Give people 87 Predator after Free Trial weekend.

#41

Also it’s from the TV version so all swear words will be dubbed by a poor sound alike

2 Likes
#42

People did not preorder them, so it isn’t a solution.

1 Like
#43

Giving Wolf to people who preordered will cause more of an uproar than JH 87.

1 Like
#44

Don’t forget scar aswell. Then We can really rub it in their faces lol

#45

And with a yo-yo!

#46

I dont want a solution I want to rub it in the faces of thr “fake” fans

#47

Thats not a good thing though, if we want to the community to be more divided sure go ahead, but that’s not what we need, we don’t need bragging rights or throwing more salt that doesn’t help anything.

1 Like
#48

Eh. I’m more of a hacky sack guy.

#49

What ET said, we just don’t need the negativity, we have enough things to be annoyed with each other about.

2 Likes
#50

If only it was more strictly moderated.

Free speech doesn’t constitute hate/derogatory speech.

People have that line blurred in this forum sometimes.

#51

Helps weed out the fake fans from the real ones

1 Like
#52

I don’t mind most of the arguments, even the ones that are filled with insults. They’re a kind of forum entertainment. That said, no one should have to be apart of them if they don’t want to.

I only fight with people who want too, generally. If they’re a bigot, well then they asked for it in a less direct way. 😉

1 Like
#53

I’m canadian and I’m nice till provoked xD lolz

1 Like
#54

In America free speech covers all speech even hate speech. It’s important to differentiate normal speech from hate speech.

#55

I’m Canadian too, 😂.

So very polite, until someone brings up releasing JH.

1 Like
#56

No it does not cover all speech, it covers the governments role (or lack there of) in political speech.

Threats are just as illegal in the US as in Canada.
We actually get better protection under Freedom of Expression.

Freedom of expression (section 2) also has a wider-ranging scope than the freedom of speech guaranteed under the U.S. For instance, a form of picketing, though involving speech that might have otherwise been protected, was deemed as disruptive conduct and not protected by the U.S. 1A, but was considered by the SCC in RWDSU v. Dolphin Delivery Ltd. (1986). The SCC would rule the picketing, including the disruptive conduct, as fully protected under section 2 of the Charter , after which section 1 would be used to argue the injunction against the picketing as just.

2 Likes
#57

As long as it doesn’t incite violence it’s covered

#58

No.

#59

So the anti picketing laws in some states, protected by the Supreme Court’s rulings don’t over ride the first Amendment?

Cause if your picketing is disruptive to the economy in the US, your free speech goes out the window man.

#60

That’s more of a public gathering thing

Speech itself is protected.