's lots more, all in all Barton wrote 14 defamatory tweets all based on some pretty horrific untrue claims that any reasonable person would see as defamatory. He linked Vine to Jimmy Savile and Jeffrey Epstein for God's sake. The tweets got increasingly libellous and had the serious possibility of massively reducing Vine's reputation and with it his viewership and therefore his job prospects if he didn't challenge those posts. Barton has 2.8m Twitter followers, do you seriously think that if Vine stayed quiet and just rolled his eyes there wouldn't be plenty of people who would accept the unchallenged view put forward by Barton? Of course they would.
Also, I don't think we need to worry about a very tricky path. Defamation law has been a thing since the 1200s, Barton getting done for being openly libellous and suffering the consequences isn't going to cause even a ripple in the wider framework of the law, just look at Colleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy for an example about just how difficult it is to win a case where you can't prove proper damages or truth as a total defence. The only wider discussion to come from this really is the fact it's been reported so widely as just a case where Barton called Vine 'bike nonce' rather than the horrendous accusations he made about him being more thoroughly reported on.13 -
Even a lie can be a serious accusation, it doesn't have to be true to affect the person involved. There's too many examples in the past where an accusation or similar about a celebrity/famous person has stuck and followed them around for years, when it turns out to have been fabricated by another, who was just out to hurt another or make a name for themselves.Braziliance said:
Why would I let a comment that isn't the truth bother me? It's a word on the Internet. I've been called slurs because of my alias, all sorts, none of it bothers me as it isn't the truth.stoneroses19 said:
You wouldn't care if someone commented again and again on your YouTube videos, making accusations as serious as the ones Barton posted about?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.It's a lot more harmful than "they're just words" and "playground remarks".
A serious accusation is someone saying something along the lines of they've seen me doing x activity and providing that information to the law or in the eyes of the public. Someone coming on my YouTube video and typing something like 'football vlog nonce' would just be ridiculous and nonsense.
It's kind of besides my original point now anyway and going off track, which is that IF people who go around sticking cameras in people's faces and creating a rod can decide how offending a comment is, it gives them serious power to do what they want on a camera (to an extent) to members of the public with 0 repercussions.
Complicated subject, but my belief is it doesn't warrant a 75k fine, and could lead down a very tricky path.1 -
Well, I like making jokes, so I will probably carry on doing that.soapboxsam said:Braziliance said:
Seen the word thrown around plenty of time on social media, work spaces, football etc. I don't think people care about playground insults, generally speaking.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
If you have an ounce of sense you don't post stuff in the public domain that's defamatory.Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
It would be an absurd comment to make. No one as good looking as me is getting called a nonce, or is anyone believing it.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Would you feel the same if you had someone telling 1000's of people, many of whom believe 'no smoke without fire' that you touched kids?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.
Only truthful comments could get under my skin, so no, 1000s of people calling me a word that isn't the truth could not get under my skin.
Although knowing there could potentially be thousands of pounds coming my way in that hypothetical scenario, I could probably pretend to be offended by someone calling me a made up insult?
Stop being naive or suddenly making it into a joke.
You know in this world of social media that people believe all sorts of rumours put out there.
If you were famous,(sorry mate you aren't) then millions of people hearing about a "celebrity" called a "nonce on a bike" really would bother you because the ,'no smoke without fire' would kick in. I'm don't do twitter etc and I heard about this as a news story.
Most of us know Joey Barton is a violent cretin ever since he stubbed a cigar in the academy player's face/eye and violents will never be far away when he loses it.
75k and Barton has got off light. Hopefully Vine donates the money to the victims of crime or their families if they were left bereaved.
If people choose to believe stupid rumours, that's on them. Thank you for clarifying I'm not famous, the postman did ask for my signature the other day so I needed someone to ground me after that experience. Respectfully, you're telling me something that only I would know the answer to, and is something completely hypothetical anyway, as I won't be a celebrity in this lifetime. I can confirm though that no insult has ever gotten to me, I don't see that changing regardless of any status I could potentially have in life.
I really don't care what Joey Barton is or has done, my point had nothing to do with Joey Barton the person, he was just related to the topic.
Agree on the last point though, if he's going to receive money, it would be nice to go to a good cause1 -
So it's ok to call people a nonce, as long as they're not famous? What do followings etc have to do with anything generally speaking, if we are talking about freedom of speech. Defamation by its definition doesn't only apply to people with a big following, so why the need to mention both parties followings. I understand you're probably using the numbers, to show the impact it could have on a wider audience, compared to two ''normal'' people, but that in itself seems like a bit of selective outrage to me. Would Vine be as bothered had it been a ''no profile'' making the same remarks? Probably not. Would the spectators care as much if it was a random twitter profile, probably not.Garrymanilow said:
Sorry but this an absolutely incorrect take. Just wildly out of step with reality and law. Jeremy Vine is a public figure, he has 786,000 followers on Twitter, has 6.8 million people listen to his radio show and had over 13.3m viewers of his Channel 5 show. It's not just words and playground remarks when you're that famous, if you don't address the comments then perception becomes reality in people's minds and it can affect you personally, socially and monetarily.Braziliance said:
Why would I let a comment that isn't the truth bother me? It's a word on the Internet. I've been called slurs because of my alias, all sorts, none of it bothers me as it isn't the truth.stoneroses19 said:
You wouldn't care if someone commented again and again on your YouTube videos, making accusations as serious as the ones Barton posted about?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.It's a lot more harmful than "they're just words" and "playground remarks".
A serious accusation is someone saying something along the lines of they've seen me doing x activity and providing that information to the law or in the eyes of the public. Someone coming on my YouTube video and typing something like 'football vlog nonce' would just be ridiculous and nonsense.
It's kind of besides my original point now anyway and going off track, which is that IF people who go around sticking cameras in people's faces and creating a rod can decide how offending a comment is, it gives them serious power to do what they want on a camera (to an extent) to members of the public with 0 repercussions.
Complicated subject, but my belief is it doesn't warrant a 75k fine, and could lead down a very tricky path.
Defamation law requires that a person be defamed in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or damages their reputation. Barton calling Vine a 'raving bacon' and saying 'if you see this fella by a primary school call 999' as well as asking 'Did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?' is a serious accusation. He wrote 'Elvis was a Nonce As well' and 'Have you been on Epstein Island? Are you going to be on these flight logs? Might as well own up now because I’d phone the police if I saw you near a primary school on ya bike.' There's lots more, all in all Barton wrote 14 defamatory tweets all based on some pretty horrific untrue claims that any reasonable person would see as defamatory. He linked Vine to Jimmy Savile and Jeffrey Epstein for God's sake. The tweets got increasingly libellous and had the serious possibility of massively reducing Vine's reputation and with it his viewership and therefore his job prospects if he didn't challenge those posts. Barton has 2.8m Twitter followers, do you seriously think that if Vine stayed quiet and just rolled his eyes there wouldn't be plenty of people who would accept the unchallenged view put forward by Barton? Of course they would.
Also, I don't think we need to worry about a very tricky path. Defamation law has been a thing since the 1200s, Barton getting done for being openly libellous and suffering the consequences isn't going to cause even a ripple in the wider framework of the law, just look at Colleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy for an example about just how difficult it is to win a case where you can't prove proper damages or truth as a total defence. The only wider discussion to come from this really is the fact it's been reported so widely as just a case where Barton called Vine 'bike nonce' rather than the horrendous accusations he made about him being more thoroughly reported on.
Quite ironic anyway, as most people on here clearly think Barton is a moron, a lot of people on social media do, and know most of what he says probably isn't true, yet his words seems to carry so much weight and significance that Vine had no choice but to take it to court, and now people are celebrating his court loss?
Anyway, I'll take a step back from this thread, I am spending too much of my time talking about two blokes I don't care about, and what my original view was, has been completely lost. Which was can this be heavily exploited in this day and age depending on someones financial situation/social media clout. Especially with the access to engage among celebrities. Anyway, there's no outcome here where my opinion on this can change, and vice versa, so it's not a good use of time.
No more replies from me on this topic, without sounding arrogant, enjoy your day all
Edit: & just to be clear, I genuinely understand the majority of every quoted post at me, I just have a different train of thought is all and don't want to bicker about it all.0 -
Legally the followers make a huge difference, a nobody with 0 influence wouldn’t be able to cause and real damage.Braziliance said:
So it's ok to call people a nonce, as long as they're not famous? What do followings etc have to do with anything generally speaking, if we are talking about freedom of speech. Defamation by its definition doesn't only apply to people with a big following, so why the need to mention both parties followings. I understand you're probably using the numbers, to show the impact it could have on a wider audience, compared to two ''normal'' people, but that in itself seems like a bit of selective outrage to me. Would Vine be as bothered had it been a ''no profile'' making the same remarks? Probably not. Would the spectators care as much if it was a random twitter profile, probably not.Garrymanilow said:
Sorry but this an absolutely incorrect take. Just wildly out of step with reality and law. Jeremy Vine is a public figure, he has 786,000 followers on Twitter, has 6.8 million people listen to his radio show and had over 13.3m viewers of his Channel 5 show. It's not just words and playground remarks when you're that famous, if you don't address the comments then perception becomes reality in people's minds and it can affect you personally, socially and monetarily.Braziliance said:
Why would I let a comment that isn't the truth bother me? It's a word on the Internet. I've been called slurs because of my alias, all sorts, none of it bothers me as it isn't the truth.stoneroses19 said:
You wouldn't care if someone commented again and again on your YouTube videos, making accusations as serious as the ones Barton posted about?Braziliance said:
Irrespective, they're just words, and if they aren't true, who cares. 75k is absolutely nonsense over some playground remarks made between two adults.thenewbie said:
There were actually several other messages as well as the "bike nonce" one, it wasn't a one off thing there was definitely the deliberate attempt to call Vine a paedophile without actually saying it - and this is not just my opinion, it was a court ruling.Braziliance said:I don't think it's anything to celebrate tbh, I don't like a lot of the stuff Joey Barton says, but, Jeremy Vine purposely looks to antagonise members of the public/drivers for Internet clout. It's two insufferable people in a face-off, and neither should be celebrated or rooted for in my eyes.
I also think it's quite dangerous territory that something as petty as calling someone a 'bike nonce' or whatever other weird comment he has made towards him, which literally doesn't make any sense, has warranted a fine of 75 thousand pounds. I have seen people suffer far less for way worse.
More importantly Barton's defence was more or less "it's just banter" (except wrapped up in suitably legalese terminology) and it was quite rightly slapped down as nonsense, which is a precedent that needed setting.
I'm no fan of Vine at all but you don't get to do what Barton did just because the other person is a dickhead, that's not how it works.
I also truthfully couldn't care for what's ruled in courts, there have been plenty of occasions where courts have been completely wrong, and not served true justice imo, speaking as a victim and witness. I don't take what is ruled in court as gospel or a correct decision for every outcome, that would be naive of me.
It's an absurd amount of money and opens up for people like Vine, to antagonise the general public knowing they have full protection of any counter measures, even childish insults.
We are seeing a growing trend of people using platforms like tiktok, YouTube and Instagram to do antagonising or attention seeking acts on members of the public for online trend, court rulings like this just encourage those types more imo with that level of protection. That's my concern.It's a lot more harmful than "they're just words" and "playground remarks".
A serious accusation is someone saying something along the lines of they've seen me doing x activity and providing that information to the law or in the eyes of the public. Someone coming on my YouTube video and typing something like 'football vlog nonce' would just be ridiculous and nonsense.
It's kind of besides my original point now anyway and going off track, which is that IF people who go around sticking cameras in people's faces and creating a rod can decide how offending a comment is, it gives them serious power to do what they want on a camera (to an extent) to members of the public with 0 repercussions.
Complicated subject, but my belief is it doesn't warrant a 75k fine, and could lead down a very tricky path.
Defamation law requires that a person be defamed in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or damages their reputation. Barton calling Vine a 'raving bacon' and saying 'if you see this fella by a primary school call 999' as well as asking 'Did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?' is a serious accusation. He wrote 'Elvis was a Nonce As well' and 'Have you been on Epstein Island? Are you going to be on these flight logs? Might as well own up now because I’d phone the police if I saw you near a primary school on ya bike.' There's lots more, all in all Barton wrote 14 defamatory tweets all based on some pretty horrific untrue claims that any reasonable person would see as defamatory. He linked Vine to Jimmy Savile and Jeffrey Epstein for God's sake. The tweets got increasingly libellous and had the serious possibility of massively reducing Vine's reputation and with it his viewership and therefore his job prospects if he didn't challenge those posts. Barton has 2.8m Twitter followers, do you seriously think that if Vine stayed quiet and just rolled his eyes there wouldn't be plenty of people who would accept the unchallenged view put forward by Barton? Of course they would.
Also, I don't think we need to worry about a very tricky path. Defamation law has been a thing since the 1200s, Barton getting done for being openly libellous and suffering the consequences isn't going to cause even a ripple in the wider framework of the law, just look at Colleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy for an example about just how difficult it is to win a case where you can't prove proper damages or truth as a total defence. The only wider discussion to come from this really is the fact it's been reported so widely as just a case where Barton called Vine 'bike nonce' rather than the horrendous accusations he made about him being more thoroughly reported on.
Quite ironic anyway, as most people on here clearly think Barton is a moron, a lot of people on social media do, and know most of what he says probably isn't true, yet his words seems to carry so much weight and significance that Vine had no choice but to take it to court, and now people are celebrating his court loss?
Anyway, I'll take a step back from this thread, I am spending too much of my time talking about two blokes I don't care about, and what my original view was, has been completely lost. Which was can this be heavily exploited in this day and age depending on someones financial situation/social media clout. Especially with the access to engage among celebrities. Anyway, there's no outcome here where my opinion on this can change, and vice versa, so it's not a good use of time.
No more replies from me on this topic, without sounding arrogant, enjoy your day all
Edit: & just to be clear, I genuinely understand the majority of every quoted post at me, I just have a different train of thought is all and don't want to bicker about it all.2 -
What I don't understand is WHY Barton has gone after Vine like this. It's not as if their paths have crossed much in their careers.1
