Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mirror.co.uk)   Religious bakery tells customer it won't bake a Bert and Ernie cake because something.. something about gay marriage   (mirror.co.uk) divider line 650
    More: Asinine, faiths, Bible Teach, Sesame Street character, Belfast Telegraph, Icing on the Cake, executive directors  
•       •       •

8995 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jul 2014 at 9:48 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



650 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-08 12:25:43 PM  
First they came for the gay cakes, and I did not speak out - because I prefer pie.
 
2014-07-08 12:26:12 PM  

Theaetetus: I did. Didn't see one definition there. Maybe you're referring to another thread?


I've explained on several posts here that this is not a case of discrimination, because the bakery did not refuse service based on the customer's identity in a protected demographic.  Indeed there's been no mention of the customer's sexual orientation, and I suspect that the Bakery would refuse to print the message regardless of whether the customer was gay or straight.

Now if you're going to argue that holding certain political viewpoints puts you in a protected class, I'm afraid there's no point in continuing the discussion.
 
2014-07-08 12:26:21 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: In GoldSpider's case, you have the business' products being specifically created to display a set message that cannot be changed or deleted on a whim in contravention to the beliefs of those that created it.


So? I don't think making a cake and writing a message on it like "Don and James 4 Ever" means I necessarily support their being married.
 
2014-07-08 12:27:07 PM  

Theaetetus: You can't "change or delete on a whim" that post I made, regardless of your beliefs, nor can your computer manufacturer. Neither you nor they have any responsibility for the content... you know, like a cake manufacturer who prints a customer-requested image on the face of a cake.


Are you really suggesting that a content creator has no responsibility for the content that they create?

And while I cannot change or delete your post (due to me lacking administrative or moderator privileges on this site), others can. Others that are responsible for the content on this site who have deemed certain things to be anathema to the smooth operation of their business. One might call those "beliefs."
 
2014-07-08 12:27:10 PM  
Shows you how backwards the UK is that a private business may be forced to do something they don't want to do.

Pretty tragic.
 
2014-07-08 12:27:20 PM  
Well, the religious right's efforts to block gay marriage are being overturned state by state on an almost weekly basis. Now all they can do is fight for bakers' rights. They lost the battle long ago, now they're just limping along. Good riddance.

(Yes, I am fully aware that this particular example comes from the UK.)
 
2014-07-08 12:28:40 PM  

genner: Gaylord Fister: Also, the bible mentions homosexuality only twice, but shellfish eight times. I bet you these hypocritical zombie worshippers wouldn't mind making a cake with a shrimp on it.

It mentions homosexuality  13 times and says shellfish is fine the last time it mentions it.


Not that it really matters, but that's highly debatable.  Several of the times the Bible "mentions homosexuality" it may be a mistranslation.  And don't get me started on Paul.

If you really care, there are a number of books and articles out there, some on the Internet, that go into the question at some length.  Suffice it to say that if you're only going by what an English translation says, without any regard to the original language and context, you're not in a position to argue about what the Bible does or does not really say.
 
2014-07-08 12:29:04 PM  

GoldSpider: Theaetetus: I did. Didn't see one definition there. Maybe you're referring to another thread?

I've explained on several posts here that this is not a case of discrimination, because the bakery did not refuse service based on the customer's identity in a protected demographic.  Indeed there's been no mention of the customer's sexual orientation, and I suspect that the Bakery would refuse to print the message regardless of whether the customer was gay or straight.

Now if you're going to argue that holding certain political viewpoints puts you in a protected class, I'm afraid there's no point in continuing the discussion.


"We thought that was the end of it, but approximately six weeks later we received a letter from the Equality Commission. The Equality Commission's letter said that we had discriminated against the customer on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

on the grounds of  HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
 
2014-07-08 12:29:08 PM  

Theaetetus: Ah, so you agree that the  box may be corporate letterhead, but not the  cake?


That's where you're splitting the hair?  Really?
 
2014-07-08 12:29:09 PM  

Ker_Thwap: Anyone else think it's creepy using images of a childlike muppet to promote a sexual orientation choice?


1) Sexual orientation is not a choice

2) The fact that you feel it necessary to include "creepy" and "childlike"  says more about you than about folks who think E&B are gay

3) Using images of muppets to "promote" sexual orientation doesn't seem to be much of a problem when that orientation is "heterosexual"
img.fark.netimg.fark.netimg.fark.netimg.fark.net
img.fark.net img.fark.net

Having a chicken as your romantic partner is A-OK, as long as it's a girl chicken.
 
2014-07-08 12:29:33 PM  

GoldSpider: Theaetetus: I did. Didn't see one definition there. Maybe you're referring to another thread?

I've explained on several posts here that this is not a case of discrimination, because the bakery did not refuse service based on the customer's identity in a protected demographic.  Indeed there's been no mention of the customer's sexual orientation, and I suspect that the Bakery would refuse to print the message regardless of whether the customer was gay or straight.

Now if you're going to argue that holding certain political viewpoints puts you in a protected class, I'm afraid there's no point in continuing the discussion.


Of course not. I'm arguing that the bakery assumed the customers had a particular sexual orientation and refused service on those grounds, just as they would likely have refused to create a "Bob and Jim 4Eva" cake. Contrary to your apparent belief, people are not required to prove their sexual orientation before they are protected from discrimination on those grounds.
 
2014-07-08 12:30:06 PM  
poseurs, i only do business with clones of myself, that way i know they have 100% the same ideals as i do
 
2014-07-08 12:30:36 PM  

browntimmy: How have these bigots not realized they're on the wrong side of history by now? They're okay knowing future generations will either be ashamed or laughing at them?


They think the same of us, except they imagine it will them up in Heaven laughing at us as we roast in Hell.  And they're less concerned about what future generations might think as they're expecting the Rapture to happen Any Day Now.
 
2014-07-08 12:30:42 PM  
Much as I support non-discrimination, I have to wonder if it can be applied to the subject matter of custom artwork.  i.e., if a bakery refuses to sell one of their standard designs that they have made a hundred times before to a same sex couple, sue the hell out of them.  If they refuse to make a wedding cake in the shape of two lesbians making out, that is a legitimate decision on the part of the artist.  If two men order a red and teal wedding cake, I think it would be entirely appropriate for the baker to gently suggest that they get someone who has been tested and proven not to be color blind review their wedding decor choices.

/One of the gay couple vs. bakery cases did in fact involve a red and teal wedding cake
//The color scheme was not the reason the baker refused to make it.
///In one out of sixteen gay male couples, both members will have some form of color blindness
 
2014-07-08 12:31:01 PM  

stpauler: "We thought that was the end of it, but approximately six weeks later we received a letter from the Equality Commission. The Equality Commission's letter said that we had discriminated against the customer on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

on the grounds of  HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATION.


That presumes that the business owners knew the sexual orientation of the customer.  I don't know about you, but I can't look at someone and know that they are gay.
 
2014-07-08 12:32:19 PM  

Theaetetus: GoldSpider: Theaetetus: I did. Didn't see one definition there. Maybe you're referring to another thread?

I've explained on several posts here that this is not a case of discrimination, because the bakery did not refuse service based on the customer's identity in a protected demographic.  Indeed there's been no mention of the customer's sexual orientation, and I suspect that the Bakery would refuse to print the message regardless of whether the customer was gay or straight.

Now if you're going to argue that holding certain political viewpoints puts you in a protected class, I'm afraid there's no point in continuing the discussion.

Of course not. I'm arguing that the bakery assumed the customers had a particular sexual orientation and refused service on those grounds, just as they would likely have refused to create a "Bob and Jim 4Eva" cake. Contrary to your apparent belief, people are not required to prove their sexual orientation before they are protected from discrimination on those grounds.


The article only mentions the business refused to make the Bert/Ernie cake with 'Support Gay Marriage' on it.  Without more evidence, we cannot assume they were refused because of their sexual orientation.
 
2014-07-08 12:32:27 PM  
It's Mathew Shepard all over again
 
2014-07-08 12:32:30 PM  

Muta: kling_klang_bed: [cdn-www.i-am-bored.com image 480x381]

[img.fark.net image 480x381]

Is Bigbird rubbing one out back there?


Either that, or ready to join in. Snuffalufigus would be the 'bear' in that whole deal, and definitely a top.
 
2014-07-08 12:32:33 PM  

stpauler: Frank N Stein:
Why can't the customers just go to another bakery if they insist on a specific product?

Because they did? Maybe try reading the articles.
The councillor, who hosted the event during his term as mayor of North Down, said another bakery in Bangor stepped in and accepted the cake order.

Moreover, it's not the customer suing the bakery:

The County Antrim firm could face legal action from the Equality Commission.

But please keep talking out your ass. It lets us all know where your brain is.


So they went to another company and got the product that they wanted to, and the other bakery didn't have to make a product that they didn't want to. Why should the government be involved again?
 
2014-07-08 12:32:45 PM  

EvilEgg: Isn't a good rule of thumb to never let someone who hates you prepare your food?

/Ernie and Bert were not gay.
//Neither were Felix and Oscar who they were styled after.
\Not sure about the latter couple.


Bert and Ernie were all about getting rectally fisted. They refused to perform unless Henson or one of his crew had an arm shoved up their backside, all the way to the elbow. That's pretty gay, dude.
 
2014-07-08 12:32:58 PM  

Theaetetus: I'm arguing that the bakery assumed the customers had a particular sexual orientation and refused service on those grounds


That's also an assumption.
 
2014-07-08 12:33:04 PM  

Theaetetus: According to another article, this was the picture that the customers wanted printed on a sheet cake:


Would you just look at that obscene, depraved, immoral image they requested on a cake to be prepared by a family bakery?? I mean, how can this decent, family-owned bakery be expected to endorse and celebrate that sick, immoral lifestyle by baking such an abominable putrefaction? Won't somebody think of our children? Our families?
 
2014-07-08 12:33:07 PM  
I wonder if they would have denied that awesome Bears cake I got for my 7th birthday.
 
2014-07-08 12:33:11 PM  

Theaetetus: Ah, so you agree that the  box may be corporate letterhead, but not the  cake?


Must the cake carry a mark on it to denote that it came from a certain bakery in order to be an advertising medium? Or is word of mouth and understanding that the cake that came out of the box came from the same bakery as the box enough?

Theaetetus: According to another article, this was the picture that the customers wanted printed on a sheet cake:


So because one cake is "printed," the bakery makes no original cakes?

Theaetetus: And no reasonable person would conflate printing a customer-requested image on a sheet cake with corporate letterhead.


Good thing no one in this thread conflated the two. GoldSpider thinks that a cake, no matter what the image or design, is a representative advertisement of the bakery. And he's correct. You seem to think that it's a pair of pants or an unrelated image. I am having trouble finding any reasonableness in your replies.
 
2014-07-08 12:33:16 PM  

GoldSpider: stpauler: "We thought that was the end of it, but approximately six weeks later we received a letter from the Equality Commission. The Equality Commission's letter said that we had discriminated against the customer on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

on the grounds of his sexual orientation.

on the grounds of  HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATION.

That presumes that the business owners knew the sexual orientation of the customer.  I don't know about you, but I can't look at someone and know that they are gay.


Luckily, one doesn't have to be gay to be discriminated against based on sexual orientation. Otherwise, what you are arguing would be totally stupid.
 
2014-07-08 12:34:14 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Theaetetus: You can't "change or delete on a whim" that post I made, regardless of your beliefs, nor can your computer manufacturer. Neither you nor they have any responsibility for the content... you know, like a cake manufacturer who prints a customer-requested image on the face of a cake.

Are you really suggesting that a content creator has no responsibility for the content that they create?


Are you really suggesting that someone who manufactures a product at someone's request explicitly endorses all of the beliefs of that someone?

And while I cannot change or delete your post (due to me lacking administrative or moderator privileges on this site), others can. Others that are responsible for the content on this site who have deemed certain things to be anathema to the smooth operation of their business. One might call those "beliefs."

... so you aresaying that all of the modmins and Drew must endorse whatever is posted here, because they can change or delete it? That Fark is their "corporate letterhead" so anything that appears on their site is their officially adopted belief?
 
2014-07-08 12:34:31 PM  

GoldSpider: Deliberately misunderstanding/misrepresenting a point


You'll have to cut him some slack on that one--he's a lawyer, he can't help it.  Ever been in a court room?  The sheer amount of misrepresentation and playing dumb by all attorneys present is enough to make a sane person start doubting reality.
 
2014-07-08 12:35:13 PM  
I present photographic evidence that Bert and Ernie's relationship is strictly platonic.


antikewl.com
 
2014-07-08 12:35:22 PM  
Cheesus:
The article only mentions the business refused to make the Bert/Ernie cake with 'Support Gay Marriage' on it.  Without more evidence, we cannot assume they were refused because of their sexual orientation.

So you agree that the Equality Commission should investigate this potential instance of discrimination? Great, glad we're all on the same page.
 
2014-07-08 12:35:44 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Colour_out_of_Space: Religious Bakery?
Exodus 29:2  And from fine wheat flour, without yeast, make bread, and cakes mixed with oil, and wafers spread with oil.
Hypocrites

Well that was taken totally out of context, and has nothing to do with this discussion.

Consecration of the Priests

29 "Now this is what you shall do to them to consecrate them, that they may serve me as priests. Take one bull of the herd and two rams without blemish, 2and unleavened bread, unleavened cakes mixed with oil, and unleavened wafers smeared with oil. You shall make them of fine wheat flour. 3You shall put them in one basket and bring them in the basket, and bring the bull and the two rams. 4You shall bring Aaron and his sons to the entrance of the tent of meeting and wash them with water. 5Then you shall take the garments, and put on Aaron the coat and the robe of the ephod, and the ephod, and the breastpiece, and gird him with the skillfully woven band of the ephod. 6And you shall set the turban on his head and put the holy crown on the turban. 7You shall take the anointing oil and pour it on his head and anoint him. 8Then you shall bring his sons and put coats on them, 9and you shall gird Aaron and his sons with sashes and bind caps on them. And the priesthood shall be theirs by a statute forever. Thus you shall ordain Aaron and his sons.


Well, they're not doing any of that stuff!
 
2014-07-08 12:36:27 PM  

menschenfresser: AllYourFarkAreBelongToMe: BFletch651: Oh, good lord.  If some asshole doesn't  want the job, just get someone else.  You don't have to argue with everyone about everything.

^^^^^^^^
So much this.

And who the hell would WANT a cake baked by somebody who didn't want to bake it?

Those black boys in Nashville should have just gone to a different lunch counter where people didn't hate them.


Beat me to it. It's exactly, unexaggeratedly the same. You can be a society that abhors making a set of humanity second class citizens for an ostensibly meaningless trait or you can be wrong.
 
2014-07-08 12:36:36 PM  

GoldSpider: Theaetetus: Ah, so you agree that the  box may be corporate letterhead, but not the  cake?

That's where you're splitting the hair?  Really?


Did the customer request the message to be printed on the box, or just the cake?
 
2014-07-08 12:37:19 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Circusdog320: Where did Jesus say love everybody except gay people?

You can love someone, but still not support their lifestyle.


You CAN, yes.  But most Christians don't.
 
2014-07-08 12:37:26 PM  
 
2014-07-08 12:37:28 PM  

Theaetetus: Frank N Stein: Theaetetus: Frank N Stein: Theaetetus: Or they could put on their contract that they are not responsible for the content of any customer-requested message. Would that make you happy, or do you insist that the bakery must shove their bigotry in everyone's face?

I suppose if the bakery wants to do that, it's a valid solution. However, refusing to make a specific cake is also a solution as well.
Why can't the customers just go to another bakery if they insist on a specific product?

I suppose if the lunch counter wants to print on the backs of their checks that they don't endorse any racial beliefs of their customers, that's a valid solution. However, refusing to serve black people is also a solution as well. Why can't those darkies just go to another lunch counter if they insist on eating at a restaurant?

That's a different issue because in your scenario, it's an outright refusal to serve a group of people, whereas this whole bakery thing is about refusing to create a specific product.

But you already knew that. You're just running out of valid arguments.

They refused to serve these customers. No mention was made of alternate products. But you knew that, too, since you read the article, right?


It says right in the article that the bakery "refused to make a cake featuring the slogan". It's the specific product that they didn't want to make, and not a carte blanche refusal to serve gay people.
 
2014-07-08 12:38:00 PM  

ReverendJasen: Ever been in a court room?  The sheer amount of misrepresentation and playing dumb by all attorneys present is enough to make a sane person start doubting reality.


Yeah, the willful denial of reality, logic, and common sense would probably make my head explode.
 
2014-07-08 12:39:03 PM  

mama2tnt: cwolf20: Come to America. The lawsuit hap happiest place on earth.  I think I should go sue Burger King for not serving dolphin

Have you ever walked up to the window with one to find out?

/Last time I took my dolphin for a walk we stopped by BK for fish sammiches. Yum.


Was THAT what all that commotion was yesterday?  I was getting busy in the bathroom.
 
2014-07-08 12:39:21 PM  

stpauler: Frank N Stein:

So they went to another company and got the product that they wanted to, and the other bakery didn't have to make a product that they didn't want to. Why should the government be involved again?

Because laws. Laws that were passed. Maybe also due in part to Northern Ireland's history of not quite getting along with those of other opinions.

The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland is a non departmental public body established by the Northern Ireland Act 1998. Our powers and duties derive from a number of statutes which have been enacted over the last decades, providing protection against discrimination on the grounds of age, disability, race, religion and political opinion, sex and sexual orientation. We also have responsibilities arising from the Northern Ireland Act 1998 in respect of the statutory equality and good relations duties which apply to public authorities.

Our sponsor Department is the Office of the First and deputy First Minister which carries responsibilities for equality policy and legislation in the Northern Ireland Executive.
- See more at: http://www.equalityni.org/HeaderLinks/About-Us#sthash.MnwyJWcH.dpuf


Okay, so then why do you believe that there should there be this law which requires a company to make a product that it doesn't want to?
 
2014-07-08 12:39:24 PM  

stpauler: Luckily, one doesn't have to be gay to be discriminated against based on sexual orientation.


In that case, there's a lot of money to be made in the court system.  Working as intended, I suppose.
 
2014-07-08 12:40:41 PM  
Why don't these bakeries go the Curves route and become private heterosexual cake clubs? They could charge a $1 annual membership fee or something and be all set.

It just seems stupid to risk a bunch of bad publicity when there are perfectly legal ways out there to discriminate against anyone you want to. I'm starting to think that some of them actually want the publicity so they can brag to the rest of us about how hard they believe in jebus and the bibble.
 
2014-07-08 12:42:07 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Theaetetus: Ah, so you agree that the  box may be corporate letterhead, but not the  cake?

Must the cake carry a mark on it to denote that it came from a certain bakery in order to be an advertising medium? Or is word of mouth and understanding that the cake that came out of the box came from the same bakery as the box enough?


The word of mouth may be advertising, not the cake itself. But hey, let's go with your argument for a second - assume the cake is advertising. It can now be regulated as commercial speech, which has much less protection than creative speech. Why, all sorts of non-discrimination in advertising regulations can be applied to it now! Are you  really sure you want to go with that argument?

Theaetetus: According to another article, this was the picture that the customers wanted printed on a sheet cake:

So because one cake is "printed," the bakery makes no original cakes?


We're talking about this particular cake. Who cares if they make brioche?
To return to the original analogy, a paper company may make blank printer paper  as well astheir own corporate letter head... That doesn't mean that the former is  also corporate letterhead, such that anything anyone prints on it becomes adopted as their belief.

Theaetetus: And no reasonable person would conflate printing a customer-requested image on a sheet cake with corporate letterhead.

Good thing no one in this thread conflated the two. GoldSpider thinks that a cake, no matter what the image or design, is a representative advertisement of the bakery. And he's correct.


Nope, it's absolutely incorrect. But then, you also apparently think that everything posted on Fark is a representative advertisement of Drew and the modmins.
 
2014-07-08 12:42:27 PM  

Theaetetus: Are you really suggesting that someone who manufactures a product at someone's request explicitly endorses all of the beliefs of that someone?


No, I am saying that it can be construed that way. That's it. If you think this to be false, then I really don't know what more there is to say to you on the topic.

Theaetetus: ... so you aresaying that all of the modmins and Drew must endorse whatever is posted here, because they can change or delete it? That Fark is their "corporate letterhead" so anything that appears on their site is their officially adopted belief?


I am not saying that they endorse everything that is posted here. It would be impossible to ascribe the beliefs of every single Farker to the individuals that own and run the site. See, because we customers of Fark are the ones actually creating the content. We hold our own beliefs under our usernames.

However, Fark.com is their corporate letterhead. It is the product that they present to the public and inferences can be made based on what is posted here that can be directed back at the owners and operators of the site. For instance, I can discern that Drew is likely more concerned with his belief that making money is preferable to having NSFW links on the main page, hence the decision to move Foobies out of the main FarkoSphere.
 
2014-07-08 12:42:39 PM  
And for what it's worth at this point, I happen to support marriage equality.  I just happen to also support a business' right to choose what products it wants to produce and sell.  These beliefs are not contradictory.
 
2014-07-08 12:43:35 PM  

AllYourFarkAreBelongToMe: The problem is, not everybody WILL, and you're never going to MAKE them.  So why not just go to a different bakery and stop whining about EVERYTHING?  It's a farkin' CAKE.  Or do you really want a cake that some ignorant a-hole is likely to urinate on, or ejaculate into, while he laughs himself silly in the kitchen?  I don't care one way or another to whom you're attracted, but gay people really need to choose their battles more wisely.


Oh, thank you!  That's EXACTLY what LBGTQ folks have needed all along, for you to tell us how we should strategize!
 
2014-07-08 12:43:39 PM  
"Hey Chuck! We can't go making a gay rights cake! If the townspeople see it they'll assume we aren't bigots! And then our friends, families, and churches will condemn us for not being bigots! It would be a DISASTER."
 
2014-07-08 12:44:24 PM  

GoldSpider: Selena Luna: That's what discrimination is: someone is offering others services or products that they refuse to offer to a specific group.

Nothing in the article suggests a particular group was refused service.


Go into the bakery wearing gay pride shirts and holding hands, order a "Happy Birthday" cake. If they refuse I think most people would definitely be on your side. The "Support Gay Rights" cake puts a lot of people on the fence.
 
2014-07-08 12:44:53 PM  

Frank N Stein: Theaetetus: Frank N Stein: Theaetetus: Frank N Stein: Theaetetus: Or they could put on their contract that they are not responsible for the content of any customer-requested message. Would that make you happy, or do you insist that the bakery must shove their bigotry in everyone's face?

I suppose if the bakery wants to do that, it's a valid solution. However, refusing to make a specific cake is also a solution as well.
Why can't the customers just go to another bakery if they insist on a specific product?

I suppose if the lunch counter wants to print on the backs of their checks that they don't endorse any racial beliefs of their customers, that's a valid solution. However, refusing to serve black people is also a solution as well. Why can't those darkies just go to another lunch counter if they insist on eating at a restaurant?

That's a different issue because in your scenario, it's an outright refusal to serve a group of people, whereas this whole bakery thing is about refusing to create a specific product.

But you already knew that. You're just running out of valid arguments.

They refused to serve these customers. No mention was made of alternate products. But you knew that, too, since you read the article, right?

It says right in the article that the bakery "refused to make a cake featuring the slogan". It's the specific product that they didn't want to make, and not a carte blanche refusal to serve gay people.


It doesn't say anywhere in the article that they offered to make a different cake. Rather, they refused the order and refunded the customer's money.
 
2014-07-08 12:45:28 PM  
Frank N Stein:

Okay, so then why do you believe that there should there be this law which requires a company to make a product that it doesn't want to?


Why do I, as an American, believe that Northern Ireland should have a law requiring businesses not to discriminate against its potential clientele? You mean, besides the points repeated elucidated in this thread, in my post, and in the articles and links provided, and Northern Ireland's history of sectarian and political violence?
 
2014-07-08 12:47:10 PM  

stpauler: Welcome to a month of TF to a couple posters here.


Hey, thanks for the month of TF.
 
2014-07-08 12:47:27 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Theaetetus: ... so you aresaying that all of the modmins and Drew must endorse whatever is posted here, because they can change or delete it? That Fark is their "corporate letterhead" so anything that appears on their site is their officially adopted belief?

I am not saying that they endorse everything that is posted here... Fark.com is their corporate letterhead. It is the product that they present to the public and inferences can be made based on what is posted here that can be directed back at the owners and operators of the site.


So, you're not saying that they endorse everything here, but rather that reasonable inferences can be made that they endorse everything here?

cdn2.crushable.com
 
Displayed 50 of 650 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report