» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.
Subject: Don't post incriminating pics on MySpace...
Written By: esoxslayer on 06/29/07 at 7:34 pm
Stoopid kid....
http://wbztv.com/topstories/local_story_180090542.html
Subject: Re: Don't post incriminating pics on MySpace...
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 06/29/07 at 8:04 pm
Stoopid kid....
http://wbztv.com/topstories/local_story_180090542.html
Dateline: Nashua. Say no more. I'm a native Granite Stater and this comes as no surprise!
:D
This is nothing new. Before Myspace and digicams people used to send rolls of film to the Fotomat with images of themselves toking bongs and standing next top marijuana plants. And they were all so shocked when the cops came a-knocking!
Having spent more than my share of time---way more--trolling the sewers of the 'net, I'm flabbergasted at how many young women allow themsevles to be videoed/photographed while they (censored censored censored) with (censored) all of their faces.
You'll get married, start a career and a family, but those pics won't disappear!
:o
Subject: Re: Don't post incriminating pics on MySpace...
Written By: philbo on 06/30/07 at 5:26 am
I fail to see why the pictures of him partying were relevant: there was no attempt to show that they came either just before (i.e. so they might in some way have been causal) or after the accident: seems quite possible that they were pictures from some way before that the guy didn't think about deleting. To use them as "evidence" that he wasn't showing remorse is spurious (unless it was proven they were posted after the accident).
i.e. from the article, they weren't *incriminating* pictures at all.