Agreed and to post things from X/Twitter/Facebook here which is not confirmed and can be totally fake.chrisc90 wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 23:54I agree should be there to discuss, but the greater problem is the nature of which some people comment. Libel, slander and defamation are probably VERY borderline here. Don't forget you have journalists getting emails off lawyers asking to remove content, not to post anything etc. There is nothing at all stopping those people from coming after forum owners, or even posters about their comments or sharing the content. Those people could quite easily bankrupt sites like this or even go after people who are posting. There are comments about a person who's a multi-millionaire working for multi-billion pound companies. Spending a few quid on lawyers wont trouble them to come after people.Richard Casto wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 23:32I lurk here on a regular basis and post very infrequently. I tend to agree that I see no reason to lock the thread as long as it remains on topic and doesn't run afoul of forum rules. The topic is polarizing as potential negative outcomes might conflict (or not) with forum participant allegiances which can result in strong opinions and disagreements. But I think what is happening, potential outcomes and implications of those outcomes are on topic and newsworthy. I would hate to see it locked while the situation is still dynamic.
Richard
The whole topic is no longer a little playground joke, its massively serious now and across a worldwide platform being discussed worldwide. Actually quite surprised there has been no comment from Steven on this matter and the thread about what can/cannot be discussed, if at all, to avoid dragging the forum into legal battles.
At the top of the page Under "Horner" click the wrench dropdown, and check unsubscribe from topic. You will no longer get unread notifications!
Yeah this is a basic principle of legislation. Section 230 in the US.denyall wrote:No one on a forum or Reddit or Twitter is getting sued.... None of us have any authority whatsoever....
Fourms are generally protected from litigation related to their subscribers posts... Digital street corner and all that jazz...
Edit: https://itif.org/publications/2021/02/2 ... liability/
I have seen the entire content of the Google Drive folder. If the content is indeed fake, then it's a darn well-made fake. On a technical level, there's nothing there that suggests this is fake. In my mind, the only way I can see this being fake is the way Horner communicates in those texts... juvenile at best.
There are plenty of legal reasons for horner not to say they're fake. Defamation law is complex and fickle and it's not always worth the risk. Especially if you've been cleared of wrongdoing.stonehenge wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 20:35I agree. This is not the statement you would put out if these were just fake. Responding to them, especially without stating that they are not accurate, just gives them credibility. Would be very strange if they aren’t real.bonjon1979 wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 20:29I have always denied the allegations, is very different from those aren’t real. If they were fake he’d say so. The allegations were of inappropriate and controlling behaviour. Perhaps the ‘investigator’ concluded it’s not inappropriate to send dick pics to your assistant if she welcomes said pics. I suggest most corporations would take issue with company phones being used jn such a way, but red bull are the cool distributors tho right so….Joe Hudson wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 20:09
That's odd phrasing considering several jurnos have confirmed they have these messages
I thought about that myself, and then wondered if they aren't fake was he potentially inebriated. Over the years I've seen a lot of people act like a completely different person once they've had a few drinks!
While i haven't had access to the entire folder, please don't tell me that the picture below is a "well made" fake. It's horrendous, and is absolutely either AI generated or a Photoshop botch job.mkay wrote: ↑01 Mar 2024, 01:04I have seen the entire content of the Google Drive folder. If the content is indeed fake, then it's a darn well-made fake. On a technical level, there's nothing there that suggests this is fake. In my mind, the only way I can see this being fake is the way Horner communicates in those texts... juvenile at best.
If the content isn't fake, I can't see how he survives this scandal.
The main stream press are going big with it now in the uk. There are also, quite clearly, people briefing against Horner and standing up the leak. I predict by tomorrow we’ll have ‘sources close to geri Horner say she’s devastated’. The press are dumb, but they’re not that dumb. If these images are as easily proved as fake as you say, there is no way in hell theyd risk publishing this stuff. I could be completely wrong, maybe someone has taken everyone for fools, but this feels like an orchestrated campaign and I’d be really surprised if there was no truth in this. Let’s not forget, a real person came forward and made this complaint. It’s not been conjured out of thin air, we heard about these messages and now we’ve seen them. Sure, it could all be an entire fabrication but I would suggest that it’s more likely that red bull tried to cover up an incredibly embarrassing scandal to maintain stability, then all these different news outlets risk their reputation by printing easily refutable fakes. The first thing editors do when they get stuff like this is call their sources in the team and ask ‘is this real?’ They don’t publish blindMIKEY_! wrote: ↑01 Mar 2024, 01:06There are plenty of legal reasons for horner not to say they're fake. Defamation law is complex and fickle and it's not always worth the risk. Especially if you've been cleared of wrongdoing.stonehenge wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 20:35I agree. This is not the statement you would put out if these were just fake. Responding to them, especially without stating that they are not accurate, just gives them credibility. Would be very strange if they aren’t real.bonjon1979 wrote: ↑29 Feb 2024, 20:29
I have always denied the allegations, is very different from those aren’t real. If they were fake he’d say so. The allegations were of inappropriate and controlling behaviour. Perhaps the ‘investigator’ concluded it’s not inappropriate to send dick pics to your assistant if she welcomes said pics. I suggest most corporations would take issue with company phones being used jn such a way, but red bull are the cool distributors tho right so….
Reverse image searching has already shown at least some of the explicit pictures to be of other people from previous scandals. Others appear to be AI generated images according to the naked eye on online analysis tools (not that either of those are perfect). At most this is a real story with major faked embellishments. Or it's entirely faked using some real (innocent) photos to add authenticity.
Exactly. This looks like a Portrait Mode selfie on iPhone. I don't think this is fake.dans79 wrote: ↑01 Mar 2024, 01:24
It might be PS, but it might be real as well. Given Horner's social standing, I assume he has a top tier smart phone. They all have filters/functions built in. A very common one is artificial background blur.
for example.
https://iphonephotographyschool.com/blur/
https://images.iphonephotographyschool. ... 0/Blur.jpg
IF you don't know what you are doing or you rush you can make horrendously bad looking photos.
Someone pointed out some of the d!ick pics etc are from a euro footballer scandal.mkay wrote: ↑01 Mar 2024, 01:04I have seen the entire content of the Google Drive folder. If the content is indeed fake, then it's a darn well-made fake. On a technical level, there's nothing there that suggests this is fake. In my mind, the only way I can see this being fake is the way Horner communicates in those texts... juvenile at best.
If the content isn't fake, I can't see how he survives this scandal.
I can clearly tell the difference between the filter you just demonstrated and a bad photoshop. The Horner one is a bad photoshop. It's the edges on Horner vs. the background, as well as the shadows vs. lightning on him giving it away.dans79 wrote: ↑01 Mar 2024, 01:24
It might be PS, but it might be real as well. Given Horner's social standing, I assume he has a top tier smart phone. They all have filters/functions built in. A very common one is artificial background blur.
for example.
https://iphonephotographyschool.com/blur/
https://images.iphonephotographyschool. ... 0/Blur.jpg
IF you don't know what you are doing or you rush you can make horrendously bad looking photos.