|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 15:19:31 GMT -5
What on earth are you talking about? The story met their criteria--the author was formerly associated with the 2x2s as in she grew up in it. The criteria is ASSOCIATION. Whats there to discuss or admit that? Hmm. Association. Guilt by association. We are guilty because we are associated with this man. "What kind of an operation are we running?"
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 15:24:37 GMT -5
Whatever it may be it's not libel. Since Todd's statement is purely a matter of opinion, it's not actionable.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 12, 2008 15:27:23 GMT -5
I declare that "what" is the anti-Christ.
Have a nice day.
|
|
|
Post by degem on Dec 12, 2008 15:28:15 GMT -5
I don't understand. How is calling a website an "anti-Christ website" libelous? (oops not too sure if libelous is really a word)
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 15:29:20 GMT -5
I declare that "what" is the anti-Christ. Have a nice day. Just don't call me "late for dinner". Will Cherie be censuring you for libel also?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 15:31:49 GMT -5
I don't understand. How is calling a website an "anti-Christ website" libelous? (oops not too sure if libelous is really a word) It isn't. Here's more from wiki: Another important aspect of defamation is the difference between fact and opinion. Statements made as "facts" are frequently actionable defamation. Statements of opinion or pure opinion are not actionable. In order to win damages in a libel case, the plaintiff must first show that the statements were "statements of fact or mixed statements of opinion and fact" and second that these statements were false. Conversely, a typical defense to defamation is that the statements are opinion. One of the major tests to distinguish whether a statement is fact or opinion is whether the statement can be proved true or false in a court of law. If the statement can be proved true or false, then, on that basis, the case will be heard by a jury to determine whether it is true or false. If the statement cannot be proved true or false, the court may dismiss the libel case without it ever going to a jury to find facts in the case.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Dec 12, 2008 15:36:10 GMT -5
Is libel like calling somebody a liar?
|
|
|
Post by degem on Dec 12, 2008 15:41:40 GMT -5
thanks what. no lin, when you call someone a liar you are being libelous towards that person.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 15:44:29 GMT -5
Is libel like calling somebody a liar? Hi Lin, Search wikipedia on "Defamation". A good, brief overview. Essentially, libel is writing a falsehood about another. Slander is the same thing, but in verbal oral form.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 12, 2008 15:45:13 GMT -5
I declare that "what" is the anti-Christ. Have a nice day. Just don't call me "late for dinner". Will Cherie be censuring you for libel also? First you say that it's not libel.... oh, I get it. It's not libel when used against VOT. But when used against you.... oh well. That's what I get when dealing with One Note Johnny.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 15:47:22 GMT -5
Just don't call me "late for dinner". Will Cherie be censuring you for libel also? First you say that it's not libel.... oh, I get it. It's not libel when used against VOT. But when used against you.... oh well. That's what you get when dealing with One Note Johnny. You're not libelling me. Settle down.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Dec 12, 2008 15:57:07 GMT -5
Thank you for stating what I have wanted to say for a long time, but lacked the ability to do so clearly!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Dec 12, 2008 16:01:20 GMT -5
I think that this story that you singled out gives readers plenty of pause to consider just how far the editors of the VOT will go to present the 2x2 church as 100% evil. It shows how the truth can be used to tell a lie. Exactly, not much different than the "angle cut beam" WTC conspiracy theories. Again, maybe that is why so few choose to be members on sites like VOT and TLT - they have investigated from an objective big picture point of view, and see clearly exactly what is going on. VOT is responsible ONLY for being a repository of stories. Their alleged crime was in posting the singled out story under their child abuse section. Period. They made no comments about it on the VOT site. They didn't add to it or take from it. The comment at the end is siimply the last line of the story reiterated. VOT might not have commented on this specific story but investigation reveals that stories like it are the basis for a LOT of subjective commentary on VOT, et al. If one wants to make the case that the cause of all the bad in these stories is because of the friends and workers fellowship then one must also accept the reciprocal - that the bad people involved would have been a angels in a different fellowship. Goodness why would anyone choose to harm the credibility and viability of their own cause like this, it makes no sense. Reminds me of Don Henley's -->> Dirty Laundry << You'd think VOT et al would pay attention when even Pickle like Priscilla gets it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2008 16:23:24 GMT -5
Cherie, you have already effectively stated on this thread that inclusion of stories on the VOT must be negative against the 2x2s, that's the criteria. Association is clearly not the criteria since positive or neutral stories are not allowed no matter how closely associated. And hey, I'm ok with that. What I'm not ok with is posting a story that is not anti 2x2 in the hopes that readers will view it that way.
I fully support the idea that anti-2x2 church sites exist. Good can come of it. Fertilizer comes from cow dung. However, if the site is going to exploit people, you'll never get fertilizer from that kind of cow dung.
You operate a site that seeks to influence the public, specifically against a church group. You are morally accountable because what you do can change people. You have put youself into an important place and need to carefully consider the moral effects of your efforts.
Besides, if you don't operate the site with a high standard of integrity, you will actually strengthen the 2x2 church.
I don't doubt there are anti-Christ aspects about the VOT just as there are about me, you and the 2x2 church. To try to claim otherwise is...........well, you know the answer to that one.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 12, 2008 16:24:04 GMT -5
RE Libel, etc from: www.dancingwithlawyers.com/Defamation is written or spoken injury to a person or organization's reputation. Libel is the written act of defamation, vs. slander, the oral act of defamation.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 12, 2008 16:27:58 GMT -5
Clearday: Cherie, you have already effectively stated on this thread that inclusion of stories on the VOT must be negative against the 2x2s, that's the criteria.
Please produce proof of this outrageous statement.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Dec 12, 2008 16:37:31 GMT -5
This is a sad, if not sick thread in that someone writes their story of growing up in a 2x2 home, wants it put on VOT and everyone starts attacking VOT.
This thread is made up of sad, sick people. The person who posted the thread is not the problem, it is those who have tried to minimise and accuse them of wrong doing when it was the parents who were wrong. Typical diverson tactics. 100% responsibility goes to the parents, no one else. Typical when abuse occurs, people get all upset about the writers or whistle blowers rather than the offenders. Takes the focus off the real issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2008 16:43:02 GMT -5
Clearday: Cherie, you have already effectively stated on this thread that inclusion of stories on the VOT must be negative against the 2x2s, that's the criteria. Please produce proof of this outrageous statement. Cherie Kropp writes: "I see no reason why VOT should publish positive 2x2 experiences. They dont claim to be an equal opportunity site. They've never held themselves out to be so. VOT was formed to give people the opportunity to tell the OTHER SIDE - the other half that doesnt get told in meetings."
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 12, 2008 16:45:31 GMT -5
What's the problem with these people telling their stories, clearday?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 16:45:47 GMT -5
RE Libel, etc from: www.dancingwithlawyers.com/Defamation is written or spoken injury to a person or organization's reputation. Libel is the written act of defamation, vs. slander, the oral act of defamation. Is this apropo of anything in particular?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 16:50:56 GMT -5
This is a sad, if not sick thread in that someone writes their story of growing up in a 2x2 home. They have it put on VOT and everyone is attacking VOT and the person.This thread is made up of sad, sick people. The person who posted the thread is not the problem, it is those who have tried to minimise and accuse them of wrong doing when it was the parents who were wrong. Typical diverson tactics. 100% responsibility goes to the parents, no one else. Typical when abuse occurs, people get all upset about the writers or whistle blowers rather than the offenders. Takes the focus off the real issue. Where did you see anyone attacking the person? Where do you see anyone upset about the writer? We of the fellowship are defending ourselves from a scurrilous tarring by association by VOT. Don't misconstrue that defence as an attack on the writer.
|
|
|
Post by Geoff on Dec 12, 2008 16:50:56 GMT -5
Is libel like calling somebody a liar? Hi Lin, Search wikipedia on "Defamation". A good, brief overview. Essentially, libel is writing a falsehood about another. Slander is the same thing, but in verbal form. Are you saying that "verbal" is not written? If you mean spoken and not written then you'd need the word "oral". Verbal just means in words. And doesn't necessarily specify that its spoken or written.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 12, 2008 16:53:07 GMT -5
Hi Lin, Search wikipedia on "Defamation". A good, brief overview. Essentially, libel is writing a falsehood about another. Slander is the same thing, but in verbal form. Are you saying that "verbal" is not written? If you mean spoken and not written then you'd need the word "oral". Verbal just means in words. And doesn't necessarily specify that its spoken or written. Thanks, Geoff. I did mean oral.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 12, 2008 16:56:29 GMT -5
RE: Again, maybe that is why so few choose to be members on sites like VOT and TLT - they have investigated from an objective big picture point of view, and see clearly exactly what is going on.
And then again--this is just your hopeful dream and speculation...
This statement is made by one who doesn't have a very long history on the message boards. I've been on the message boards that were put up since day one along with many others here. Before that, we were on the 2x2-church list.
Since the very first board, there has always been ONE board where more people have congregate than to the other boards open at the same time. This is largely because people dont like to have to check several other boards--so they will elect to frequent ONE board where most all the news will be found.
Boards have come and gone through the years. Even large boards like this one have gone by the wayside. The Professig Message Board did (PMB). Who would have thought just requiring registration would cause so many people to jump ship and go to another board (this one) that would eventually require registration!
Fewer numbers on other boards proves nothing. Thats the way it has always worked with a board of people associated with the F&W.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 12, 2008 17:00:34 GMT -5
Clearday: Cherie, you have already effectively stated on this thread that inclusion of stories on the VOT must be negative against the 2x2s, that's the criteria. Please produce proof of this outrageous statement. Cherie Kropp writes: "I see no reason why VOT should publish positive 2x2 experiences. They dont claim to be an equal opportunity site. They've never held themselves out to be so. VOT was formed to give people the opportunity to tell the OTHER SIDE - the other half that doesnt get told in meetings."You'll have to do lots better than this. No where does the above claim that VOT's requirement is negative info about the 2x2 must be present. Get real! Go take a vacation...you're showing signs of really needing it.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Dec 12, 2008 17:11:06 GMT -5
Cherie,
I know that, but lets look at the TMB numbers.
These are the stats for the last 24 hrs;
1 Staff Member, 81 Members, 445 Guests, 32 Invisible Users
The invisible usere and members might also show show up as guests if they log in each time they visit. This means there might be < 400 people who read here any given day, and 110 or so who are logged in and post. In the big picture that is a very, very small number.
take care, Jesse
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 12, 2008 17:17:49 GMT -5
So what? There is no point. It proves nothing. You have not defined the illusive "bigger picture"... So the numbers just hang out there...meaningless. Cherie, I know that, but lets look at the TMB numbers. These are the stats for the last 24 hrs; 1 Staff Member, 81 Members, 445 Guests, 32 Invisible Users The invisible usere and members might also show show up as guests if they log in each time they visit. This means there might be < 400 people who read here any given day, and 110 or so who are logged in and post. In the big picture that is a very, very small number. take care, Jesse
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Dec 12, 2008 17:18:30 GMT -5
Cherie, I know that, but lets look at the TMB numbers. These are the stats for the last 24 hrs; 1 Staff Member, 81 Members, 445 Guests, 32 Invisible Users The invisible usere and members might also show show up as guests if they log in each time they visit. This means there might be < 400 people who read here any given day, and 110 or so who are logged in and post. In the big picture that is a very, very small number. take care, Jesse So the group is only a small group in comparision to the rest of the world. Only a small number have never been involved in the group if you look at the big picture.
|
|