Then what legal basis do Netflix’s shareholders have in suing? Again, they don’t have the right to free speech. Citizen’s United wasn’t a publicly traded company, it was a non-profit organization.
You literally think you are “fighting to death in a war”?
It doesn’t matter if the company is public or not, it a moot point and irrelevant. The ruling doesn’t distinguish between public or private companies. The think about the language of law, it has to be PRECISE.
This still exists?
Seems really inconsistent to remove /spit and still have this.
There’s plenty of empty space in this game for people to fill with whatever level of depth they want to add for themselves and their characters.
I think a child-targeting Tolkien game would be very, very boring. The Hobbit minus what little violence it has? It’d be all musical numbers and a handful of riddles.
Then there’s a lot of games you’re not going to want to play.
Do you often have people telling you their desires - sexual, identity-wise, or anything else - out of the blue in game?
should we remove pvp cause it hurts fefes to?
/spit was removed for use of harassment to people who bought store mounts, not cause it was used in the world during pvp moments. last time i checked you cant do that with a flag of ownership.
1 Like
Exactly. This is the point.
Okay, you have a link to the lawsuit. We’ll look at it and figure it out. It’s a public document.
I found it…
Pirani v. Netflix Inc
docket number 22-CV-02672
The lawsuit, which seeks class-action status, seeks unspecified monetary damages on behalf of investors who owned Netflix shares between Oct. 19, 2021, and April 19, 2022. Those include “compensatory damages in favor of Plaintiff and the other Class members against all defendants, jointly and severally, for all damages sustained as a result of Defendants’ wrongdoing, in an amount to be proven at trial, including interest thereon.”
According to the lawsuit, Netflix and its top execs “employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud [investors], while in possession of material adverse non-public information” the lawsuit reads. They also made “untrue statements of material facts and/or omitting to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made about Netflix and its business operations and future prospects in light of the circumstances under which they were made not misleading,” the suit alleges.
Stop gaslighting, It’s not about free speech, it’s about Securities Fraud…
2 Likes
Cross Factional Cooperation. Having class order halls made it feel in game more collaborative to take on Legion threat. Focusing on Class lore and Class skills. I miss it and hang out in Legion content regularly because it just reminds me of the potential this game has to feel great again.
1 Like
You have no idea what Marxist and brainwashing mean.
1 Like
If the American RP-servers are just a speck of what AD-EU is, then they will be fine. European GMs made a statement on the AD-forums why they cannot simply cull the eRP this easily, it comes with too many complications.
This was my understanding to. /Spit was abused on players for doing things like buying store mounts or boosting.
1 Like
I dont have a problem with violence - just dont feel the need for sex in it.
I dont play many other games. Just MMORPGs and maybe 3 or 4 (depending if you count different versions as different games). I even made my own EQEMU server for my son and I so I could have a persistent world with no other players.
Forums every single day.
In game I have seen enough people spamming to join guild that advertise sexual specialties - especially when I tried MG after being told that was only held to Goldshire.
Again, nothing about the case you linked had anything to do with free speech. Not once is free speech even mentioned. Citizens United v FEC was covering independent donations to non-profits and establishing whether or not that fell under the laws established by The Federal Election Campaign Act.
And even with the Supreme Court Ruling, if a publicly traded company made an independent donation to such a cause and it caused harm to the value of their stock, the stockholders are still able to sue.
Sorry was on another topic on my alt (asking about prettiest Paladin)
Then you didn’t read it.
removed for stupidity
It covers more than that as well
When someone has a fiduciary duty to someone else, the person with the duty must act in a way that will benefit someone else, usually financially . The person who has a fiduciary duty is called the fiduciary, and the person to whom the duty is owed is called the principal or the beneficiary.
I did. Even did a “Free Speech” search function. Literally didn’t come up until the citations.
No you didn’t.
AH, trolling. Got it.