Jump to content
whoiswhoiam

Do Not Associate With Majstoner.

Recommended Posts

majstoner was a really good friend of mine and i had him watching my house while i was in mexico. he decided it would be a good idea to screw over people who treated him like family. he stole 3,500 -5,000 dollars worth of prime bud and he is trying to sell and trade it. you really should think 2 times before you deal with him. he is a loose cannon and a bad person. if you choose to do business with him its your choice but he stole from who he called a best friend and he will rob you too. i am tracking him now to try to get my goods back. thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it sucks because i trusted him to watch my living plants and my dogs and also to cure my harvest. i was gonna give him some when i got home but that wasn't good enough for him. he has a bad past history of screwing his friends over in one way or another and i should have seen it sooner but hind sight is 20 20. hes a liar and a thief. if you plan to do anything with him watch your back cause hes only out for himself. i hope to get some back but you never know. anyway thanx for the support everyone. i just want to get this out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest OxXGarfieldXxO

Oh this is why he wants his accounts deleted.....

 

And yes he has used more then one account to reply to himself (as I just seen looking up his stats)

 

See...I really should read more, but I just don't have time.

 

Best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hope more than karma gets him!...i am a firm believer in karma! i always live by it! last Saturday i shot a nice 8 pt and my brother shot a 7 pt and the doe they were chasing! i got so caught up in the action i had left my wallet and hunting licenses on the roof of my truck! as i pulled out of the farm my wallet flew off my truck..as soon as i got home i had noticed it was gone, within seconds i got a call from my mother saying she had my wallet..WTF? karma! her neighbor had found it! (this is 15 miles from her house and i hunt three different properties) so when i got my wallet i fount that the money,compassion club cards,dispensary membership cards and hunting licenses were gone!..i took it for what it was and was moving on! today i received a call from my grandfather..a woman had found all of this along the road as she was walking,she called the # on my doe tag! the land owner #(my grandfathers) and i received everything i lost in a sealed envelope tonight! money,cards,everything!...karma! i have this woman's # and if she is a patient i will give her the best med's off of my harvest! and if not, i will be at the local meat market getting her a nice gift certificate that will cover her Christmas dinner!!!!...karma!....keep it alive!

thanks to all the good people.......bigtimm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what the heck?did he just walk out with everything?what did he say about it? sorry to hear about this type of thing,miss placed trust,it just hurts...zzb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about the property or it's value. Even if not insured it's only money. The truly offensive aspect is a friend, or anyone for that matter, invited or not, feeling they have the right to do as they please in the one place my family shall feel safe. There's a word for those folks, SOCIOPATH. They, not cannabis consumers and other non-violent drug offenders, belong in prison for a very, very long time. A sociopathic personality is not a curable illness but a disorder that with intense behavioral therapy and a supervised, controlled evironment can minimize the threat posed to society, especially the vulnerable.

LEO should be as interested in apprehending and charging this individual as you and the rest of us are. Legal medical cannabis consumers will remain second class citizens for some time to come.

 

Geez, we're still working on the civil rights thing started in 1964. DADT?

 

Both of you move in the same social circle? Sure would hope friends would let ya know and return your property. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you asked how he did it so here you go. i have 2 100+ lab dogs and no one would just come in here. we had it in a slot machine that was very heavy. he stole the slot machine with its contents (many fresh jars) and took it out my sliding glass doors the day b4 i got back from mexico. he called me and asked if someone came and picked it up. weird.... then he blamed it on some losers he knows but then we went with him to confront these people and his story changed. then i see the kid for everyday for a year and a half then he just stops calling and comming around. that was enough to prove he was guilty. it is about the friendship because i trusted him like i would trust my other close friends but none of them would ever do this to me. his a psyco and a loser in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is any consolation, or any help to anyone else in future endeavors.....

 

I was robbed 2 years ago, next week.

 

I too, was coming back from vacation. 3 weeks in Australia.

 

My very good friend took care of everything perfectly. I got back, everything was great. I was on Cloud Nine!!!

 

Spoke to a few clients in the week I was back, days before harvest.

 

When asked about whether I had any "OG", I replied to a friend/client "No, but I will here in about a week or so :-)".

 

I got robbed 4 days later, and...........

 

Many months later, accusations abound, I realized I had never heard back from my biggest and best "OG" client....

 

He has never called since........

I learned then, it's not always what people do that communicates their guilt, it's what they don't do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh this is why he wants his accounts deleted.....

 

And yes he has used more then one account to reply to himself (as I just seen looking up his stats)

 

See...I really should read more, but I just don't have time.

 

Best

Obviously the guy is a 1st class a-hole if he did what he is accused of doing. No offense to the OP but couldn't anyone have a beef with someone else on this site and then go post a bunch of libelous things about him here? People are so quick to jump to another's defense when they are charged with a MMA violation but what if that same pt is on here and the victim of mudslinging? I am in no way suggesting that the OP is lying but I don't think this forum should be a place to air this sort of beef.

 

With that said--and again no offense (this time to garfield)--but don't you think it is a little bit presumptuous for a moderator to state for a fact that someone was replying to themselves? Isn't what you really mean that someone utilizing the same IP address was replying to someone else whom used the IP address? That very well could mean a husband was replying to a wife or anyone in the same household or who shares an internet connection were replying to one another. I think as a mod you ought to refrain from making such accusations. If they aren't true then you, as a mod and therefore agent of the MMMA, are exposing the MMMA to liability for libel (written slander) due to damage to reputation.

 

Again, no offense but you ought maybe go back and edit your post to reflect exactly the info you know rather than what you are inferring from the info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously the guy is a 1st class a-hole if he did what he is accused of doing. No offense to the OP but couldn't anyone have a beef with someone else on this site and then go post a bunch of libelous things about him here? People are so quick to jump to another's defense when they are charged with a MMA violation but what if that same pt is on here and the victim of mudslinging? I am in no way suggesting that the OP is lying but I don't think this forum should be a place to air this sort of beef.

 

With that said--and again no offense (this time to garfield)--but don't you think it is a little bit presumptuous for a moderator to state for a fact that someone was replying to themselves? Isn't what you really mean that someone utilizing the same IP address was replying to someone else whom used the IP address? That very well could mean a husband was replying to a wife or anyone in the same household or who shares an internet connection were replying to one another. I think as a mod you ought to refrain from making such accusations. If they aren't true then you, as a mod and therefore agent of the MMMA, are exposing the MMMA to liability for libel (written slander) due to damage to reputation.

 

Again, no offense but you ought maybe go back and edit your post to reflect exactly the info you know rather than what you are inferring from the info.

 

wow, that was pretty bold of you..... coming from a person who has ZERO clue what Garfield has actually seen in those messages where he/she is replying to themself. maybe he isnt being presumptious at all but has 100% red-handed proof? how the hell do you know?

 

timing seems pretty good to me eh? member A steals from member B. member B makes it public..... member A wants his/her accounts deleted??? sure, maybe you are correct, and my assumptions are wrong...... but where does garfields assumptions come into play........ why should they come out of your mouth??

 

he has more abilities than any of us do. he sees more than any of us can see. how long have you been a member here? how long has garfield been here?

 

 

Obviously the guy is a 1st class a-hole if he did what he is accused of doing. No offense to the OP but couldn't anyone have a beef with someone else on this site and then go post a bunch of libelous things about him here?

 

yup, they could. and if werent true, i would be here defending myself..... rather than asking for my accounts to be deleted. maybe thats just me...... i stand up for myself..... but if thats not what he would do..... then why isnt there a slander lawsuit? the criminal in question curled his tail between his legs and ran.

 

I think as a mod you ought to refrain from making such accusations. If they aren't true then you, as a mod and therefore agent of the MMMA, are exposing the MMMA to liability for libel (written slander) due to damage to reputation.

 

i fail to see where any accusations were made from the MMMA??

Oh this is why he wants his accounts deleted.....

 

And yes he has used more then one account to reply to himself (as I just seen looking up his stats)

 

See...I really should read more, but I just don't have time.

 

Best

 

you see any accusations in there? you see any name-calling or slander? word for word?? what do you see?

 

it seems that while we are trying to fix a problem THAT ISNT EVEN OURS............ you try to make more?

 

why i ask? why? didnt you have something better in your life to do than assume things?? garfield has solid back-end mails/posts/account info..... and you have what??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, that was pretty bold of you..... coming from a person who has ZERO clue what Garfield has actually seen in those messages where he/she is replying to themself. maybe he isnt being presumptious at all but has 100% red-handed proof? how the hell do you know?

 

timing seems pretty good to me eh? member A steals from member B. member B makes it public..... member A wants his/her accounts deleted??? sure, maybe you are correct, and my assumptions are wrong...... but where does garfields assumptions come into play........ why should they come out of your mouth??

 

he has more abilities than any of us do. he sees more than any of us can see. how long have you been a member here? how long has garfield been here?

 

 

 

 

yup, they could. and if werent true, i would be here defending myself..... rather than asking for my accounts to be deleted. maybe thats just me...... i stand up for myself..... but if thats not what he would do..... then why isnt there a slander lawsuit? the criminal in question curled his tail between his legs and ran.

 

 

 

i fail to see where any accusations were made from the MMMA??

 

you see any accusations in there? you see any name-calling or slander? word for word?? what do you see?

 

it seems that while we are trying to fix a problem THAT ISNT EVEN OURS............ you try to make more?

 

why i ask? why? didnt you have something better in your life to do than assume things?? garfield has solid back-end mails/posts/account info..... and you have what??

 

Somebody is edgy and a bit defensive. Why don't YOU reread what I wrote???? I didn't jump garfield's @ss. Whether he has a better way of identifying the poster I don't have a clue. See the question mark at the end of my sentence???? Question marks signify what? Oh yeah, a QUESTION!!! It signifies that I was ASKING if all that he was doing was matching up IP addresses. Get it? Comprende'? You're right, he may have access to some sort of hidden camera and he actually saw the guy making the post. Other than that I don't know how anyone could conclusively state that HE made the post! Why dont you get off your high horse.

 

As for how the mmma made accusations--do you know what an agency/principal relationship is? If not look it up before you spout off. If you can't figure it out ask an attorney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen Bubblegrower.

 

I hope you are feeling better.

 

Before Proposition 1 became legal I, too, had a "former friend" rip me off completely and steal all of the plants.

 

Karma is real and came back to bite this worthless POS right in the azz.

 

 

Mizerman

 

p.s. far as I'm concerned, the OP should post Majstoner's real name, and ALL of his personal information on the website. :growl::devil::sword:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i quoted you word for word??? or did you miss that part?

 

maybe YOU BETTER REREAD WHAT YOU WROTE :)

 

No kidding you quoted it---then you proceeded to interpret it in a very twisted way as if I was accusing garfield of something. I was ASKING something NOT accusing. Learn to read.

 

 

As far as your questions, how about you google it and figure it out. Here's a start. (And if you don't mind opening up the MMMA to a lawsuit from some pissed off member then keep it up...no skin off my back.)

 

 

Bloggers & Moderators liable for blog comments

 

Update 2009: This article notes that a blogger has been fined 1.8 million dollars for an article that he allowed to be published on his blog.

 

"The head of a local advertising agency has won $1.8 million in damages after suing an author of a blog - known for its harsh and sometimes crass criticism of elected officials, business leaders and local media - for defamation."

 

Today a blogger must be aware of libel and defamation laws in 190 countries from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. In this Reuters article we see that Sun Microsystems has warned their employee bloggers that embarrassing any Sun customer in a blog is very dangerous:

 

Sun's bloggers also are cautioned to protect corporate secrets and that "using your Web log to trash or embarrass the company, our customers, or your co-workers, is not only dangerous but stupid."

 

According to the web page titled “NOTICE - YOU HAVE BEEN SUED” the blog owner claims that he was sued for comments like these, which he did not write (below is edited to remove the name of defamed party):

 

Some of the opinions are fairly harsh, with some people stating things like:

 

In my opinion, all xxx is is just a bunch of cheep everyday crooks. They should all be in jail.

 

xxx called me today at 4:34am in the morning!!! What the F*@k ! They do not even check the time zones of who they are calling? I line in Hawaii .. Can anything be done to stop these people?!?!

 

This blogger also lists the text of the blogger libel lawsuit, which alleges that the Defendant is responsible for the words of others, in this case because of his alleged malicious intent:

 

15. Also at unknown date or dates, Defendants maliciously published or caused to be published false and defamatory information over the internet concerning Plaintiff and Plaintiff's business.

 

16. Pursuant to Defendant's malicious intent, the publication has been read by the public.

 

17. The false and defamatory matter is calculated to damage Plaintiff's reputation, and at the time Defendants published or caused to be published such false and defamatory information about the Plaintiff over the internet, Defendants knew that the information published was false and defamatory and making such defamatory publication, Defendants acted with malice toward the Plaintiff.

 

 

It's a wide world for the blogger

 

 

 

Blog and forum publishers have been successfully hailed into foreign legal battles, and the current consensus is that the blogger must know the scope of their liability across the planet.

 

 

 

The DMCA was designed to protect web hosting services and ISP's and not web authors. In this article, a retired judge Fadeley notes that offering DMCA protection to bloggers and web authors is a serious loophole in the DMCA, and that new legislation is required to make bloggers and "cyber bullies" responsible for damage to people. See Time for DMCA reform for details.

 

 

 

The “Read My Day” blog site in England has published an excellent warning that suggests that British bloggers are responsible for all comments published into their blogs:

 

 

 

Posting comments on the internet is akin to writing the same comments to the letters page of every major national newspaper in the world. The international scope of blogs mean that claims in any country are possible - territorial limits are a thing of the past.

 

 

 

Bloggers must also be aware of their responsibilities as hosts of discussions where comments are invited from readers. Any defamatory comments made in other posts on the blogger's website may result in the blogger being held responsible for those comments and being sued for libel.

 

 

 

Defamation legislation gives a defence where the 'publisher' (the blogging host) has no knowledge of the defamatory remarks or no reason to suspect the remarks have been made. This gives some protection to Internet Service Providers (ISPs) but very little comfort where the blogger has read and accepted comments on his/her blogging pages. A prudent blogger must exercise editorial control over comments to avoid this liability as a publisher of libel.

 

 

 

Australia has similar laws to England, and this Australian libel web site notes that linking-to or otherwise republishing a libel, is itself a libel:

 

In principle republication of a defamatory statement is itself a libel.

 

It is no defence to say that what is published is merely a repetition of a statement that was previously published and that did not incur prosecution. In principle every person who repeats or republishes a defamatory statement faces the same liability. . .

 

Australian law is an adversarial system, in which a defamatory statement is assumed to be false and must therefore be defended. Truth was allowed as a defence in defamation for first time in the UK under the 1835 Libel Act but - in practice - using that defence can be difficult.

 

To be completely safe, some folks recommend that you turn-off blog comments to ensure that you don't inadvertently publishing a libel on your blog:

 

 

 

However, some jurisdictions agree that the blog owner could be held responsible if they “incited” the defamatory remarks or if they selectively edit or delete the comments.

 

 

 

In the USA, you can be sued for “tortuous interference” if your blog comments defame, encourage harassment or interfere with someone’s normal course of business.

 

 

 

The North Carolina Supreme Court has held that tortious interference with prospective economic advantage occurs when a party interferes with the freedom of contract and “not in the legitimate exercise of defendant's own right, but with design to injure the plaintiff . . ." (see Owens v. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co. of Hickory, N.C., Inc., 330 N.C. 666, 680, 412 S.E.2d 636, 644 (1992)).

 

 

 

This article also notes that in Germany, a forum moderator is responsible for comments that are made in their forum:

 

A Hamburg court has ruled that moderators of internet forums are liable for content posted on their sites. . . The new ruling means if operators do not have enough in-house resources to monitor forums, they should "reduce the scope of their business operations".

 

This court ruling also imposes the burden on forum moderators to approve messages before publishing them, just like any other traditional print publisher:

 

The court held that a publisher would have been able to prevent such incitations by "reviewing the content of the comments before publishing them."

 

 

 

The court clearly did not believe Heise Zeitschriften Verlag's argument that constant reviewing of the content of more than 200,000 comments per month would be an unreasonable burden on the publisher.

 

This article by Alfred C. Frawley notes that allowing employees to blog during work hours can expose the company to liability for a host of civil torts:

 

 

 

“Established case law suggests an employer can be liable for even unauthorized publication of allegations by an employee when that publication occurred in performance of an employee's authorized acts”

 

 

 

Frawley also note that company policies must be very strict regarding blogging, and those companies that allow employees to blog do so at their own peril:

 

 

 

“The fact that the employee chose an improper method of performing his job does not shield the employer from liability and certainly this logic can be applied to blogs where the employer has encouraged legitimate discussion of reliable businesses.”

 

 

 

Finally, Frawley notes that blogs intensify the risk of liability for any company:

 

 

 

“Blogs also may intensify the risk of liability for defamation, copyright and trademark infringement, disclosure of trade secrets or private customer information or other business torts. Even comments posted to a blog by unrelated third parties may rise to claims of corporate liability.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you feeling weak? you look weak :( how about a gatorade and a session answering the questions THAT I ASKED YOU?

Why dont you line up and number your questions in a neat format and after I find my dentures, have a gatorade, and get over the verbal whipping you gave me then maybe I'll skulk back and answer them. That, or you can continue to put me down because of my screenname and get your kicks. Then you can proceed to ban me from the website for pointing out possible issues. Then after that you maybe ought consult with Komorn or some other attorney and decide if the current policy of posting things that could defame people is the best thing to be doing on this website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't for the life of me find where Garfield slandered anyone. Could you please show why what he said is slander in your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't for the life of me find where Garfield slandered anyone. Could you please show why what he said is slander in your opinion?

Can't for the life of ME find where ANYONE said Garfield slandered anyone. Could you please show me where I or anyone else said what he said was slander?

 

Give me a freaking break already. Do people read anymore?

 

All I did was issue warning that a defamation lawsuit is possible if someone were to commit libel. Garfield said:

 

Oh this is why he wants his accounts deleted.....

 

And yes he has used more then one account to reply to himself (as I just seen looking up his stats)

 

See...I really should read more, but I just don't have time.

 

Best

 

 

If you cannot see where there is possible defamation in that post then there is no point in discussing it any further.

 

Libel is written defamation. Libel occurs when you write something about someone as true when it is not. The writing must have a tendency to damage one's reputation. That's it.

 

Writing that someone has used more than one account to reply to themselves is libel if it isn't true. Why? Because it gives the impression that the person in question is deceitful. That, in turn, damages one's reputation. However, if the writing is true then it isn't libelous as truth is an absolute defense to defamation claims. The question becomes, "is the statement true?" Does garfield know the statement is true? I don't know. But I don't know how anyone could know it is true unless they see the person typing the posts. Info that comes from an IP address, even on the same computer, doesn't necessarily come from the SAME PERSON. That's the point. With that said, garfield also made the definitive statement that "this is why he wants his accounts deleted." In other words garfield purported to know for a fact that majstoner committed the alleged acts and further garfield purported to know for a fact that the reason that majstoner wants his accounts deleted is BECAUSE he committed the alleged acts. He didn't say "MAYBE that's why he wants his accounts deleted" and he didn't say "he very well COULD've been replying to his own posts." And I don't need to get into a discussion as to how the alleged act/theft could damage one's rep.

 

As a mod. garfield is an agent of the mmma. Therefore, what garfield says is attributed to the mmma as if the mmma said it. That is what is known as an agency/principal relationship. That's a similar reason why someone can sue a police dept. when a cop does something wrong. The bad behavior is attributed to the principal.

 

With all of THAT said, again, I never wrote garfield defamed the guy so what is with people asserting that I was attacking garfield????? Read what I wrote. Bubblegrower decided to jump in as Don Quixote and challenged something that didn't exist. Then you are taking what bubblegrower said and running with it. All I did was issue a warning that a mod writing things like that could end up causing trouble. Don't take my word for it though, ask a lawyer. Google it. OR just keep engaging in the same behavior and expose the mmma to liability. Again, no skin off my back other than that the mmma doesn't need negative publicity thereby bringing negative publicity to the cause. Of course, I don't need my dues going to defend a defamation lawsuit either...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am not out to start problems with people on here. i just think everyone should know what a spineless peice of crap that rob is. i also would like to prevent him selling any of my stuff on this site. i was the one that told him about the site in the first place. i also know his former caregiver who he signed off with right before i went on vacation. like this was all premeditated. he has no source of income and no way to have meds for sale unless they are mine and he has stolen them. thats the only conclusion i can come up with. he wanted to trade some "gold" and that is exactly what half of my harvest was. i know his family and i plan to take it up with them to see if they all have something to say in the matter. its a real bummer i even have to go threw this. i will have another harvest in a week so its not the end of the world. its just the point. i will ruin whatever rep he has on here if i can. thanx to everyone who supports me. hes a bad dude. just thought everyone should know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they aren't true then you, as a mod and therefore agent of the MMMA, are exposing the MMMA to liability for libel (written slander) due to damage to reputation.

 

This is cut and pasted from your post, you say he is exposing the MMMA to a written slander liability,seems to say he is slandering someone not my words or BGs but yours. I asked a question expecting a civil answer, don't bother replying as I now know all I want about you and what you seem to stand for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...