Post: #26

The guy who wrote the letter isn't even affiliated to Facial Abuse, he is just using the incident for publicity.

From his twitter @xxxmonarchy

Quote:For the record, I have no affiliation with the fine folks at Facial Abuse. I was merely using them as a reference in calling out @t_bagles

He is merely manipulating feminists into supporting his porno business.

Post: #27

Is the CEO of a porn company white knighting by outing a customer and not so subtly calling him an attention where?

Extremely odd business move.

EDIT: Read the above post. Just a white knight being a white knight.

Post: #28

While this does have a certain karmic ring to it, overall it's stupid. The guy looks like a dork who will have trouble performing on camera, and rewarding someone for outing your performers is sure to damage Facial Abuse's business.

EDIT: the white knight impostor theory explains everything

Post: #29

(03-07-2014 12:41 AM)dog24 Wrote:  How is this not just another case of white knighting while publicly shaming another male to make some dumb bitch with no morals look good?

Mikecf how do you know he wanted to hurt her just because she was out of her league? Its not like girls these days dont take the my shit don't stink to the extreme right?

I personally wouldnt have bothered doing that, but lets not all act as if some girls dont have whats coming for them, they meanmug guys, yell at them, try and do hit them, they ostracize and bully guys.
And on the other hand you cant even say hi to them without them rolling their eyes, you cant call them out on anything, you obviously cant hit them, you cant ostracize them from a social group. There are no repercusions to their actions.

We always shame fat girls, feminist girls out of touch with reality and we suddenly are against shaming a girl with no morals whatsoever.. come on

Are women really bullying you?

Post: #30

I can look at the kid and tell that he's a sexless dork.

Doesn't get laid.

Plays video games.

Probably belongs to PUA hate and would take any opportunity to fuck over guys like us.

He's revolting and I'm glad he got blown out.

Post: #31

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piVnArp9ZE0

Post: #32

Poor kid is getting set up.

And he ain't even know it.

Post: #33

This is a top marketing move.

IMO if you pay for porn, you don't value your money anyway.

Post: #34

I see it from both sides.

The kid is a sexless dork. I feel sorry for him. He needs game, a style consultation, and a gym membership. Something like RoK. If he said something retarded like "I did it for mens rights!" then we'd have the right to all jump down his throat (Archer: "Phrasing!").

The porn guy is white knighting for profit. The news is calling him a bully while they bully the kid - probably the biggest issue. Everyone involved in this story is terrible in some way, including me/some of you who are playing the role of cackling bystander.

But...

Post: #35

(03-06-2014 11:32 PM)runsonmagic Wrote:  For reference, the man in question, Thomas Bagley.

Post: #36

I thought for a second the porn site owner went white knight and offered the guy 10,000 to get abused himself

Post: #37

No use taking sides here. Everyone involved is retarded.

Feminist porn star who thinks getting fucked will take down the patriarchy.

Sexless beta lashing out by blowing the whistle on a girl he could never fuck and who would otherwise pay him no attention. (MikeCF is right on here)

Business owner betraying his customers trust, and shaming the same male sex drives that he profits off of.

It's impossible to find a sympathetic character here, which means it will never be made into a movie, and thank god for that.

Post: #38

I'm not even going to lie...I would choose Aletta Ocean in a heartbeat

I can only hope that every girl in Hungary looks like her

Post: #39

Don't know if the guy who outed her did it just to intentionally be malicious. Could have been just that he had piece of information that was so juicy that he couldn't help tell other people and it just ended up spreading out through out the frat social network and then eventually to the general population on campus. Or maybe he just loved the idea of being friends with a porn star and wanted to brag about it.

Post: #40

Thomas Bigley...I want a datasheet!

Post: #41

The guy who owns the site is in the wrong here, legally speaking (I'm pretty sure).

When you perform on camera for a Web site or any other media, you become a public figure and are subject to a different set of laws than a private citizen. There is no expectation of privacy. You signed that away.

But when you subscribe to a newspaper, Web site, or other media -- as far as I know -- there is an expectation of privacy. Which would apply to Mr. Bagley.

My guess is that the Facial Abuse site has "small print" that says "we will never pass along your info to third parties, etc." If it does, Bagley has a legal case against the site.

This also sets a dangerous precedent. Can all Web sites now "out" their subscribers with no expectations of legal recourse? Think about that. Not good.

Post: #42

(03-07-2014 02:35 AM)MikeCF Wrote:  I can look at the kid and tell that he's a sexless dork.

Doesn't get laid.

It was a dick move by him, but don't be so harsh. I would say most of us here have at one point spited a girl who rejected us...surely not like this but still. Its obviously not red pill behavior, but we all have to start somewhere.

This kid has the chance of a lifetime. How he answers this letter could establish his street cred for life.

My suggestion: snag a Cialis from Pops and hop on the next plane to LA. Even if he has a tiny dick, accepting his mistake and turning the situation around with a sense of humor will get him some fame pussy.

Maybe this producer will even learn some humility.

Post: #43

Yeah, if he had game, he could play this situation into celebrity and fame. If.

Post: #44

(03-07-2014 05:12 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  The guy who owns the site is in the wrong here, legally speaking (I'm pretty sure).

When you perform on camera for a Web site or any other media, you become a public figure and are subject to a different set of laws than a private citizen. There is no expectation of privacy. You signed that away.

But when you subscribe to a newspaper, Web site, or other media -- as far as I know -- there is an expectation of privacy. Which would apply to Mr. Bagley.

My guess is that the Facial Abuse site has "small print" that says "we will never pass along your info to third parties, etc." If it does, Bagley has a legal case against the site.

This also sets a dangerous precedent. Can all Web sites now "out" their subscribers with no expectations of legal recourse? Think about that. Not good.

DoBA, Kulich (the dude who wrote this letter) is not the owner of "Facial Abuse" (lol) and is not affiliated with it in any way. His insinuation in the letter that Bagley has a subscription to FA is purely speculative. So no breach of trust by that website has occurred. The whole thing is just a little publicity stunt with a touch of white-knighting.

Post: #45

(03-07-2014 04:45 PM)Wutang Wrote:  Don't know if the guy who outed her did it just to intentionally be malicious. Could have been just that he had piece of information that was so juicy that he couldn't help tell other people and it just ended up spreading out through out the frat social network and then eventually to the general population on campus. Or maybe he just loved the idea of being friends with a porn star and wanted to brag about it.

+1
That's what I think too. He watched one of her vids, showed it to a friend, and it spread from there.

Post: #46

(03-07-2014 07:55 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 05:12 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  The guy who owns the site is in the wrong here, legally speaking (I'm pretty sure).

When you perform on camera for a Web site or any other media, you become a public figure and are subject to a different set of laws than a private citizen. There is no expectation of privacy. You signed that away.

But when you subscribe to a newspaper, Web site, or other media -- as far as I know -- there is an expectation of privacy. Which would apply to Mr. Bagley.

My guess is that the Facial Abuse site has "small print" that says "we will never pass along your info to third parties, etc." If it does, Bagley has a legal case against the site.

This also sets a dangerous precedent. Can all Web sites now "out" their subscribers with no expectations of legal recourse? Think about that. Not good.

DoBA, Kulich (the dude who wrote this letter) is not the owner of "Facial Abuse" (lol) and is not affiliated with it in any way. His insinuation in the letter that Bagley has a subscription to FA is purely speculative. So no breach of trust by that website has occurred. The whole thing is just a little publicity stunt with a touch of white-knighting.

Gotcha. I think I can be excused for not knowing the ins and outs (heh) of the Facial Abuse management team.

My mind is boggled that anyone would actually subscribe to a site like this. Their content is so compelling you need to be updated daily on it? Seriously, I would assume that once you've seen one girl get "facially abused" you'd want to move on, but I guess not for some people...

(PS: Looks like this guy went to my old high school! It must have turned into a Beta factory since I ruled those halls -- ha ha.)

Post: #47

the guy making the offer doesnt even own facial abuse, apparently. good counter troll job

Post: #48

The guy who exposed the girl did nothing wrong. If I was the guy, I just wouldn't respond to anything about it.

Post: #49

Talking about the guy who exposed the girl. At my university some guys found out that a lab assistant at our university was a porn star via found her twitter, it went round like wildfire as they made a facebook status, and then people heard about it via a ripple effect.
So about the guy who "blabbed" being some beta who was jealous I don't think is true I think that it probably happened the same way by just guys finding it, then finding it funny then spreading it.

Post: #50

(03-08-2014 03:29 PM)tylerdurden1993 Wrote:  Talking about the guy who exposed the girl. At my university some guys found out that a lab assistant at our university was a porn star via found her twitter,

Seriously how dumb can you be. If you have a regular job and need to be professional, don't make a social media profile. And wear a wig or something, some plausible deniability please.

I was raised to do the right thing, because you might get caught.

Just seems like everyone else is raised with "you will never get caught."