Post: #126

(10-23-2014 10:52 PM)Ollave Wrote:  The comment sections of ROK are being porn bombed, I assume it's related
Roosh, you may want to look into it.

The irony here is that the most active visitors for the comment sections are probably angry SJW/feminists looking to get their snarky remarks in.

So they are the ones who are getting an eyeful of big fat gaping snatches or whatever. Whoever is doing the porn spamming is "harming" their own with friendly fire.

Post: #127

(10-23-2014 10:52 PM)Ollave Wrote:  The comment sections of ROK are being porn bombed, I assume it's related
Roosh, you may want to look into it.

Meh, we're men. We're hardly going to get the vapours over pictures of naked obese girls. I'll just try to trick my mates into looking.

Post: #128

What articles have you noticed them on?

Post: #129

(10-24-2014 12:20 AM)Billy Chubbs Wrote:  What articles have you noticed them on?

Looks like they're already been removed. It was a bunch of obese women naked, a few trannies. Nothing that would shock anyone who has ever spent a decent amount of time on the internet.

ROK can clean house in a matter of minutes. The Jezebel crew had been complaining for a couple of years about the shock porn in their comments until they had to try and publicly-shame their boss into doing something.

Post: #130

(10-24-2014 12:26 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 12:20 AM)Billy Chubbs Wrote:  What articles have you noticed them on?

Looks like they're already been removed. It was a bunch of obese women naked, a few trannies. Nothing that would shock anyone whose ever come across something like The Other Wiki.

ROK can clean house in a matter of minutes. The Jezebel crew had been complaining for a couple of years about the shock porn in their comments until they had to try and publicly-shame their boss into doing something.

If that was the best they can do to spam us it was pretty pathetic. I found a total of about 4 images, posted by only 2 different accounts - both of which used their real IP addys and legitimate E-mails instead of guerilla mail or some other by the hour re-directory. Laziest troll ever. Our own legitimate commentators troll us better than that.

Post: #131

(10-24-2014 12:09 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 10:52 PM)Ollave Wrote:  The comment sections of ROK are being porn bombed, I assume it's related
Roosh, you may want to look into it.

Meh, we're men. We're hardly going to get the vapours over pictures of naked obese girls. I'll just try to trick my mates into looking.

I reckon we'll live.

(10-24-2014 12:33 AM)Billy Chubbs Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 12:26 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 12:20 AM)Billy Chubbs Wrote:  What articles have you noticed them on?

Looks like they're already been removed. It was a bunch of obese women naked, a few trannies. Nothing that would shock anyone whose ever come across something like The Other Wiki.

ROK can clean house in a matter of minutes. The Jezebel crew had been complaining for a couple of years about the shock porn in their comments until they had to try and publicly-shame their boss into doing something.

If that was the best they can do to spam us it was pretty pathetic. I found a total of about 4 images, posted by only 2 different accounts - both of which used their real IP addys and legitimate E-mails instead of guerilla mail or some other by the hour re-directory. Laziest troll ever. Our own legitimate commentators troll us better than that.

Just the Yoga essay posted today. I thought of Jezebel's little situation previously when I saw it.

If that is the case then obviously these perps aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Probably a few Gender Studies first years working themselves up to have "an encounter" against "The Patriarchy™"

Post: #132

Reply from Marriott:

Quote:Thank you for contacting Marriott. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with information.

Marriott advertises in a wide range of media outlets. Marriott cannot and does not control all elements of programming for any specific media outlet. Placement of a Marriott advertisement on a particular media outlet does not indicate that the programming represents the views of the company.

To be honest, I can't blame them for this stance. But I was still hoping for some results.

Post: #133

(10-24-2014 03:55 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Reply from Marriott:

Quote:Thank you for contacting Marriott. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with information.

Marriott advertises in a wide range of media outlets. Marriott cannot and does not control all elements of programming for any specific media outlet. Placement of a Marriott advertisement on a particular media outlet does not indicate that the programming represents the views of the company.

To be honest, I can't blame them for this stance. But I was still hoping for some results.

Find board members and/or major shareholders of Marriott who would be offended by such advertisements. They have more influence than some schmuck working in consumer relations.

http://investor.shareholder.com/MAR/directors.cfm

Post: #134

(10-23-2014 10:49 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Let's not look too far into the future. One battle at a time.

You do us proud

Post: #135

(10-24-2014 04:14 AM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 03:55 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Reply from Marriott:

Quote:Thank you for contacting Marriott. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with information.

Marriott advertises in a wide range of media outlets. Marriott cannot and does not control all elements of programming for any specific media outlet. Placement of a Marriott advertisement on a particular media outlet does not indicate that the programming represents the views of the company.

To be honest, I can't blame them for this stance. But I was still hoping for some results.

Find board members and/or major shareholders of Marriott who would be offended by such advertisements. They have more influence than some schmuck working in consumer relations.

Ha, if any of the Mormon contingency sitting on the board of directors of Mariott saw that they advertised on a site that has published articles that clearly do not align with their Church's ideology, I am sure they would have been all over it. Sort of odd how these corporations allow these third party advertising entities to just post their logos on any site they please, if that's how it works.

Post: #136

(10-24-2014 04:14 AM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 03:55 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Reply from Marriott:

Quote:Thank you for contacting Marriott. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with information.

Marriott advertises in a wide range of media outlets. Marriott cannot and does not control all elements of programming for any specific media outlet. Placement of a Marriott advertisement on a particular media outlet does not indicate that the programming represents the views of the company.

To be honest, I can't blame them for this stance. But I was still hoping for some results.

Find board members and/or major shareholders of Marriott who would be offended by such advertisements. They have more influence than some schmuck working in consumer relations.

http://investor.shareholder.com/MAR/directors.cfm

Could definitely go after getting some of the Mormon executives of Marriot.

If anyone can point out which executives would be best to message, I'll be sure to message them since the Marriott is opening 3 hotels in my region the next few years

Post: #137

I looked at those board members, I'd say we zero in on that guy Mitt Romney, he looks like he may be Mormon

In all seriousness, I'm still shocked that the shit that they post on Gawker is considered mainstream enough to warrant advertising companies to decide to freely post ads for their corporate sponsors there without hesitation. Like that article I posted above is one of the most vile things I have ever read, reminds me of that Roosh video he just posted on YouTube overlords and how that guy freely talks about inserting fingers up himself yet YouTube doesn't post a parental advisory.