Sometimes, with some people…extra precautions are necessary when documenting very dangerous levels of stupidity.
And by dangerous I mean “handling nitroglycerin” dangerous. The kind of dangerous that fear pee-soaked, sandy vagina, nutshuffling penises will delete without warning in a sudden explosion of rank cowardice.
Take this guy, for instance: he might be a world record holder in Twitter cowardice, with the most lost, abandoned or suspended Twitter handles in history. But since he’s a SJW-pussy, Twitter just lets him keep on keepin’ on, as long as his impotent attacks are directed at acceptable targets, even if they are so far out of his intellectual class they might as well be orbiting a different star (and I think that’s everybody who isn’t made of latex and living in a hotel).
This particular DUMBFUCK recently peed himself in an effort to show how the lawsuit in which he is currently sinking fast as a defendant will hinge on HOW TWITTER WORKS rather than on HOW A CONTRACT WORKS.
The reason he wants to argue about Twitter and not about contracts is painfully obvious to anyone with a double digit IQ.
But that’s not the purpose of this post.
The purpose of this post is to explore the reasons why Zombies like myself take screen caps of people’s tweets.
In three simple words: “Because they’re cowards.”
The image you see above is a screencap of a tweet. It’s STOLEN. (shhh! our little secret…)
I made an image file of it, and uploaded it to an image hosting site.
Why would I do that?
So I could EMBED the URL of the tweet underneath it when I included the image in this post. You’ll notice that the cursor changes because the image is a link. Click it, if you want to go to a DUMFUCK Twitter account.
So there must be some advantage to doing this, right?
Indeed there is!
If you were an enterprising zombie, and you chose to delve into the archives on this site, you would find no small number of posts that make somewhat less sense now than they did when they were first published. The reason for this is that I followed the Twitter terms of service and embedded a tweet in the post.
And then the owner of the tweet (GUESS WHO?!?) deleted the tweet, and often the entire account, because he figured out that he might get in trouble for it, and that if he deleted the whole thing the trouble would vanish. Kind of like the old “Family Circus” cartoons:
What I have done – what is necessary to do with someone who refuses to produce documents in discovery – is retain an image of the original tweet, so that certain nutshuffling footlong lovers who enjoy watching men fellate other men
can’t delete the evidence of their perfidy and later deny it ever happened.
So you can call it theft if you like, but wouldn’t it just be easier to use the term that a certain DUMBFUCK himself favors: