|
Maoist Pussy posted:Huff Po next. i hope so brother
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 01:28 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
an unexpectedly cool end to a fun shitshow thanks for the news OP
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
My penis hurts from all this semen I shot out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Spiderjelly posted:Did you miss the part where gawker declared bankruptcy? He ain't getting poo poo. quote:In response, Gawker filed for Chapter 11, triggering a bankruptcy auction. POLITICO has learned that Ziff Davis, the owner of PC Mag, has agreed to an opening bid in the $90 million to $100 million range and other bids are expected. SMASH EM HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
SMASH EM HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Best heel face turn ever SMASH EM HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
smash em, hulkster
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
billionaires can secretly shut down entire publications out of spite, but what really matters is that some dumb gossip website is maybe going out of business
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Wall Balls posted:billionaires can secretly shut down entire publications out of spite, but what really matters is that some dumb gossip website is maybe going out of business It's not a secret. A bad person broke the law by invading the privacy of another bad person and a third bad person used the opportunity to get back at the first. Everything is fine
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Can someone do a photoshop of those Hulk Hogan 9/11 pics but with the Gawker offices instead? That'd make my day.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Whatchagonnado when Hulkamania sues you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Here's a salty-sweet  crybaby article from New RepublicPeter Thiel’s Revenge Against Gawker Is Neither Justice Nor Philanthropy
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
paul_soccer10 posted:SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Everybody will just work at a different site. Except the Hulkster, who dropped too many n-bombs but didn't have the courage to go all out and get a job at Takimag.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Here's a salty-sweet Eh, I'm not sure anything can beat Peter Bright on Ars Technica wading into the comments of the article when the initial verdict came down to say well actually, Gawker did nothing wrong because Bulk Hogan having sex is in fact something the public has the right to know about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Axel Serenity posted:SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
aha awesome eat poo poo gawker
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I don't mind the result but am bothered by the process at the same time, i'm still glad Gawker's gone, because their list of idiotic and awful deeds is very long
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Disagreeing with or attacking Gawker makes you a racist, sexist piece of poo poo. Hope you all loving die, shitlords.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Gawker reaped what it sowed
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Ahaha
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Wall Balls posted:billionaires can secretly shut down entire publications out of spite, but what really matters is that some dumb gossip website is maybe going out of business You've rightfully recognized the inequality here but have taken it to the wrong conclusion: the problem isn't that billionaires can shut down entire dumb gossip publications out of spite (and violating people's rights, etc.), it's that only billionaires can shut down entire dumb gossip publications out of spite (and violating people's rights, etc.).
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Hulkamaniacs are keeping an eye out for you brotherrr
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
paul_soccer10 posted:SMASH 'EM, HULKSTER!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:Disagreeing with or attacking Gawker makes you a racist, sexist piece of poo poo. Hope you all loving die, shitlords. I promise you I am, and I will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
SMASH EM HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
And nothing of value was lost
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:And nothing of value was lost -overheard at ur funeral lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Smaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaash 'em HULKSTER
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
jesus christ, denton
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
gonna take a celebratory poo poo and piss
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
SMASH
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Cthulu Carl posted:Eh, I'm not sure anything can beat Peter Bright on Ars Technica wading into the comments of the article when the initial verdict came down to say well actually, Gawker did nothing wrong because Bulk Hogan having sex is in fact something the public has the right to know about. I'm sympathetic to Hogan's case but I am wondering what made this different from other celebrity sex tape leaks exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 01:28 |
|
|
EM
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:50
|
|