Because Stinger asked
Fri, 13 Feb 2009, 11:16 amadministrator23 posts in thread
Because Stinger asked
Fri, 13 Feb 2009, 11:16 amWho is the Judge, Jury & Executioner here?
Author: stinger
Date: 13/02/2009 - 09:45
(a)Who decides if something posted on this website is defamatory?
(b)What qualifications do they have to do so?
(c)Who is said to have been defamed?
(c)Since when has it been policy of this website to remove a post on the grounds of "defamatory information" anyway?
If we all knew that we could have a post removed just by claiming that it contained defamatory material and requesting its removal, I suggest that there would be very little left on here. Also, it should be borne in mind that TRUTH is a complete defence to a claim of defamation.
Come on 'Administrator' - let's have your reasons and satisfy our curiousity.Puzzled
Ssstinger>>>
***
(a) I sincerely don't believe anything posted on this website can constitute defamation. But I will act, as a matter of courtesy, on specific complaints regarding allegations of defamatory content.
(b) No decision involved, no qualifications required.
(c) Usually, by implication, the complainant.
(d) Always. Please read the disclaimer (under the about menu).
You are correct regarding the possible implications of this policy. Thanks for drawing that to everyone's attention.
;-)
Cheers
Grant
My client Mr Pinkshirt,...
Fri, 13 Feb 2009, 02:33 pm... he whose posting was removed purely on the complaint of Mr G Ross, may well claim that there was nothing defamatory in what he wrote, that he was simply taking issue with what Mr G Ross wrote in his alleged 'review'. Mr G Ross, feeling that his credibility was under attack, may well have bleated out the 'D' word, sending our esteemed Administrator scurrying for his censor's switch, regardless of the merit or otherwise of what Mr Pinkshirt actually wrote.
I must say, with respect, that I am somewhat dismayed at the thin-skinnedness of both gentlemen in this instance :(
Ssstinger>>>