So far I've gotten two emails, purportedly from two different people named "Darren Taylor" and "Clare Connell" regarding this post from 2007 quoting a Daily Mail story. Both emails have asked me to take that post down, alleging to be the Clare Connell mentioned in the article. Both emails have come from throwaway accounts, one at hotmail and the other at google mail. No credentials or corroborating evidence of identity has been offered. I'm 98% sure that it's bullshit from one of our resident imbeciles. The first email, from darren.taylor87@googlemail.com: The second email, from connellclare@hotmail.com: I'm disinclined to take this seriously without some kind of proof. Thoughts?
Lawyers don't send random e-mails from Google accounts. They send snailmail cease and desist letters their clients pay for. If a lawyer were to send e-mail, it would be professional e-mail from their practice's site, not Gmail. "Clare's" supposed phone annotation is in the wrong place and I believe smartphone should be capitalized. Ok...after a brief looksie... http://www.whoismind.com/whois/tyreshoplondon.com.html http://tyreshoplondon.com/ Lawyer cum Tire salesman? Suuuuure. We also have: http://www.whoismind.com/whois/connell-consulting.com.html http://connell-consulting.com/ Probably safe to say it's full of shit.
Yeah, my thought as well. I turned up those same sites and links when I went poking at 'em. I've exchanged a couple more emails with "Clare" and she's supposedly going to send me a picture of herself holding a current newspaper tomorrow. Right.
Hrmm...y'know, this seems like a case of a woman saying a few things she regrets now and doesn't want every potential future boyfriend who looks her up on the internet to see a feminazi. This also means she is likely single and on the prowl. (For those who might be interested in that. :flow2: ) If you feel like being nice you might maybe change the name "Clare" in the article. I'd be against deleting the entire thread as I think Wordforgers also would be pissed at having their opinions deleted at the whim of this woman. However, any legal threats from her, and I'd be tempted to bump the article.
It's complete BS. A picture of a woman with a newspaper proves nothing at all. They should be ignored completely unless and until Lanzman receives a letter in the mail from a real lawyer asking for removal.
