I didn’t look into the thread until now (after having posted one post). I assumed most posts will be of a flaming nature directed towards me (after all, I am a newbie here, how dare I rock the boat?). A couple of posters (like Niflmir) do make a lot of sense.
As a rule, I never respond to flaming posts.
Not quite correct, Johnny. I am not a lawyer, but you know, I am a know it all. A lawyer friend of mine explained it to me in layman’s terms.
If you start a sentence, ‘it is my opinion that’, you can say just about anything, it is not actionable. It is just an opinion, and an opinion can be wrong. I remember a few years ago Oprah said some nasty things about the way they grow meat in USA. Meat growers lost millions of dollars as a result and they launched a lawsuit again Oprah for the loss of income. The suit was tossed out. What Oprah said was only her personal opinion and she was entitled to it.
But when somebody makes a factual statement, prima facia it is actionable. The person who stated the facts could be asked to prove them in a court of law. However, action can be launched does not mean that it will be launched. There are several grounds for a suit. One is loss of income, of course. Or you could show that you are likely to lose income in the future because of the untruths. Or it could even be simply defamation of character (a person falsely claiming that another person is not a doctor would come into this category).
I remember a few years ago NBC did a news feature on GM. It contained a few inaccuracies. Within days, GM launched a lawsuit, seeking billions of dollars in damages. There was no way GM had lost any income in just a couple of days. It was about potential loss of income and defamation of character. NBC apologized and GM dropped the lawsuit.
So there are many grounds for launching a lawsuit. The anonymity of internet is another obstacle to overcome, but an enterprising lawyer probably would be able to overcome it.
But the point is, if you were a moderator or an owner, would you want to take the risk at the end of the day? I know I wouldn’t. If one poster is making factual statements (without offering any evidence) about another poster and that other poster is claiming that they are lies, I (as a moderator o the owner) would want it to stop.
While I have said it repeatedly that I have no intention of suing anybody (it will be a dark day indeed when I care what an anonymous blogger thinks or says about me), it could happen to another poster, and that poster may not be so charitable. He may sue everybody in sight.
The risk however small, is not worth taking. Evidently moderators also felt the same way. They acted properly.
As a rule, I never respond to flaming posts.
Not quite correct, Johnny. I am not a lawyer, but you know, I am a know it all. A lawyer friend of mine explained it to me in layman’s terms.
If you start a sentence, ‘it is my opinion that’, you can say just about anything, it is not actionable. It is just an opinion, and an opinion can be wrong. I remember a few years ago Oprah said some nasty things about the way they grow meat in USA. Meat growers lost millions of dollars as a result and they launched a lawsuit again Oprah for the loss of income. The suit was tossed out. What Oprah said was only her personal opinion and she was entitled to it.
But when somebody makes a factual statement, prima facia it is actionable. The person who stated the facts could be asked to prove them in a court of law. However, action can be launched does not mean that it will be launched. There are several grounds for a suit. One is loss of income, of course. Or you could show that you are likely to lose income in the future because of the untruths. Or it could even be simply defamation of character (a person falsely claiming that another person is not a doctor would come into this category).
I remember a few years ago NBC did a news feature on GM. It contained a few inaccuracies. Within days, GM launched a lawsuit, seeking billions of dollars in damages. There was no way GM had lost any income in just a couple of days. It was about potential loss of income and defamation of character. NBC apologized and GM dropped the lawsuit.
So there are many grounds for launching a lawsuit. The anonymity of internet is another obstacle to overcome, but an enterprising lawyer probably would be able to overcome it.
But the point is, if you were a moderator or an owner, would you want to take the risk at the end of the day? I know I wouldn’t. If one poster is making factual statements (without offering any evidence) about another poster and that other poster is claiming that they are lies, I (as a moderator o the owner) would want it to stop.
While I have said it repeatedly that I have no intention of suing anybody (it will be a dark day indeed when I care what an anonymous blogger thinks or says about me), it could happen to another poster, and that poster may not be so charitable. He may sue everybody in sight.
The risk however small, is not worth taking. Evidently moderators also felt the same way. They acted properly.
Last edited:
