PDA

View Full Version : Fake medium Chris Fleming Threatened me HAHA


laughingoutloud
14th January 2011, 09:35 PM
Been lurking a long time. Had to sign up to share this one. Chris Flemin, host of the dumbest show I've ever seen called "Dead Famous" a few years back, and recently from another dumb show on A&E just threatened me. I have 4,000 friends on fb and somehow got connected to this guy. A post of his with the other nit witted Chip Coffee on fb claimed they filmed a fairy, and video of it. It was of course a grasshopper, but while replying to this nonsense I began communicating with another skeptic on this particular post. Not thinking that Fleming himself actually looked at this page, me and the other skeptic started laughing at Flemings ridiculous shows where he claimed to channel the spirits of dead celebrities. We were laughing in particular to his stupid act of channeling Howard Hughes. Then the Psychic Kids thing came up and we started writing our concernes about how they are dangerously abusing these kids emotionally.
I was soon sent a private message from Fleming saying that I should tell him what I said to his face so he could "Knock the ****" out of me. I sent him a message saying I was sorry, and didn't mean to hurt his feelings, but he should be careful who he threatens because I was a professional fighter and much bigger than him, and he didn't really want a problem with me. Then he wrote back that he could have me killed if he wanted. HAHAHAHAHA..... Then immediately blocked me from his page.
So if you're ever sitting around with nothing to do and want to poke at a lying fraud just for fun, go to his fb page and let it happen. You will be entertained by his response. I guess if you call a fake a fake, they can't take it. HAHAHA.. Thanks for letting me post.

Edited to properly mask profanity. Do not attempt to bypass the autocensor.

Learjet
14th January 2011, 10:06 PM
Good grief. I know a little about him and his association with the infamous K-II EMF meter that started Ghost Hunters and "paranormal investigators" the world over using it. What a con that is.

laughingoutloud
14th January 2011, 10:10 PM
Good grief. I know a little about him and his association with the infamous K-II EMF meter that started Ghost Hunters and "paranormal investigators" the world over using it. What a con that is.

SHHHHHH, don't let him hear you say that. He'll threaten you too. HAHAH

Squeegee Beckenheim
15th January 2011, 12:17 AM
Report him to the police. And to Facebook.

plumjam
15th January 2011, 01:34 AM
OP looks like it was written in tiny writing on one sheet of toilet paper, in a prison cell.

Sledge
15th January 2011, 05:08 AM
I wouldn't know, plumjam. I bow to your greater experience in such matters.

drewid
15th January 2011, 08:49 AM
Take screencaps of the exchange and get them to the police along with details of dates and timestamps. The massages will be on FBs servers as well. That sort of threat can be taken very seriously (at least in the UK) and can lead to prosecution if it seems like a serious thing.

sadhatter
15th January 2011, 09:24 AM
Been lurking a long time. Had to sign up to share this one. Chris Flemin, host of the dumbest show I've ever seen called "Dead Famous" a few years back, and recently from another dumb show on A&E just threatened me. I have 4,000 friends on fb and somehow got connected to this guy. A post of his with the other nit witted Chip Coffee on fb claimed they filmed a fairy, and video of it. It was of course a grasshopper, but while replying to this nonsense I began communicating with another skeptic on this particular post. Not thinking that Fleming himself actually looked at this page, me and the other skeptic started laughing at Flemings ridiculous shows where he claimed to channel the spirits of dead celebrities. We were laughing in particular to his stupid act of channeling Howard Hughes. Then the Psychic Kids thing came up and we started writing our concernes about how they are dangerously abusing these kids emotionally.
I was soon sent a private message from Fleming saying that I should tell him what I said to his face so he could "Knock the ****" out of me. I sent him a message saying I was sorry, and didn't mean to hurt his feelings, but he should be careful who he threatens because I was a professional fighter and much bigger than him, and he didn't really want a problem with me. Then he wrote back that he could have me killed if he wanted. HAHAHAHAHA..... Then immediately blocked me from his page.
So if you're ever sitting around with nothing to do and want to poke at a lying fraud just for fun, go to his fb page and let it happen. You will be entertained by his response. I guess if you call a fake a fake, they can't take it. HAHAHA.. Thanks for letting me post.

Edited to properly mask profanity. Do not attempt to bypass the autocensor.

As everyone knows, i am usually the first to jump on the bash the psychic bandwagon, but without proof, does this non constitute slander? These are some very serious allegations, and while i would support, comment and probably make a joke if we saw some proof. When it comes to death threats it is going to take a bit more than the word of some random person.

Apology
15th January 2011, 09:31 AM
As everyone knows, i am usually the first to jump on the bash the psychic bandwagon, but without proof, does this non constitute slander? These are some very serious allegations, and while i would support, comment and probably make a joke if we saw some proof. When it comes to death threats it is going to take a bit more than the word of some random person.
Without proof it constitutes an anecdote. It's not illegal in the US to say someone threatened you over the internet in this manner without proving it. I know that other countries have different laws about these types of things, etc., but in the US this would not constitute slander.

sadhatter
15th January 2011, 09:53 AM
Without proof it constitutes an anecdote. It's not illegal in the US to say someone threatened you over the internet in this manner without proving it. I know that other countries have different laws about these types of things, etc., but in the US this would not constitute slander.

I always thought all that was required for slander was to be able to show that through a persons untruthful statement , your reputation has been impacted. While i wouldn't say any on the jref have love for this guy, death threats are another matter.

Now seeing as some countries, one can sue for slander if the statement is read in them, i don't think that sticking to just united states law avoids the slander issue.

And as far as the states, with the exception of a handful of states, accusing someone of criminal activity ( as well as allegations in regards to business, and a few other topics. ) is slander regardless of proof of impact on their reputation or business. And the point is , that it is an anecdote, if the OP could prove this, at that point is where it is not slander.

With the fact that the woosters do indeed love to use the legal system in this way, i think the op should look into providing proof before making a claim of this nature.

I mean really, all this is , is the skeptic version of the " I had a psychic experience but won't tell you." threads, until the op provides some kind of proof.

The Greater Fool
15th January 2011, 10:41 AM
I always thought all that was required for slander was to be able to show that through a persons untruthful statement , your reputation has been impacted. While i wouldn't say any on the jref have love for this guy, death threats are another matter.

Now seeing as some countries, one can sue for slander if the statement is read in them, i don't think that sticking to just united states law avoids the slander issue.

And as far as the states, with the exception of a handful of states, accusing someone of criminal activity ( as well as allegations in regards to business, and a few other topics. ) is slander regardless of proof of impact on their reputation or business. And the point is , that it is an anecdote, if the OP could prove this, at that point is where it is not slander.

With the fact that the woosters do indeed love to use the legal system in this way, i think the op should look into providing proof before making a claim of this nature.

I mean really, all this is , is the skeptic version of the " I had a psychic experience but won't tell you." threads, until the op provides some kind of proof.

At least in the USA, slander and libel are not prosecutable (meaningfully) unless actual damages can be proven. In this case, an anonymous random anecdote on the internet probably didn't damage him at all... more likely, it increased the buzz about him ever so slightly. Personally, I never heard of the guy before, and once I hit enter, never expect to give him a second thought.

sadhatter
15th January 2011, 11:24 AM
At least in the USA, slander and libel are not prosecutable (meaningfully) unless actual damages can be proven. In this case, an anonymous random anecdote on the internet probably didn't damage him at all... more likely, it increased the buzz about him ever so slightly. Personally, I never heard of the guy before, and once I hit enter, never expect to give him a second thought.

from my interpretation of the law, in regards to statements not in certain categories ( claims of certain diseases, mostly stds, infidelity, criminal acts, and acts in direct conflict with the persons business. ) you are indeed right, but within the aforementioned categories, it falls under slander Per sae and simply requires that the person prove that the person in question said what they said.

Now, my legal knowledge ends at the entertainment industry, if someone in a legal profession could weigh in here , with appropriate sources, i would be more than happy to concede to someone with better knowledge.

Above and beyond that though, the op has still yet to provide any proof. I would love to make a few dozen jokes about psychic goon squads, but i am just not willing to believe such a large allegation based on nothing more than a random user on the net's word. If so, i would have to take limbo, aku, and numerous others stories as true as well. My standard of proof doesn't get thrown out the window just because someone is saying something i would like to believe.

So op, where is the proof? I am rooting for you, but not until i see some solid evidence.

wasapi
15th January 2011, 11:57 AM
If he did pm you with such a reaction that included saying he could have you murdered, hopefully you saved it. Otherwise it is just a 'I-said, he-said', and doesn't mean anything. You also engaged in some posturing and bunting antliers with the guy, if what you say is true, with the 'I'm bigger and badder' rhetoric. Which, in my opinion isn't a good skeptical tactic.

I dislike the constant mantra of "Evidence!", because it is tossed around so much that it seems to not get much of a reply except defensiveness, and, in my opinion could be asked in a better way.

However, this is one of those times I can't think of a better way, and there seems to be something about this experience that I can't put my finger on, but makes me doubtful. So, evidence?

Julia

laughingoutloud
15th January 2011, 05:31 PM
What silly responses. Evidence... HAHHAHAHA. Why would anyone make up a story like this? If you think it didn't happen, then g ood for you. If you do, then good for you. It was a stupid threat by a stupid guy. I actually felt bad the guy got so angry, and apologised to him. I think it would be equally stupid of me to actually save his messages or turn him in to the police. The guy doesn't even know me, and I don't know him. He had a momentary fit of anger and said some stupid things I'm sure he didn't even mean. No one that threatens someone on the internet is serious about it. I had someone that lived close to me threaten me a few years ago about building a commercial structure near his house. I did take it to the police and make a report, the cop that took the report gave me the impression he thought it was silly and they never even called the guy. That I took seriously. This dipstick Fleming kid is a joke. No one could take his little anger fit seriously enough to tell the authorities. You people need to find better things to do than to be so fearful. Sorry I posted on this ridiculous site. What a bunch of dorks you guys are. HAHAHAHAHAH

laughingoutloud
15th January 2011, 05:36 PM
Oh, and if you are having trouble wrapping your tiny brains around the fact that Fleming is a hot head and threatened me, go get your own proof. Give a hard time, and watch what he does. Don't believe me. Go get your own evidence.

Fnord
15th January 2011, 05:44 PM
Oh, calm down, already! If your claims are valid, then you may have the ability to practically own the guy! If they're not, then the OP is just one more in a seemingly endless series of improvable claims and baseless ideas.

Turn the guy in. Collect a settlement. End of story.

desertgal
15th January 2011, 05:47 PM
What silly responses. What a bunch of dorks you guys are. HAHAHAHAHAH

Snort. Guffaw. Chortle. Oh, the irony.

...but he should be careful who he threatens because I was a professional fighter and much bigger than him, and he didn't really want a problem with me.

Sean84
15th January 2011, 07:36 PM
James Randi Educational Foundation
a place to discuss facebook, internet tough guy syndrome, this dipstick Fleming kid and lulz in a friHAHHAHAHA I TROLLZ YOU DORks111111

People are strange... :boxedin:

John Jones
15th January 2011, 07:59 PM
Oh, and if you are having trouble wrapping your tiny brains around the fact that Fleming is a hot head and threatened me, go get your own proof. Give a hard time, and watch what he does. Don't believe me. Go get your own evidence.


OK :jaw-dropp

Cavemonster
15th January 2011, 08:46 PM
Anybody else think of this?
EdA0tasZVqI

Tumblehome
16th January 2011, 01:00 AM
Fleming is starting to look like the saner one HAHAHAHA

HumanityBlues
16th January 2011, 01:32 AM
The OP doesn't need to qualify the term "medium" with "Fake". They are ALL fake. It's a given.

nzric
16th January 2011, 01:35 AM
If you're a professiona fighter I think the best thing to do would be to post his threat on your facebook account for your 4000 followers, formally accept his offer for an organised fight at a time and place of his choosing (maybe your gym), and contact local media outlets to drum up some publicity.

No need to place a complaint, just tell him you're happy to discuss "mano-a-mano" if he wants. Fairies optional.

Furcifer
16th January 2011, 01:40 AM
Well he's got a point, I don't think the police would do much but laugh at you for bringing in a screen capture of threats from some internet tough guy. It's like reporting your neighbour to the cops for downloading movies off the internet. Pretty dorky thing to do.

bluesjnr
16th January 2011, 02:23 AM
Hahahahahahahahhhhhahahahahahahaaaahashahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha!

Squeegee Beckenheim
16th January 2011, 02:42 AM
Why would anyone make up a story like this?

For attention. Because they're an idiot. To defame Fleming. Because they're a bored child. Any number of reasons.

Agent : Orange
16th January 2011, 02:45 AM
Thanks for posting laughingoutloud - I had a good lol, but it might not be for the reason you originally intended.

Stray Cat
16th January 2011, 03:07 AM
Well he's got a point, I don't think the police would do much but laugh at you for bringing in a screen capture of threats from some internet tough guy. It's like reporting your neighbour to the cops for downloading movies off the internet. Pretty dorky thing to do.
Here in the UK, a man was taken to court last year for putting a comment on his Twitter feed with a joke about blowing up an airport (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/7706197/Accountant-used-Twitter-to-threaten-to-blow-up-airport.html).
Some authorities take this stuff seriously.

As for the OP - There are many more valid reasons to mock, ridicule and expose psychics than unevidenced anecdotes badly written by professional trolls fighters.

MatildaGage
16th January 2011, 04:00 AM
Personally I wouldn't notify the police over this incident, but maybe Facebook.

However, I'd definitely preserve all evidence in case this wasn't the end of it. It makes absolutely zero sense to discard the evidence.:confused:

Furcifer
16th January 2011, 04:26 AM
Here in the UK, a man was taken to court last year for putting a comment on his Twitter feed with a joke about blowing up an airport (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/7706197/Accountant-used-Twitter-to-threaten-to-blow-up-airport.html).
Some authorities take this stuff seriously.


I'm not sure internet tough guy ranks up there with wanabe terrorist. These days, with the paranoia it's almost required for the authorities to follow up on something like a bomb threat at an airport. I don't know how serious the threat needs to be in order to shut down the airport, but I'm guessing not much.
A death threat on the internet, meh. I've had numerous on YouTube, utterly meaningless. FB is slightly more personal, and obviously not anonymous, but equally vapid.

Mirrorglass
16th January 2011, 04:30 AM
Personally I wouldn't notify the police over this incident, but maybe Facebook.

However, I'd definitely preserve all evidence in case this wasn't the end of it. It makes absolutely zero sense to discard the evidence.:confused:

That's true. Unless, of course, the actual response was something in the nature of "Hahaha you think you could take me I'm a professional fighter loser I'd beat you to pulp come on try it big boy you're a loser HAHAHA!"

Then I could see why contacting the police would be a bad idea.

Stray Cat
16th January 2011, 07:13 AM
I'm not sure internet tough guy ranks up there with wanabe terrorist. These days, with the paranoia it's almost required for the authorities to follow up on something like a bomb threat at an airport. I don't know how serious the threat needs to be in order to shut down the airport, but I'm guessing not much.
The airport wasn't shut down... well not because of his Twitter post anyway.
It was closed because of snow. He made his twitter post as a joke because his flight had been cancelled. I'm not condoning what he wrote in any way, just pointing out that there is a precedent here in the UK for authorities taking serious action against internet based threats no matter how baseless they are.

A death threat on the internet, meh. I've had numerous on YouTube, utterly meaningless. FB is slightly more personal, and obviously not anonymous, but equally vapid.
I completely agree that it means nothing. Or even less if no evidence is provided to show that it even happened in the way the OP states.

And further point out that the most it shows about this psychic (if the story is accurate and true) is that he is a dick. It says nothing about his ability (or inability) as a psychic therefore his profession is kind of irrelevant.

sadhatter
16th January 2011, 08:49 AM
What silly responses. Evidence... HAHHAHAHA. Why would anyone make up a story like this? If you think it didn't happen, then g ood for you. If you do, then good for you. It was a stupid threat by a stupid guy. I actually felt bad the guy got so angry, and apologised to him. I think it would be equally stupid of me to actually save his messages or turn him in to the police. The guy doesn't even know me, and I don't know him. He had a momentary fit of anger and said some stupid things I'm sure he didn't even mean. No one that threatens someone on the internet is serious about it. I had someone that lived close to me threaten me a few years ago about building a commercial structure near his house. I did take it to the police and make a report, the cop that took the report gave me the impression he thought it was silly and they never even called the guy. That I took seriously. This dipstick Fleming kid is a joke. No one could take his little anger fit seriously enough to tell the authorities. You people need to find better things to do than to be so fearful. Sorry I posted on this ridiculous site. What a bunch of dorks you guys are. HAHAHAHAHAH

You seem to have gotten this wrong, this is a skeptics forum not a " Skeptical if we don't like what your saying " forum. We require evidence from everyone , not just those we dislike.

Mirrorglass
16th January 2011, 09:07 AM
You seem to have gotten this wrong, this is a skeptics forum not a " Skeptical if we don't like what your saying " forum. We require evidence from everyone , not just those we dislike.

Oh yeah? I'd like to see some proof of that.

Jerk.






;)

sadhatter
16th January 2011, 09:51 AM
Oh yeah? I'd like to see some proof of that.

Jerk.






;)

http://forums.randi.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=6772570

lol

Furcifer
16th January 2011, 10:34 AM
I completely agree that it means nothing. Or even less if no evidence is provided to show that it even happened in the way the OP states.


If you don't believe it happened the way the OP said, then there is no evidence to bring to the police anyways. So suggesting the OP do so is contradictory. If you do believe it, it's still kinda nerdy to think you could go to the police because someone called you a name on the internet.

What's the OP gonna do, go to the cyber police and have them back trace it because Chris Flemming dun goofed? :D

I Ratant
16th January 2011, 10:41 AM
Well he's got a point, I don't think the police would do much but laugh at you for bringing in a screen capture of threats from some internet tough guy. It's like reporting your neighbour to the cops for downloading movies off the internet. Pretty dorky thing to do.
.
That kind of thing ran a nice couple out of here.
We all got a letter from the Kansas City Police department... at least that was the letter head, about child porn.
And, we are in California!
I talked to the couple, and it was the result of hatred about an inter-racial marriage by some of the inlaws.

Stray Cat
16th January 2011, 10:49 AM
If you don't believe it happened the way the OP said, then there is no evidence to bring to the police anyways. So suggesting the OP do so is contradictory.
What I was actually suggesting and what you are suggesting I was suggesting are two different things completely.

I haven't said I don't believe him, I (and others) simply pointed out that to be taken seriously, he would have to provide evidence... there is no contradiction except your imagined one.

If you do believe it, it's still kinda nerdy to think you could go to the police because someone called you a name on the internet.
Yes like it was nerdy of the Doncaster airport staff to go to the police to report a stupid internet twitter post.

What's the OP gonna do, go to the cyber police and have them back trace it because Chris Flemming dun goofed? :D
No, he'll most likely just realise that he's actually come out of his little foray into the jref forum looking a bigger dick than the psychic he was trying to make look like a dick and post the same unevidenced claims in other places around the internet where more credulous people may lap it up and join in with his revenge game... which like I already said, has nothing to do with the guy being a psychic at all.

So why should the claim "this guy threatened me" be treat any different from any other claim made on this forum?

applecorped
16th January 2011, 10:54 AM
What silly responses. Evidence... HAHHAHAHA. Why would anyone make up a story like this? If you think it didn't happen, then g ood for you. If you do, then good for you. It was a stupid threat by a stupid guy. I actually felt bad the guy got so angry, and apologised to him. I think it would be equally stupid of me to actually save his messages or turn him in to the police. The guy doesn't even know me, and I don't know him. He had a momentary fit of anger and said some stupid things I'm sure he didn't even mean. No one that threatens someone on the internet is serious about it. I had someone that lived close to me threaten me a few years ago about building a commercial structure near his house. I did take it to the police and make a report, the cop that took the report gave me the impression he thought it was silly and they never even called the guy. That I took seriously. This dipstick Fleming kid is a joke. No one could take his little anger fit seriously enough to tell the authorities. You people need to find better things to do than to be so fearful. Sorry I posted on this ridiculous site. What a bunch of dorks you guys are. HAHAHAHAHAH

Are you sure about that?

Sledge
16th January 2011, 11:08 AM
Can the title of this thread be changed to "Handbags at dawn on Facebook" so as to more accurately indicate its contents?

sadhatter
16th January 2011, 11:35 AM
If you don't believe it happened the way the OP said, then there is no evidence to bring to the police anyways. So suggesting the OP do so is contradictory. If you do believe it, it's still kinda nerdy to think you could go to the police because someone called you a name on the internet.

What's the OP gonna do, go to the cyber police and have them back trace it because Chris Flemming dun goofed? :D

there is a difference between calling someone a name and threatening them with death.

I know of, personally someone who went to court over threatening someone with death online. Laws don't suddenly end because your behind a keyboard.

Fnord
16th January 2011, 01:36 PM
I think the OP now realizes that he's been pwn'd by teh 7331 crowd.

wasapi
16th January 2011, 03:58 PM
I believe that the OP picked up his ball and took it home, kicking at the dirt the entire way. Expectations weren't met. No one jumped up and clapped while giving a standing ovation at both his awesomeness and masculnity.

Instead, me and my little brain, as well as others - you know who you are-wanted to make sure the story was accurate and truthful.

Now, this of course is speculation. But I don't believe the OP was just hesitant to show the psychics PM. I believe the OP didn't want us to read what he wrote to the so-called psychic. I wonder why that would be?

Oh well. Oh - wait - I forgot something . . . HAHAHAHA

There.

Julia

desertgal
16th January 2011, 05:22 PM
Instead, me and my little brain, as well as others - you know who you are-wanted to make sure the story was accurate and truthful.


Not me. I'd just like to know how the OP's exchange of threats with Fleming has anything to do with skepticism or critical thinking.

Seems rather a waste to me-he had an opportunity to insert some rational argument in his one on one exchange with Fleming and, instead, he responded with a childish "neiner" pseudo threat.

Way to go, dude. I bet Fleming feels thoroughly chastened now. Probably reconsidering his psychic career altogether, I'm sure. :rolleyes:

Furcifer
16th January 2011, 05:25 PM
there is a difference between calling someone a name and threatening them with death.

I know of, personally someone who went to court over threatening someone with death online. Laws don't suddenly end because your behind a keyboard.

That may be case I don't know you haven't provided any evidence, as it stands it's just a made up story.
Regardless of this incident, people suggesting someone go to the police because of an internet tough guy is just dorky. If the actual person that received the threat didn't feel threatened your just projecting your insecurities on someone.

Furcifer
16th January 2011, 05:46 PM
I haven't said I don't believe him, I (and others) simply pointed out that to be taken seriously, he would have to provide evidence... there is no contradiction except your imagined one.

Sure there is, think about it. If you don't believe he has any evidence, why would you tell him to run to the police with it?


Yes like it was nerdy of the Doncaster airport staff to go to the police to report a stupid internet twitter post.

No matter what you say there's a difference between willfully putting an entire airport and some unwitting people in "danger" because of a threat, and putting yourself in "danger" because of a threat.


No, he'll most likely just realise that he's actually come out of his little foray into the jref forum looking a bigger dick than the psychic he was trying to make look like a dick and post the same unevidenced claims in other places around the internet where more credulous people may lap it up and join in with his revenge game... which like I already said, has nothing to do with the guy being a psychic at all.

Doubtful. I think he made his intentions clear. I doubt if he'll be back to this forum for the reasons he stated. You can try to put any spin on it you'd like, the evidence suggests otherwise.


So why should the claim "this guy threatened me" be treat any different from any other claim made on this forum?

So are you going to tattle on the members who said they smoke pot too? Hmmm. There are plenty of indiscretions mentioned on the forum all the time. You'd get tired of running to the cyber police every time someone mentioned them :)

Squeegee Beckenheim
17th January 2011, 12:35 AM
Regardless of this incident, people suggesting someone go to the police because of an internet tough guy is just dorky. If the actual person that received the threat didn't feel threatened your just projecting your insecurities on someone.

God forbid I be dorky and insecure. Consider me suitably chastened.

Normal Dude
17th January 2011, 12:45 AM
... but he should be careful who he threatens because I was a professional fighter and much bigger than him ...

Let me guess, you were also a SEAL as well.

Furcifer
17th January 2011, 01:34 AM
God forbid I be dorky and insecure. Consider me suitably chastened.

I wouldn't worry about it, nobody could be as dorky as they sound around here at times. Still, like I mentioned in another thread, it's no wonder there are so few female members. :p

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 05:38 AM
Sure there is, think about it. If you don't believe he has any evidence, why would you tell him to run to the police with it?
But I haven't said I don't believe him. So stop with the circular argument and form a logical one.

No matter what you say there's a difference between willfully putting an entire airport and some unwitting people in "danger" because of a threat, and putting yourself in "danger" because of a threat.
There is no evidence that anyone was in danger or even in "danger" in either case. However, there is plenty of evidence that no one was in danger from an accountant who was annoyed with his plane being cancelled because of snow and put a twitter post on his own twitter feed (he didn't send it to the airport, it was reported to them by a third party).
So despite their being differences which I acknowledge, you deny the similarities.

Doubtful. I think he made his intentions clear. I doubt if he'll be back to this forum for the reasons he stated. You can try to put any spin on it you'd like, the evidence suggests otherwise.
Yes, he stated:
Sorry I posted on this ridiculous site. What a bunch of dorks you guys are. HAHAHAHAHAH And
Oh, and if you are having trouble wrapping your tiny brains around the fact that Fleming is a hot head and threatened me, go get your own proof. Give a hard time, and watch what he does. Don't believe me. Go get your own evidence.Which to me sounds like his intention is to get other credulous people to threaten this psychic because we are all "dorks" for not taking his word and had the audacity to ask for some evidence.

So are you going to tattle on the members who said they smoke pot too? Hmmm. There are plenty of indiscretions mentioned on the forum all the time. You'd get tired of running to the cyber police every time someone mentioned them :)
I was referring to the amount of unsupported claims made on this forum, not reporting people to the police. :rolleyes:

Furcifer
17th January 2011, 06:20 AM
But I haven't said I don't believe him. So stop with the circular argument and form a logical one.

Perhaps you could point out where I did...



Yah, thought so. I just said such accusations were made in the thread, not that you made them. I don't know where you got this idea? Maybe you should go over the thread again and check to make sure.


So despite their being differences which I acknowledge, you deny the similarities.

No, no, I see the similarities. Both are stupid things to do.


Which to me sounds like his intention is to get other credulous people to threaten this psychic because we are all "dorks" for not taking his word and had the audacity to ask for some evidence.

I got the impression the seriousness of going to the police over some psychic saying they were going to send a hitman after you was ridiculous, and that's why he said people were dorks. And it is. To think some FB psychic has hired goons to pop a cap in yah, funny stuff.


I was referring to the amount of unsupported claims made on this forum, not reporting people to the police. :rolleyes:

Gotcha. I think however the OP was just posting for lolz, so "Why so serious?"

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 06:33 AM
Gotcha. I think however the OP was just posting for lolz, so "Why so serious?"
Because there's the Forum Community sub forum for non seriousness? ;)

I don't think anyone took him seriously... did they?

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 06:39 AM
Perhaps you could point out where I did...



Yah, thought so. I just said such accusations were made in the thread, not that you made them. I don't know where you got this idea? Maybe you should go over the thread again and check to make sure.
Yes, I've just been over the thread again and no one else said they didn't believe him either.

Furcifer
17th January 2011, 08:03 AM
Yes, I've just been over the thread again and no one else said they didn't believe him either.

You don't understand what "Evidence?" implies in light of the anecdote the OP told?

It's not really that hard, if someone tells you a story, and you say "evidence" you've implied you don't believe the story and require proof to validate the statement. It's pretty straightforward.:confused:

As for the question of "serious", I'd say yes they did. Serious enough to run to the police for help from the big bad psychic man's hitman.

Well I should clarify that, at the very least the OP did. He's a new member and probably didn't realize if you say the sky is blue around here someone is bound to require evidence of that claim. There's a sliding scale of what people consider extraordinary around here :D

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 08:24 AM
You don't understand what "Evidence?" implies in light of the anecdote the OP told?
Of course I do.

It's not really that hard, if someone tells you a story, and you say "evidence" you've implied you don't believe the story and require proof to validate the statement. It's pretty straightforward.:confused:
Asking to validate an anecdote with evidence doesn't imply that a story is not believed. In the same way that not asking for evidence necessarily implies a story is believed. What it shows is an interest to verify the facts as accurately as possible in order to move forward with any discussion of the story. If respondents are to offer accurate advice or opinions, it is important to be in possession of accurate facts isn't it?
I neither believed, nor disbelieved his OP. I didn't even comment in the thread until I responded to your inaccurate post about authorities not taking internet threats seriously.

As for the question of "serious", I'd say yes they did. Serious enough to run to the police for help from the big bad psychic man's hitman.
Running to the police is just as good an idea as running to a internet forum and shooting your mouth off. Unless your agenda is to 'shoot your mouth off' without having to provide any evidence of the anecdote you have just told.

Well I should clarify that, at the very least the OP did. He's a new member and probably didn't realize if you say the sky is blue around here someone is bound to require evidence of that claim. There's a sliding scale of what people consider extraordinary around here :D
The OP also said:
Been lurking a long time. Had to sign up to share this one.
So taking this statement on face value, he knows the way things work already... and yet he still managed to break forum rules and post a personal attack on someone, that was not based upon general scepticism or the paranormal in his OP.
He was trolling and no one really took him seriously. :)

Pup
17th January 2011, 08:36 AM
I got the impression the seriousness of going to the police over some psychic saying they were going to send a hitman after you was ridiculous, and that's why he said people were dorks. And it is. To think some FB psychic has hired goons to pop a cap in yah, funny stuff.

Well, I can see how it would be useful to react that way, because when used right, it's not a reaction of: ooh, I'm scared, mommy save me.

It's a reaction of: Look, I'm not interested in playing your game of who's the toughest bully on the playground. I expect you to take what I say seriously and treat me as a fellow adult, just as I do for you. So, now you've made a criminal threat that's a felony [cite the law] in both our states. Are you wanting to accept the consequences, or would you rather start over and discuss this topic rationally [or whatever interaction you want from them]?

It puts the other person in a position of needing to man up and respond seriously, or slink away. As the cliche says, we teach people how to treat us.

I've used it a couple times to put internet bullies in their place, and it works quite well. Contacting the police is irrelevant and, unless you believe the threat is actually cause for alarm, unnecessary. It's all in the attitude of how you let the other person know they're not in control, so they need to play your game, and in your game, they just made a wrong move.

The problem is, you can't suddenly switch, after indulging in playground games yourself, and expect anybody to do anything but laugh at you. Everything you said and did up to then has to lead up to it, so the person has to totally believe that, unlike idly bragging about who's the better fighter, you really would follow through and he's now playing on a whole different level.

Unfortunately, the OP clearly wasn't in any position to be able to use it effectively.

Checkmite
17th January 2011, 08:39 AM
I would recommend that, if someone identifiable tries to one-up or intimidate you my threatening your life online, you report him to law enforcement whether you are in fact afraid or insecure or not.

sadhatter
17th January 2011, 09:06 AM
That may be case I don't know you haven't provided any evidence, as it stands it's just a made up story.
Regardless of this incident, people suggesting someone go to the police because of an internet tough guy is just dorky. If the actual person that received the threat didn't feel threatened your just projecting your insecurities on someone.

I was calling out an internet troll, was the personal attack really necessary?

Hellbound
17th January 2011, 09:23 AM
Let me guess, you were also a SEAL as well.

I was a SEAL once.

But really, I'd had a LOT to drink that night, and the costume was just laying there on the bed, I mean...I didn't really know what I was doing...

:D

I Ratant
17th January 2011, 09:48 AM
I wouldn't worry about it, nobody could be as dorky as they sound around here at times. Still, like I mentioned in another thread, it's no wonder there are so few female members. :p
.
Yeah, I wonder about that.
What is there about us dorks that scares them off?

Eric D
17th January 2011, 10:23 AM
If you're a professiona fighter I think the best thing to do would be to post his threat on your facebook account for your 4000 followers, formally accept his offer for an organised fight at a time and place of his choosing (maybe your gym), and contact local media outlets to drum up some publicity.

No need to place a complaint, just tell him you're happy to discuss "mano-a-mano" if he wants. Fairies optional.

I second this.

Furcifer
17th January 2011, 10:25 AM
The OP also said:

So taking this statement on face value, he knows the way things work already... and yet he still managed to break forum rules and post a personal attack on someone, that was not based upon general scepticism or the paranormal in his OP.
He was trolling and no one really took him seriously. :)

I missed that. It might make it worse though, I mean then he knew how geeky the forum could be and was shocked at how geeky it really is :jaw-dropp

I disagree however, I think they took him much too seriously. It was just an anecdote. An anecdote of...murder (to be read in an appropriate spooky voice)

ETA- this would be way better if it were about Sylvia Brown. just sayin

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 11:04 AM
ETA- this would be way better if it were about Sylvia Brown. just sayin
It would have been a lot better if it was about the inability of Fleming to be psychic but yes, insert any psychic name in there. :)

Squeegee Beckenheim
17th January 2011, 11:12 AM
I wouldn't worry about it, nobody could be as dorky as they sound around here at times.

For the record, I was being sarcastic.

Furcifer
17th January 2011, 11:29 AM
It would have been a lot better if it was about the inability of Fleming to be psychic but yes, insert any psychic name in there. :)

What would happen if he threatened to channel a spirit to kill him? Now that would be interesting. I don't know if believing spirits are capable of murder is enough to prosecute him or what. Charge him for issuing threats and see how long he believes he's psychic.

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 11:45 AM
What would happen if he threatened to channel a spirit to kill him? Now that would be interesting. I don't know if believing spirits are capable of murder is enough to prosecute him or what. Charge him for issuing threats and see how long he believes he's psychic.
I heard of a case (but I have no references so take it as pure anecdote) about a magician working the Magic Castle who did a torn and restored card trick using glitter which he referred to as 'pixie dust' (in order to reinforce the magical element). At one show the woman from the audience who was helping him by selecting card accidentally got glitter on her expensive outfit. She complained about the cost of dry cleaning it and said she would sue for the expenses, adding words to the effect of "and it will probably cost a lot more to get pixie dust out because it's probably something the cleaners don't have much experience with" :)

Also in the (generic) 'olden days', cursing someone by use of spirits would have seen them up before the Witchfinder general in no time at all. I don't think it's actually illegal to make such hollow threats now (almost certainly in the UK as far as I know), though inciting violence against someone is, I don't know if inciting spirits to cause violence would be seriously entertained by any UK court.

23_Tauri
17th January 2011, 03:28 PM
Also in the (generic) 'olden days', cursing someone by use of spirits would have seen them up before the Witchfinder general in no time at all. I don't think it's actually illegal to make such hollow threats now (almost certainly in the UK as far as I know), though inciting violence against someone is, I don't know if inciting spirits to cause violence would be seriously entertained by any UK court.
It depends on the spirits they were using. A few too many drams of weasel whisky, distilled from the finest Highland weasels, might incite an unsavoury character to violence:

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/debs711/Weaselwhisky2-2.jpg

MatildaGage
17th January 2011, 03:33 PM
That's true. Unless, of course, the actual response was something in the nature of "Hahaha you think you could take me I'm a professional fighter loser I'd beat you to pulp come on try it big boy you're a loser HAHAHA!"

Then I could see why contacting the police would be a bad idea.
If you had said, "try it pal you're a loser HAHAHA", that would have sounded so much tougher.

:D

Stray Cat
17th January 2011, 03:49 PM
It depends on the spirits they were using. A few too many drams of weasel whisky, distilled from the finest Highland weasels, might incite an unsavoury character to violence:

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p133/debs711/Weaselwhisky2-2.jpg
Reported for infringement of copyright! :D


Kidding

23_Tauri
17th January 2011, 04:11 PM
Reported for infringement of copyright! :D
:eek:



:scared:



:faint:


Kidding
:relieved:

Squeegee Beckenheim
18th January 2011, 01:13 AM
If you had said, "try it pal you're a loser HAHAHA", that would have sounded so much tougher.

:D

You're right, "big boy" is a little bit camp, isn't it?

laughingoutloud
4th May 2011, 04:25 PM
I found one of the messages ho sent on fb for all you doubters that said I was making this up. I wish I could find the good one.

Between You and Christopher Fleming
November 27, 2010 at 11:34am Report
You have some serious ego issues and no respect for anyone. Best of luck you are plainly an ******* and karma will deal with you. .Back to MessagesEdit Subscriptions.

Squeegee Beckenheim
5th May 2011, 01:14 AM
I've found a message from Father Christmas, which will prove to everybody that he exists.

Between You and Father Christmas
December 24th, 2010 at 11:34am Report
You're completely awesome, Squeegee, you're definitely on my good boy list this year. See you tomorrow. Don't forget the saucer of milk. .Back to MessagesEdit Subscriptions.

See? Absolute, concrete, irrefutable proof. Want to see my proof of the existence of God?

sadhatter
5th May 2011, 08:48 AM
I found one of the messages ho sent on fb for all you doubters that said I was making this up. I wish I could find the good one.

Between You and Christopher Fleming
November 27, 2010 at 11:34am Report
You have some serious ego issues and no respect for anyone. Best of luck you are plainly an ******* and karma will deal with you. .Back to MessagesEdit Subscriptions.

This worked out really well for your last time.

A selection of unverifiable text does not constitute proof. Why not a screenshot with your personal information blacked out?