Tell me more about Andreus

[Keeland]

An excellent example is: "Did Jesus Christ exist?" Do you think that question would ever end up in a courtroom?

Almost, but no cigar.

State senator sues God

The lawsuit admits God goes by all sorts of alias, names, titles and designations and it also recognizes the fact that the defendant is omnipresent. . . .

. . . The lawsuit accuses God "of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent." It says God has caused "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects and the like."

[quasar]

I think it's worth noting that the mods have never explicitly stated they would expose anyone for doubling up

Most duplicates accounts have been merged without us having to say anything to other members. I would imagine that the only time we would consider exposing someone is if we feel that they have deliberately misrepresented themselves to the extent that it would be wrong NOT to inform members.

..in fact several people in this thread have said it's fairly common here and it seems to be generally tolerated.

We're getting into amateur sleuths territory here. Many members think they know a sock puppet or duplicate member, but 99% of the time they're 'pissing into the air'. Doubling up is NOT tolerated as per the Code of Conduct.

I believe Quasar said they would often be able to tell if someone was a double, even if they were spoofing an IP in some cases, but he didn't necessarily say he would expose them per se.

Indeed, spoofing an IP or using anonymizers is no guarantee that that duplicate members won't be found out. With the explosion of the internet, ISPs have, for some time, had to use one IP for multiple users. As a result, an IP check is now merely one of a number of weapons in our arsenal. That's not to say that everyone will be caught out instantly - but we're likely to get you eventually.

[xbuzzerx]

Nevertheless Johann was correct.

In a court of law if you can't produce a body, you can't rule there was a death or a murder at all.

[JohannBessler]

Almost, but no cigar.

State senator sues God

Keeland, here's the thing:

The plaintiff did not attempt to determine whether or not God existed--as we have with Andreus, and as I have suggested with Jesus Christ. Rather, the plaintiff already presumed an a priori knowledge that God DID exist.

I don't see an exact parallel.

[quasar]

Nevertheless Johann was correct.

In a court of law if you can't produce a body, you can't rule there was a death or a murder at all.

Not true nowadays due to the massive jumps in forensic science.

The United States case of People v. Scott 176 Cal. App. 2d 458 (1960) held that "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused."

[xbuzzerx]

Not true nowadays due to the massive jumps in forensic science.

That bar is WELL beyond "someone said it online."

[pat grimshaw]

Nevertheless Johann was correct.

In a court of law if you can't produce a body, you can't rule there was a death or a murder at all.

Yes and this isn't a court of law so what is your point?

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/thre...ighlight=court

[xbuzzerx]

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/thre...ighlight=court

There was a body in that case.

Your logical skills still underwhelm me.

[ChickenGuy]

This thread:

All this thread is missing now is an Official Song.

And the one in that vid is perfect.

OMG, I haven't listened to this since 1999.

Please JUBbers take a look at this vid!

[blackbeltninja]

^ That is not too difficult to do with the right 'programme ' and probably accounts why Corny had great difficulty in establishing other activities by Andreus over many years! I would not be surprised if BostonPirate re-appears under another non de plume before too long . But I dont think he will get involved in an Andreus Thread again!

The same computer on a wifi and also equipped with a 3G modem would give 2 different ip numbers, one for each instance. Alternatively, a computer and a cellphone would give 2 different IPs as well.

-d-

[Keeland]

Keeland, here's the thing:

The plaintiff did not attempt to determine whether or not God existed--as we have with Andreus, and as I have suggested with Jesus Christ. Rather, the plaintiff already presumed an a priori knowledge that God DID exist.

I don't see an exact parallel.

Well, that's why I said "Almost, but no cigar." But more than that, it being impossible to serve a god with court papers would speak to non-existence, which, no doubt, would be an important argument. Nevertheless, the post isn't worth the electrons.

[star-warrior]

Nevertheless Johann was correct.

In a court of law if you can't produce a body, you can't rule there was a death or a murder at all.

'Andreus Thanos' may just be an invented nom-de-plume.

We're treating it as if it is a real name.

Produce Andreus Thanos' death certificate, or his birth certificate, perhaps his brother's for all we care.

Or for that matter BostonPirate's tenancy records for said AT.

For some reason BP has disappeared too.

[frankfrank]

I do recall a thread in which the two of them threatened to meet up since they were both in Bahston, but I don't recall hearing anything beyond that.

-d-

Could be Pegasus69, too? I remember something in one of the threads he posted in (or, perhaps, his own?) about meeting with another area member, I think may have been dynk, and they DID meet. Pegasus69 was the first guy in here who I "saw dying" - some kind of cancer. I have no doubt, not even in the slightest, that he was real.

Pegasus69 lived in (or near) Hyannis, which isn't exactly Boston, but is certainly in the neighborhood.

Star-warrior, I see a central, devastating flaw in your reasoning.

The person known as Andreus Thanos supposedly lived in the United States, so he'd live under the jurisdiction of United States courts.

With that in mind, courtrooms in the United States simply don't deal with this kind of issue.

I read his post somewhat differently than you did. I read it more as saying that the quality of evidence presented in this thread, whether it involved embezzlement, a homicide, identity theft, drug trafficking, etc. would FAIL in a courtroom. Just as the co-yinky-dink of activity in Audreus' account within two hours of BP's disappearance constitutes PROOF of nothing, a surveillance cam picture of somebody's car in the same city block VICINITY (and around the same time) near a drug crime wouldn't (or shouldn't!! But, with some of today's prosecutors etc., who knows?) hold up in a courtroom.

[frankfrank]

'Andreus Thanos' may just be an invented nom-de-plume.

We're treating it as if it is a real name.

Produce Andreus Thanos' death certificate, or his birth certificate, perhaps his brother's for all we care.

Or for that matter BostonPirate's tenancy records for said AT.

For some reason BP has disappeared too.

It wouldn't be the first time, nor will it be the last, that somebody is living their entire life under an assumed name/alias. These people are even able to "prove," often, that they are the person who truly owns that name which is actually fake. If his real name was Theopoulos Taros, no amount of searching for "Andreus Thanos" will ever turn up that real person.

So, though I am entirely convinced that Andreus came out of somebody else's imagination, it isn't because I've seen anything that I consider to truly be PROOF.

[Hard-up1]

Metaphorical filth.

The real filth is locked up, far from prying eyes and enquiring minds .

-d-

Your not the only tease mentioned in this thread. Dreu was notorious for it.

[legend145]

Now this thread turned into a court room drama? Can it get any better?

[HunterM]

Such a good movie.

[Corny]

MANY OTHER PEOPLE moved on from the thread and have understood the fact that people are going to believe what they want. MANY OTHER PEOPLE did not accuse those believers of "lying to themselves."

Maybe it's time for you to be one of the MANY OTHER PEOPLE? I mean, it's pretty obvious that you're getting quite worked up about it ..

Wrong again my friend: Corny has held that Enchanted is not Boston Pirate. See posts 755 and 778.

Correct.

then this thread is just going to keep on going around & around in circles and therefore, probably should be closed.

Indeed, but most people vehemently spoke out against it.

I have absolutely bugger all to contribute to this wearisome thread but I just fancied being the 1000th person to post in it.

1000th post, not person - but you succeeded

[Essex Boy]

Yes I noticed that. Is there a prize?

[blackbeltninja]

^Why yes, yes there is.

You get to show us your c0ck, you lucky boy!




Over to you.

-d-

[Hard-up1]

Your not the only tease mentioned in this thread. Dreu was notorious for it.

You're!

EEEEK!

Speaking of filth!

[Hard-up1]

Maybe it's time for you to be one of the MANY OTHER PEOPLE? I mean, it's pretty obvious that you're getting quite worked up about it ...

Let me understand this more clearly.

You reached back across 100 subsequent posts since Stacy posted this, and two days have passed, to recommend she stop posting when she already stopped posting?

Sounds like belief in Andreus Thanos isn't the only character here whose motivations are less that fully credible. Looks antagonistic.

[Corny]

And she stopped a day before, too ... and came back to post this. I'm quite annoyed about people who point fingers at others for behavior that they're displaying themselves. Not sure what you're trying to tell me with the 2nd paragraph. But I guess I have to excuse myself now for spending two days elsewhere and not following this thread?

[rareboy]

One notes that Corny has never said that Boston Pirate and Andreus are/were not the same poster.


hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.........

[Hard-up1]

I'm simply saying that there were 100 posts since Stacy, some of which were every bit as sharp as her words, but they were passed over to invite her to leave.

It would seem you had followed it to go back 100 posts in any event.

[rareboy]

Andreus...

a combination of:



and



and

[Corny]

I'm simply saying that there were 100 posts since Stacy, some of which were every bit as sharp as her words, but they were passed over to invite her to leave.

It would seem you had followed it to go back 100 posts in any event.

I start every thread back at the post which came first after my last visit and progress through the latest post. Guess I have to justify me for this now, too?

[Hard-up1]

Or admonish intervening posts equally to justify singling out Stacy over all of them.

[Corny]

Are you in need of a cross?

I didn't see many others shouting at the rest of the people basically to STFU and GTFO.

[Hard-up1]

Your prejudice is plain -- there were others ascerbic after Stacy.

Nice try on the jab though, but I haven't portrayed myself as the victim in any of my comments about Stacy, so that would be a miss, Sir.

[Corny]

There is a difference between being just acerbic and what I described. And even IF? So I did single out, the first one that I came across, and not the rest? So what? You're now singling me out if you want it that way. And no, you are not making YOU as the victim, you are trying to hang someone else on a a cross. Someone who can very well defend herself.

[Hard-up1]

But it is sometimes more appropriate for third parties to take up a cause when bias is evident. When she is compelled to go back and forth with you, it inherently looks simply defensive, and to reply to your retort when she wasn't attacking your post.

We enjoy the forum. This thread was hardly a hotbed of acrimony.

You have authority as Admin and I've never been one to jump on the "screw the mods -- they're all unfair" bandwagon, but your post carries more weight when you publicly suggest that a poster leave the thread.

You exaggerated her posts with characterizations like STFU when her actual tone was less, and had actual questions that begged for what was being supposedly proven.

I have no bond with Stacy any more than any other fellow JUB member, so all the more reason to speak up for her independently when she appears to be unfairly harried on the forum.

[rareboy]

Well this is one way to get a thread closed. lol.

[rareboy]

By the way...did you all know that you can stay in Andreus?

http://www.andreus.it/en/hotel-andreus/

[Hard-up1]

One SEXY looking pool -- very fitting for Andreus' namesake.

[tombastep]

I have no bond with Stacy any more than any other fellow JUB member, so all the more reason to speak up for her independently when she appears to be unfairly harried on the forum.

This is hard to take seriously when you pretty much did this to someone else recently on the forum.

[rareboy]

just in case anyone has missed the obvious.

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

[Hard-up1]

Yeah, to your detractors, you can do no right.

Carrying grievances from one thread to the next is verboten.

[Corny]

You exaggerated her posts with characterizations like STFU when her actual tone was less, and had actual questions that begged for what was being supposedly proven.

Yes, sure the capitalization just happened accidentally

she appears to be unfairly harried on the forum.

So one reply by me, suggesting for her to take her own advice is someone being "unfairly harried"? This probably would have gone under, if it weren't for you blowing this way out of proportion.

You have authority as Admin and I've never been one to jump on the "screw the mods -- they're all unfair" bandwagon, but your post carries more weight when you publicly suggest that a poster leave the thread.

And no mod action at all was involved. If I, as a mod/admin want someone to do something, he/she will notice. And apart from that I have every right to hold up a mirror to someone or voice my opinion in any other way, complying with the CoC. So stop annoying me - and I don't think after this verbiage, you should label others "detractors".

[-Callum-]

I think the thread has definitely run its course Corny...

[Vannie]

I feel the need to intervene and set the record straight in this thread once and for all.

[Gimmecat]

Idk felt appropriate /exits thread.

[rareboy]

I think the thread has definitely run its course Corny...

Oh I don't think so....

There's still grist for the mill here.....

[star-warrior]

As Einstein once said, "Oy vey! Die thread, die!"

[palbert]

Can someone explain this kerfuffle?

[rareboy]

It is like one of those horrible tribal conflicts that has become the proxy battlefield,

It is about the twilight of the Gods.

About fantasy...

and reality.

About pissing matches.

Old and new.

It is a warning to those who want to believe only the best and those who believe nothing but the worst.

It is about vindication and villification.

A throbbing saga of friendships and foes.

And thus the kerfuffling.

And apparently after picking the flesh off the carcass of Andreus Thanos, everyone is now indeed bored and we only have one another to feast on.

Eventually everyone will drift away into their own corners and the thread itself will wither and disappear under the mounds of fresh new subjects. I think that day is now upon us.

[stacy]

See now I have this conundrum. Come in, defend myself, slow down the bickering I apparently caused while I was moving on from the thread, and be accused of doing the opposite, or ignore the thread and feel bad that Hard-Up came to my defense and I let him hang there.

The thing is, despite my questioning of Johann and how I responded I never once said shut up, shut down the thread, why is it still going, I'm done with it...never. I honestly wanted to know what was driving Johann so hard to convince the believers they were lying to themselves.

Johann took it better than anyone in here. He answered the questions. And in case you haven't noticed, we both stopped posting about that part of it.

I am passionate about this topic because the entity of Andreus had a direct affect on my time at JUB from the moment I got here. You are reading the words how you want to read them. I don't want the thread shut down. Never asked for it. I simply asked Johann why he had not moved on once he had given his "facts" and why he was so insistent on those of us who do not care about the facts in this case believe in him so adamantly.

I will own up to this and only this: I am passionate about this topic and am posting emotionally.

But never once did I ask for, suggest, demand or stomp my feet at the fact that this thread is still going. And I never once acted holier than thou, like I had moved on and nobody else had.

[Harke the Boeotarch]

Can someone explain this kerfuffle?

This hurly-burly ballyhoo rucus concerns the deliberate falsehood on behalf of that protean JUB-character and internet performance artist formerly know as the 'late' Andreus.

[quasar]

...A throbbing saga...will wither and disappear under the mounds of fresh new subjects.

I do love a good throbbing saga and mounds of fresh new talent subjects.

[Ram]

Congrats to ChickenGuy on your 4000th post!

Woohoo. Can we delete the rest of JUB off and just keep this thread to post in?

Congrats ChickenGuy