Fezmid

They didn't know who owned it at first -- Gizmodo bought the phone, posted about it, and hunted down the rightful owner. They then returned the phone when asked. They didn't steal it -- and the phone was a huge news story (heck, it was even posted on a Bills message board!). They have no right to seize any of his stuff.

Ummm, wasn't Friday night an elimination game? And didn't we win 4-1.... Or are you just cherry picking the stats that make you look smart...?

I agree, to an extent. The issue, however, is that Facebook (in this example) keeps changing the rules to try and trick users into revealing more information than they want. When I first signed up, I specifically made everything locked down. Then Facebook did some sort of an update and changed the default settings to "open" -- so I had to lock them down again (I have no idea how long they were open for). Now they're "opening" this up to 3rd party vendors, again without permission from the user. You should be forced to opt-in -- and I thought we had laws on the books requiring that, but maybe not... I can't speak for AOL or Yahoo, but Google gets its revenue from ads. They have automated processes that scan your emails for keywords, then present ads based on that. They (allegedly) don't share any of that information, nor do they examine your emails or keep records of them -- it's completely autonomous.

http://w2.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/how-op...ersonalization/ http://www.eff.org/press/mentions/2010/4/21

Here's more details, including the warrant: http://gizmodo.com/5524843/police-seize-ja...chens-computers

Time to switch to Dish/DirecTV

Yeah, this seems completely ludicrous to me and I can't believe they'd be allowed to take everything he owned, especially when the article says he GAVE IT BACK WHEN ASKED! WTF?

So you're saying it's RayFinkle's problem?

Is that Center Ice's problem? Or does CBC just not broadcast in HD? I don't know...

Thanks for that - was going to go barefoot, but now that you mention it, that would probably not be a fun 5 mile walk.

Let the Right One In.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=5132815 Explains Belanger: "I knew I was in trouble, but what are you going to do? It's the playoffs."

We can both still leave feedback. Well, with the new eBay rules, HE can leave feedback, I can only leave POSITIVE feedback. "I'm POSITIVE that this buyer scammed me."

That's very accurate... http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nhl/news/story?id=5131588

I sure the hell wouldn't trade Lynch and our 4th for an upgrade in the 4th... Ten got ripped off.

Seattle/Ten also swapped picks in the 6th round... Seattle receives: LenDale White DT Kevin Vickerson 4th round pick (111) 6th round pick (185) Titans receive: 4th round pick (104) 6th round pick (176) Wow, that seems pretty one-sided...

Wow, that seems like a crappy deal for Ten...

Yeah, but apparently being accommodating isn't helping anything -- as he had his lawyer friend send a nasty-gram while the eBay return process was in full swing.

True - unless he gives me negative feedback saying that the item is broken. Then who's going to buy it from me?

Stupid would be not knowing how it works and returning it because of that. But he didn't - he complained about it for 40 days, and THEN filed to return it. How convenient. Come on, you have to admit it's rather funny that he's sending me threatening letters from a lawyer. The last guy who did that to me ended up losing $750 in court (an old landlord, who was also trying to take advantage of me).

Yeah, I looked again and I think you're right - but it's not entirely clear. Regardless, the guy did screw me over by "borrowing" the scanner to finish his project so I have a right to be pissed.

Well, the signature had an extra "i" in there too.... Actually, after looking closer, maybe the signature doesn't have that extra i. Cool site though!

Potentially good news: "The game ended with a melee in front of the Buffalo bench and five players were penalized. Bruins top defenseman Zdeno Chara was called for an instigator penalty, which if not rescinded will force him to miss Game 6." http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/recap?gameId=300423002

Thanks for the support, everyone! One week to go!

The saga continues!!! So last time we met, I told everyone that I agreed to take the scanner back (despite the fact that I know it worked). Dude shipped it back via USPS without delivery confirmation. I've since found that if I were to say I never received it - he'd be out his money because eBay/PayPal require signatures on anything valued over $250. I actually did receive it yesterday though, and despite the devil on my shoulder telling me to screw the guy, my parents raised me to do the right thing. So yesterday I connected the scanner up to my PC, reinstalled the software (I built a new water-cooled PC and reinstalled my old PC for my wife), booted it up... And everything worked fine. Just like I predicted. I did 5 scans and there were no errors, no lines in the negatives (I knew there was a reason he never sent me any images -- only sent me a picture of the screen from his camera), etc. However I did note that he broke the negative cartridge. One of the plastic tabs was broken off, and it wasn't like that before.... It's only cosmetic, and it still works, but that still blows. However it gets even better!!! Today I also got a letter from his LAWYER! It's the lawfirm of "Burwick & Dynice, P.C." Interestingly, it says that "Douglas L Burwick" is a partner, but the letter is signed by "Douglas L. Buriwick." I smell shenanigans... You can see the whole letter here: http://www.thevfl.com/LawyerLetter.pdf Letter was written on April 15th, and wasn't actually postmarked until the 20th. Dude opened up his dispute with eBay (forcing the return) on the 13th... The way the letter's written (especially the sentence that begins with, "We are hereby demanding...") makes it really hard to take seriously, especially since it's hard to believe that the lawfirm would have a Douglas L Burwick AND a Douglas L Buriwick working for the same firm! I'm SOOOO very tempted to say, "Screw you dude, scanner works, take it back" but I know that would not work with eBay. I'm also tempted to send a video to the "lawyer" showing that the scanner works fine... But again, what would that gain? Oh well, just figured I'd share. Once I refund the money, I have no idea if this moron is going to keep it going or not. I don't know that I'm going to do business on eBay anymore -- the rules are completely in favor of the buyer and sellers have absolutely no recourse. EDIT: What's the difference between an "attorney at law" and a "counsellor at law?" Because the letter is from "counsellor," which doesn't sound very scary to me...