Finders keepers?

June 6, 2006 7:38 PM

Finders keepers? Some joker found a lost T-Mobile Sidekick, took and uploaded pics. Will they return it? Initially, no because the finder apparently wasn't a "white b***h" dumb enough to return it. Is common decency threatened?
posted by codswallop (96 comments total)

I don't know about common decency, but common spelling and grammar are trembling in their boots.
posted by Zozo at 7:51 PM on June 6, 2006 [1 favorite]

Is everyone who's on the internet meant to email the culprits until they give the phone back?
posted by RufusW at 7:55 PM on June 6, 2006

This won't end well.
posted by intermod at 7:56 PM on June 6, 2006

"Luigi" sent me an email just now:
Commonsense is looking over its shoulder too.
posted by tellurian at 7:59 PM on June 6, 2006

I am uncomfortable with using Metafilter to further the ends of virtual mob justice. We are taking the poster at evanwashere.com at his word. While there is no reason to doubt him, there also isn't really any specific reason to trust him. Ergo, it is possible that all of the email being sent to the alleged culprits is entirely undeserved.

Of course, it is equally possible that they did take the Sidekick and, thus, are guilty of something, but does that mean that assorted strangers are empowered to harass the alleged thief?

Common courtesy would suggest that we don't harass (or create the circumstance where somebody would be harassed) people we don't know just because somebody suggests we should.
posted by Joey Michaels at 8:04 PM on June 6, 2006

People are scum, nothing new.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 8:05 PM on June 6, 2006

Why do teenage girls who take pictures of themselves always tilt their heads and look up out of the corner of their eyes? It's weird and it doesn't seem to make them look better or anything.
posted by nyxxxx at 8:09 PM on June 6, 2006

Why is it hard for u to type out two more letters? Is common spelling threatened?
posted by The Bishop of Turkey at 8:14 PM on June 6, 2006

Common decency, hell. Why not initiate a reparations program that pays out in Sidekicks?
posted by Arthur "Two Sheds" Jackson at 8:19 PM on June 6, 2006

Is common decency threatened?

Been out much lately?
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 8:19 PM on June 6, 2006

This great society is going smash.
posted by wigu at 8:23 PM on June 6, 2006

nyxxxx: Explained here?
posted by Jimbob at 8:24 PM on June 6, 2006

Funny how people get attached to shiny little gadgets they find that they know aren't theirs and yet they do not want to give them up. Translation, people are scum.

Oh yeah, and the girl is ugly and the guy is the fattest MP I've ever seen.

WWJDFHS? What would Jesus do for his Sidekick?
posted by fenriq at 8:27 PM on June 6, 2006

meh.
posted by signal at 8:28 PM on June 6, 2006

Can you pick the Sidekick user?
posted by tellurian at 8:35 PM on June 6, 2006

What kind of idiot leaves a cell phone in a cab? ;-P
posted by mischief at 8:39 PM on June 6, 2006

Apparently the sort of idiot who makes fun of 14 year olds on the internet to make sure they "gets whats coming to 'em"
posted by puddles at 8:44 PM on June 6, 2006

Boohoo, she had to pay $300 for a flashy new Sidekick! What a terrible state to be thrust into by this cruel, cruel world.
posted by nonmerci at 8:50 PM on June 6, 2006

All that other stuff aside, seriously, what is it with the mySpace profiles you can't even read?
posted by hoborg at 8:55 PM on June 6, 2006

Laffo tellurian. He's a playa - he's just got ta let ya know.

Apparently he's not too familiar with the internets and how they work. You taunt someone and it can come back to bite your ass in real life. But hey; for someone who's more concerned about being "Digg'ed" (or whatever), that's simply an after-thought.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 8:58 PM on June 6, 2006

thanks for the nws, jimbob.
posted by empath at 8:58 PM on June 6, 2006

ok, the encyclopedia dramatica, which I had never seen before, blew my socks off. this thread is awesome for that link alone.
posted by shmegegge at 9:00 PM on June 6, 2006

[sigh]

How is repeating a racial slur in the FPP relevant to the story?
posted by CynicalKnight at 9:28 PM on June 6, 2006

ooh! you should start a metatalk post about it!
posted by shmegegge at 9:37 PM on June 6, 2006

How is repeating a racial slur in the FPP relevant to the story?

It lets us know that this 16 year old is not just a theif but a racist as well!

That said, I think dating, and having a child with that gigantic fatass is punishment enough.
posted by delmoi at 9:38 PM on June 6, 2006

On second though. This entire post is lame. Why does metafilter need to be some random idiots platform for revenge (anyone who spells 'you' 'u' in something she wants to be seen by millions is like three types of stupid).

Yeah, it was lame she got the sidekick stolen, but who cares really? This isn't like the Canadians with the camera.
posted by delmoi at 9:41 PM on June 6, 2006

For those of you who looked at the link before. Take another look at it. I looked at it two hours ago or so and it's been updated with quite a bit of new information.
posted by pwb503 at 9:49 PM on June 6, 2006

From Evan's killer flash intro to his bevvy of beauties it's like I'm rooting for the girl
posted by delmoi at 9:50 PM on June 6, 2006

look out for GLOBAL HUMILIATION!
posted by 3.2.3 at 9:50 PM on June 6, 2006

Not to get involved in a pile-on or anything, but for a self-described wall street technology consultant, his web pages are ass. Hell, for a 12 year old LJer his web pages are ass. Apart from being essentially design-free, his menus are broken when they appear on subdirectories because he hasn't twigged to that whole relative URL thing, and he's got a nasty scrolling iframe (off the rack javascript) which he seems to feel is so cool it's worth using over and over again without any real content in it.
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:05 PM on June 6, 2006

My upstairs neighbors are samoans, so I really dig the Smiley with the blue cap.

What would Crystal Mangum do?
posted by mischief at 10:09 PM on June 6, 2006

Common decency isn't.
posted by spazzm at 10:16 PM on June 6, 2006

I guess worse crimes happen on a daily basis but speaking from experience, when someone steals from you, knowingly, and there's nothing you can do about it, you WANT to do something like this.

They may have lost their Sidekick forever, but at least they have a cool story to tell.
posted by b_thinky at 10:18 PM on June 6, 2006 [1 favorite]

Meh. No one involved is going to get any of my sympathy.
posted by kyleg at 10:22 PM on June 6, 2006

Violence won't help this situation..I want GLOBAL humiliation to help these punks realize what they have done.

Translation: I could go and try and talk to the guy, or yell at the guy, or drive to his house and cause about $300 worth of damage, but I won't because I'm a big ol' pussy. I'd rather hide behind the internet where I have no chance of getting my ass kicked rather than try and come up with an action that's appropriate for someone who doesn't return things that they find.

We actually do know where they live now...I am debating whether to post that on the internet since that was not given publicly to me by them.

Translation: My morals are as out of whack as the people that I look down my nose at.
posted by 23skidoo at 10:34 PM on June 6, 2006

U can run..but u can't hide!!




Christ. It's all threatened, as far as I'm concerned. Can we make this about Canada now? This would never happen in Canada.
posted by mr_roboto at 11:05 PM on June 6, 2006

Damn right, eh? In Canada, they'd just shoot three or four innocent bystanders at random, plan a weed growing business around the use of the Sidekick as a dealer's communication device, end up burning down something important and end up hollowing out the Sidekick and using it as a pipe because their bong melted in the fire.
posted by loquacious at 11:51 PM on June 6, 2006

What he said.

As an aside, that evan fellow has some remarkable pictures of the trade center towers coming down.
posted by jba at 12:00 AM on June 7, 2006

They may have lost their Sidekick forever, but at least they have a cool story to tell.

But if u want to tell a cool story, u have to learn to type first.
posted by delmoi at 12:29 AM on June 7, 2006

Why do teenage girls who take pictures of themselves always tilt their heads and look up out of the corner of their eyes? It's weird and it doesn't seem to make them look better or anything.

It's called head-canting. Pretty much every female model in every advert you see does it too. Paris Hilton is incapable of not doing it, as far as I can tell. The theory is that it denotes submissiveness, openness, and is vaguely child-like.

And what's with the 'white bitch' stuff? The people who stole the Sidekick are also white...
posted by jack_mo at 3:27 AM on June 7, 2006

This guy is a gigantic twat and so are the people who stole his stupid sidekick. lol, internets.
posted by ludwig_van at 6:13 AM on June 7, 2006

"The people who stole the Sidekick are also white..."

They don't seem to think so.
posted by MikeMc at 6:27 AM on June 7, 2006

At this point in time I am considering mobilizing a Spelling Jihad.

YOU. YOU. NOT 'U'. YOU.

Yes, I am a pedant. I admit it. but IT DOES NOT TAKE THAT MUCH MORE TIME TO TYPE 'YOU'.

This guy annoys me for that reason. It's not 'hip' or 'fresh' or 'def' or whatthehellever is the term this week. IT IS STUPID.
posted by mephron at 6:41 AM on June 7, 2006

Evan says: I ran away from home when I was 14 and was a minority white kid (1 of 3 white kids out of 500 kids of other races) in a homeless shelter in Times Square. I had to learn to become respectful of all races, religions, etc.

Running-away-from-home-and-living-in-a-homeless-shelter-in-Times-Square is the new my-best-friend-is-black.
posted by pokermonk at 6:42 AM on June 7, 2006

Well to be fair to the thieves, white bitches are pretty stupid.

All the players are assholes in this little drama.
posted by Divine_Wino at 6:49 AM on June 7, 2006

So we have less sympathy for Evan's situation than we did for the 'lost camera' person's situation because...? Because he spells 'you' like pretty much every young person spells 'you' these days? Because his web page sucks? Because he's got lots of hot girlfriends? Because his friend can afford to buy a new Sidekick? Because he's using the internet to exact revenge rather than kicking the thief's ass? All of the above?
posted by schoolgirl report at 6:54 AM on June 7, 2006

Yes, all of the above.
posted by ludwig_van at 6:56 AM on June 7, 2006

Well aren't we just a bunch of assholes, then.
posted by schoolgirl report at 7:03 AM on June 7, 2006

Well aren't we just a bunch of assholes, then.
posted by schoolgirl report at 7:03 AM PST

Nah, some people are SUCH assholes that major multi-national corporations send 'em letters TELLING them that they are an asshole.

SPRINT calls man asshole
posted by rough ashlar at 7:06 AM on June 7, 2006

Well aren't we just a bunch of assholes, then.

Ah yes, but we have sidekicks.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:21 AM on June 7, 2006

pokermonk: What is that supposed to mean? I have a feeling that you would dismiss anything this guy has to say about race. Prejudice is just so lazy.
posted by Pacheco at 7:49 AM on June 7, 2006

you could have been joking too...if so, that's funny.
posted by Pacheco at 7:50 AM on June 7, 2006

I was 14 and was a minority white kid (1 of 3 white kids out of 500 kids of other races)

Why does race always have to come up? Why would this kid even feel compelled to mention his ethnicity? What possible relevance can it have? Jesus what a dork.
posted by slatternus at 7:58 AM on June 7, 2006

All of the above?

None of the above. Can't have less sympathy for Evan because he seems more interested in the offending parties feeling shame, while Lost Camera Lady seemed to just want her camera back? Can't we have less sympathy for Evan because he posts every piece of hearsay information he can about the people he thinks are responsible, but LCL never did, and went through the police to get her camera back? No, Evan isn't required to take the high road in this situation. But being such a ginormous attention-craving, revenge-suggesting blogwhore makes people justifiably not feel sympathetic towards him.
posted by 23skidoo at 8:06 AM on June 7, 2006

slatternus: because he had apparently been getting emails focusing on the fact that the alleged thieves are minorities, and wanted to make clear that this was not, in fact, about race.
posted by schoolgirl report at 8:08 AM on June 7, 2006

23skiddo: Fair enough. I just hope you feel the same about all those people who post their "watch how I totally busted this Nigerian scammer!" stories. Or that woman who posted the camera phone pic of the guy masturbating on the subway.

If Lost Camera Lady just wanted her camera back, why did she post the story online at all? What's the motivation other than a) gaining sympathy and b) potentially shaming the offending party into doing the right thing? Both of which I'm totally okay with, mind you.
posted by schoolgirl report at 8:13 AM on June 7, 2006

See also, this guy.
posted by schoolgirl report at 8:20 AM on June 7, 2006

schoolgirl report, you're not lost camera lady, are you?
posted by [insert clever name here] at 8:21 AM on June 7, 2006

Also, his website sucks.
posted by ludwig_van at 8:24 AM on June 7, 2006

It's always about race.
posted by mischief at 8:30 AM on June 7, 2006

No, I'm grumpy Metafilter man, dammit.
posted by schoolgirl report at 8:37 AM on June 7, 2006

god i hate hate hate myspace
posted by Optimus Chyme at 8:57 AM on June 7, 2006

I love that latest advice on the "Law" of Caveat Emptor here in the US that he received from one of the "many lawyers" who have been advising him.

This guy just wants to get into Lost Camera Girl's pants.
posted by Sk4n at 9:04 AM on June 7, 2006

I will never understand why people will use unsolicited legal advice as the ultimate justification for their actions. This guy should ask himself whether these "lawyers" are going to return his phone calls when he's served. If he does get a hold of them they'll just say, "Oh, you didn't tell me that [relevant fact that changes everything]"?
posted by Pacheco at 9:16 AM on June 7, 2006

I'm unclear on Sidekick service, but wouldn't the service be coded to the phone, just like a cell phone has to be deactivated and re-activated when you replace it or change service? In other words, isn't it really simple to just call T-Mobile, cancel the service, and if the theif tries to re-activate it, T-Mobile has it on record that it's a stolen device?

In other words, forgive me for missing the answer to what is obviously a stupid question- if his sidekick was stolen, can't he just call the police, have T-Mobile trace it, and have the people arrested? I'm missing where this is hard.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:17 AM on June 7, 2006

Like Lost Camera girl, I like what this guy has done. His property was stolen, he tried to get it back, got ignored, insulted, and threatened, so he decided to publicly shame the thief/thieves. Good for him! Yes, it's wrong to "legislate morality", but sometimes (like LCL, and "dog poo girl") it's necessary to shame people to do the right thing.
posted by ObscureReferenceMan at 9:28 AM on June 7, 2006

I'm missing where this is hard.

It's not about getting the Sidekick back or stopping the thieves from using it. It's about GLOBAL HUMILIATION!

This guy needs a tire iron upside the head. Or possibly he just needs to schedule an addapairtome.
posted by uncleozzy at 9:30 AM on June 7, 2006

I like what this guy has done. His property was stolen, he tried to get it back, got ignored, insulted, and threatened, so he decided to publicly shame the thief/thieves.

Which is, of course, so much more intelligent and beneficial than calling the police and getting your phone back.

I guess it just bugs me because, I don't know, it seems like this is in fact the exact purpose of policemen, and it doesn't even seem to enter the guy's mind as a valid option beyond threatening the guy who stole his Sidekick.

If I understand this correctly, he has the name, address, and confession of the person with his stolen phone, and his response is to... make a website about it. I'm having trouble seeing how he's any smarter than someone who "bought" a phone from a cab driver and believed there's nothing wrong with that.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:42 AM on June 7, 2006

So we have less sympathy for Evan's situation than we did for the 'lost camera' person's situation because...? ... Because he's got lots of hot girlfriends? ... Because he's using the internet to exact revenge rather than kicking the thief's ass?

Those aren't his girlfriends... he is a pornographer. And the law exists so that Americans don't have to "exact revenge." This guy hasn't even tried to let the police or T-mobile take care of this. He's an idiot and I don't feel sorry for him at all. He admits to being narcissitic, and just wants attention so he is faking outrage. I'm willing to bet he's got some stolen property himself somewhere...
posted by Roger Dodger at 9:47 AM on June 7, 2006

Fine, he's a pornographer and a narcissist. I just fail to understand the selective piling on when - personality failings aside - he's engaging in extra-legal activity that has garnered others plenty of praise for their tenacity.

And he is working with T-Mobile: "...be sure that the phone will not be working very very soon. T-Mobile will be working on that tommorow as well as giving me the information of the person's account info."
posted by schoolgirl report at 10:00 AM on June 7, 2006

You guys who state that this fellow should 'work with the police to get it back' are living in a goddamned fantasy world.

Have you ever tried to 'work with the police' to get stolen goods back? It is a nightmare! The chances of recovering the property are close to zero.

And, let's consider the timeliness factor; you think the police are going to drop everything to go searching for this phone in Queens? Pull the other one, it's got bells on!

Good for this fellow. He will get far better results from this method, with far more punishment for the thieves/buyers of known stolen goods, then he could ever get by going straight to the police.
posted by Cycloptichorn at 10:04 AM on June 7, 2006

he's engaging in extra-legal activity

eh? If he (or his 'friend') is paying for the Sidekick II service, why can't they do whatever they want with the data FROM that service?

I'm not sure what the extra-legal activity is. (it is not clear to me who's making physical threats to whom)
posted by rough ashlar at 10:05 AM on June 7, 2006

Pornography? Those are artistic shots!
posted by graventy at 10:12 AM on June 7, 2006

I agree that he should work with the police to get it back (he even says "I will stop by a police station tomorrow..."). But as Cycloptichorn said, that would probably won't amount to much.
posted by ObscureReferenceMan at 10:12 AM on June 7, 2006

I'm no opinion on the phone/internet justice things, the whole thing seems like pretty small beer to me.

I do have an opinion, though, about people making accusations based on surmise and thin evidence. Roger Doger, I'm looking at you. What's it like being that sanctimonious?

Oh, and if if you think that's pornography, you need to get out more.

BTW, as you might guess, the link's definitely Not Safe for Work.
posted by mojohand at 10:15 AM on June 7, 2006

Ditto Cycloptichorn.
posted by cribcage at 10:16 AM on June 7, 2006

rough ashlar: You're absolutely correct. By "extra-legal activity" I meant the whole taking the issue to the Internet masses thing. Poor word choice, I suppose.
posted by schoolgirl report at 10:28 AM on June 7, 2006

I don't think I'm any more sanctimonious than he is. If he'd called T-mobile, let them shut off the service, then contacted the people asking nicely for the Sidekick back, and perhaps offering a small reward, he'd have it back. Instead he escalates the situation and turns it into a public humiliation. I'm not saying he deserves it because he takes sexy pictures, that was just in response to the comment that all those women were his "girlfriends". Hell, maybe they are, good for him. Do you honestly think he stopped taking pictures after he got the ones he posted?

I'm just saying if you call the police with a name and address and proof that they have your stolen property, then chances are the cops will stop by. Maybe it's not that way in New York, I don't live there. But he didn't even try and let the process work first. If he got no results that way, perhaps I'd have more sympathy for his methods.
posted by Roger Dodger at 10:34 AM on June 7, 2006

I meant the whole taking the issue to the Internet masses thing.

Ahhh, ok. I wasn't sure what laws ere being violated. A nasty lawyer might be able to make copyright claims WRT pictures or data, but I have no idea how that would clash with "he who writes the checks means they have the rights". Same for actually recording hte phone calls to/from the sidekick II.
posted by rough ashlar at 10:36 AM on June 7, 2006

The only good sidekick is Chuck Norris' "Sidekicks".

I think you know what I'm talking about.

"Chuck Norris? Chuck Norris? He doesn't compete anymore kid, and the main reason, one of the main reasons he doesn't compete anymore is me. He doesn't compete 'cause I would kick his ass."

/lies meme down to eternal rest, waiting for when it is needed again to protect the hirsute innocent.
posted by longbaugh at 10:44 AM on June 7, 2006

If he'd ... contacted the people asking nicely for the Sidekick back, and perhaps offering a small reward

Roger Dodger, did you even read the link?

From the site: When my friend realized that she had left the Sidekick in the taxi she asked me to immediately send a message to the phone saying that we would give a reward for the phone. [...] I sent messages to that Sidekick every other hour saying <REWARDIFFOUND>.
posted by Zozo at 10:46 AM on June 7, 2006

And after a closer look, I retract the pornographer statement. He is merely a hobbyist who likes to take pictures of hot models, and apparently wouldn't mind doing it professionally. I guess I can't blame him. BUT I still have no sympathy for him.
posted by Roger Dodger at 10:46 AM on June 7, 2006

If the phone doesn't work, they have no reason to keep it. He should have waited until it was turned off. And we have only his side of the story. Who says he didn't start cursing at them first. And yes, I read the link.
posted by Roger Dodger at 10:47 AM on June 7, 2006

I'm just saying if you call the police with a name and address and proof that they have your stolen property, then chances are the cops will stop by. Maybe it's not that way in New York, I don't live there.

Neither do I, and it's not that way where I live, either. So maybe logging onto the World Wide Web and assuming that everyone lives in identical circumstances isn't so bright. (Particularly when your profile says you live in a city with a population of barely 22,000.)

And yes, I read the link.

Then you need glasses. Because the story mentions offering a reward (to no avail) about a dozen times, and then you came along to suggest that, "If only he had thought about offering some type of reward..." Duh.

(Actually, what you suggested was to deactivate the phone and then offer a reward. I'm not sure how you think the owner could have contacted these people once the phone was deactivated.)
posted by cribcage at 11:11 AM on June 7, 2006

I'm just saying if you call the police with a name and address and proof that they have your stolen property, then chances are the cops will stop by.

Fantasy. World.

And that's not just New York, man. That's everywhere. Stolen Property, especially small-value stolen property, is not a high priority for the cops.

If the phone doesn't work, they have no reason to keep it.

Wrongo. What about spite? Malice? General assholeness? Poverty? Racism? What about fear that they would be prosecuted for stealing/buying the stolen phone, when they went to get the reward?
posted by Cycloptichorn at 11:16 AM on June 7, 2006

cribcage, I'm curious; what do you think this gentleman has to gain by trying to e-humiliate the offenders? Aside from the smug satisfaction that he's "sticking it" to someone and getting beacomp publicity, what good could come from his tactics? The damage has be done. I fail to see how poking a potential hornets nest is going to get the job done and as I stated in my previous comment, this is just trouble waiting to happen. These people have already made physical threats and his info is all over the web. While it may have been brilliant in concept, the execution could have some bad consequences.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 11:25 AM on June 7, 2006

Cribcage, he already had their information, email, im. According to him, T-mobile will give him even more info. If he'd waited to contact them until the phone was deactivated, he'd have more leverage. What would they want with a useless phone? Is it fair that he should have to do that to get back his own (actually his friend's) property? No. But he'd be in a better bargaining position.

I wasn't assuming everybody lives in my circumstances. I was the one who said maybe it's not that way in New York. And I hate being misquoted and changing the context of what I said. Once from you cribcage, and once from Zozo.

One thing I do know about from visiting New York is that you lose something in a cab, getting it back would be a pleasant surprise. I honestly hope the woman gets her phone back. All I was trying to say was I don't like his methods. You don't like my opinion. That's that.
posted by Roger Dodger at 11:36 AM on June 7, 2006

what do you think this gentleman has to gain by trying to e-humiliate the offenders?

Well, let's ask him.

See...u guys can stop all this.... I want a APOLOGY and the Sidekick back. That's all... Not trying to threaten u guys..not trying to harrass u guys....Just want what is right.. Everyone realizes this except u guys. Once that happens, the website with the pics and info goes down. That I promise..and as I have shown..I keep my promises... I will only write on it that the matter has been resolved.

Were you insinuating that his real motive is revenge? If so, what's wrong with that?

As for "trouble waiting to happen": You're right. These people might actually be stupid enough to show up and harm this guy, or vandalize his property, or whatever. But he's chosen to take that risk. Personally, I'd do the same on principle. Boston neighborhoods are being torn apart by gang violence right now, and a huge part of the problem is that no one is willing to stand up because they fear retribution. I can understand the logic behind that fear; but I'm also watching its consequences, so I'm not particularly sympathetic.
posted by cribcage at 11:45 AM on June 7, 2006

Find someone completely innocent who has nothing to do with the situation at all. Beat the hell out of them. Cut off one of their hands and a foot, gouge out an eye. Film it. Send the film to the cops, the press, and the person who has the phone.

...there’s no direction here, I just think it’s a good way to spend a weekend.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:04 PM on June 7, 2006

I hope the supposed MP goes to the "U" guy's house (guy, you are not Prince, just spell out the word) and beats him to death. Then the police arrest MP guy and he goes to death row. Then the big dude who has to be close to a heart attack eats one more pizza and then falls over. Then the police confiscate the Sidekick as evidence and some corrupt cop gives it to his daughter, who finds information linking the girl who currently has it with terrorism. She tells daddy, he tells the DOHS, they go pick up the girl that stole/bought/found/whatever and send her to Gitmo. The cop's daughter gets the Sidekick back and then she loses it and the original owner finds it. But in her excitement she steps out in front of a bus and then everybody who was involved in the whole mess is in jail or dead. THE END.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 1:28 PM on June 7, 2006

Well, this will be a derail, but either this guy only hangs out with er, um, "pros", or he lives in a squalid version of a Maxim fantasy world where the average frat dorm and a rather unusual sorority house form an unholy union.

His photos make me inexplicably sad, for some reason. The surgery, the squalor, the faux glamour-- there's some big cognitive dissonance happening here.
posted by stagewhisper at 2:06 PM on June 7, 2006

The one thing I don't understand is why these kind of sites always seem to say "if you just give it back, I'll take this down", as if you can just delete stuff forever from the Internet. It doesn't work that way.
posted by reklaw at 2:07 PM on June 7, 2006

well reklaw, he just said "I'll take this down", not "all copies on the internet will be removed". I suspect most geeks know about google-cache and the waybackmachine...and most geek-foes-targeted-via-website don't.
posted by nomisxid at 2:47 PM on June 7, 2006

"The people who stole the Sidekick are also white..."

They don't seem to think so.

That's what was puzzling me. Are white people from Latin America considered non-white in the US, by other people and themselves? (Because looking at the people who nicked the Sidekick, after the 'white bitch' slur, I was scrolling around looking for non-white people and couldn't find any according to the definition of 'white' in my head. Seems like, eg., saying that Slavic are non-white.)
posted by jack_mo at 4:32 AM on June 8, 2006

Slavic people, that is.
posted by jack_mo at 4:33 AM on June 8, 2006

Metafilter to Slashdot lag time: 39 hours

[Why do I do this? I dunno.]
posted by intermod at 1:19 PM on June 8, 2006