|
Post by Admin on Jun 30, 2008 21:08:48 GMT -5
We have received advice about three threads on this sub-board:
Sexual scandal in Greece (or was it Albania?) Libel Action Any Greeks?
that suggests that some of the allegations made are false. Also that some of the content is by nature libelous and/or personal attack.
I am aware that these suggestions will be controversial, therefore full transparency here is essential.
Because of the allegation of libel, it has been necessary to (at least temporarily) quarantine these three threads. Upon hearing representations here and by PM, I will seek to do my best to restore factual information.
Thank you for your understanding, admin
|
|
|
Post by belinda on Jul 18, 2008 9:09:09 GMT -5
I have no problem with the threads being moved but it's proved to be quite the conversation killer on the European board!
Or maybe everybody is at convention?
|
|
Claire
Senior Member
Posts: 489
|
Post by Claire on Jul 18, 2008 9:22:40 GMT -5
From what i hear certainly not sunbathing in the back garden ...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 18, 2008 19:03:04 GMT -5
From what i hear certainly not sunbathing in the back garden ... Maybe out sitting at cafes with a bottle of claret ;D It's a pity if this is a show stopper. The libel allegations had to be taken seriously, but hopefully the intent wasn't to stifle discussion of genuine issues. The same topics can be continued to be discussed, being careful with any use of names. If someone who knows the background wanted to clean up the threads (removing libelous material) that would be OK too. admin
|
|
|
Post by belinda on Jul 20, 2008 18:27:00 GMT -5
From what i hear certainly not sunbathing in the back garden ... Maybe out sitting at cafes with a bottle of claret ;D It's a pity if this is a show stopper. The libel allegations had to be taken seriously, but hopefully the intent wasn't to stifle discussion of genuine issues. The same topics can be continued to be discussed, being careful with any use of names. If someone who knows the background wanted to clean up the threads (removing libelous material) that would be OK too. admin Wot Admin said... Anyhoo, I believe there is a warm front approaching these wee isles over the next few days so perhaps at the first glimpse of sunshine we'll be offering up our blancmange-like flesh to the sun in the hope of a good roasting. Egg timers on the ready for turning over...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2008 7:04:41 GMT -5
sunworshippers ;D get those deck chairs out and maybe a pint of ale
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 23, 2008 5:00:39 GMT -5
It took more than one month and a half for somebody to add something on this thread. I hoped it stayed untouched a monument to the hypocrisy of the 2x2s.
Just before the three threads went under the carpet I had published this (last) comment:
In parallel I have been going through several threads of the main board and I realise that in many of them names are mentioned clearly (or enough information is given to identify people involved). This proves that the administrators are applying double standards, especially when «their own» are concerned. It is evident that this board is now fully controlled by the 2x2s and that explains the reluctance to post under the «UK/Ireland and European Issues» part. Of course trolls will continue playing around to give an air of «ex-eness» just to meke people believe that the cult is pure while the «exes» are villains.
As far as I am concerned I will not publish anything here in the near future. Except of course if I come upon some real good gossip about workers, who pretend to be the modern apostles, while they are wolves and crooks like any other preacher or priest in the mainstream churches or in smaller cult-like congregations.
P.S. Any reply on the real reasons the female Irish worker (who was with the Englishman whose brother had a responsible position in England) stopped from the work?
|
|
|
Post by Multitude on Jul 23, 2008 16:41:45 GMT -5
Ghost
Give it up mate. This thread is dead. Kaputt. Gone. Is no more. Vanquished!
This my friend is an ex thread!
I appreciate your views on the workers but when you're in a public forum you have to abide by the rules of the board. Rightly or wrongly, that's the way the world is; and it doesn't just protect the workers, it protects the likes of me and you against gossip, unfounded or otherwise. If you don't like it you're free to set up your own board, publish and be damned.
As for your assertion that this board is run by the 2x2's, well, I sense more than a hint of paranoia setting in. I've submitted plenty of heavy ex-2x2 contributions here and no one has blinked an eye lid or attempted a military coup. Indeed it would appear to most of us that it is you rather than the administrators who has utimately been responsibile for the demise of the activity on this board. And just when it had taken off too. Time, perhaps, for you to get out a bit more in the warmer weather.
And by the way, I never do quite understand the obsession on these boards with other people's sex lives. I recommend that you focus on your own - if you're not getting any, go get some, if you're not getting enough, go get some more, and if you're getting way too much, I suggest you send your wife round here.
Multitude
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 24, 2008 1:12:30 GMT -5
Typical, arrogant, personnal, agressive, know-it-all, 2x2 (i.e. antichristian) response.
|
|
Claire
Senior Member
Posts: 489
|
Post by Claire on Jul 24, 2008 1:27:12 GMT -5
Typical, arrogant, personnal, agressive, know-it-all, 2x2 (i.e. antichristian) response. ghost ... kicking anyone who tells you to calm down isn't going to make people read your posts for information - rather more likely for the excitement factor. /c p.s. is Multitude really an active, card-bearing, signed-up 2x2?
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 24, 2008 1:43:00 GMT -5
Nobody told me to calm down. They just swept under the carpet the information about a relationship between two workers, pretending it was libel. And on the basis of what? Anonymous declarations of people that once met the said people or that once knew them. No clear declaration by an actual colleague or by the people themselves - who have been asked directly.
And I am kicking nobody. Some people on this thread clearly stated that the policy of the Admin was a conversation killer on this part of the board. Now nobody said that THIS was kicking or that the person who said this (a grave accusation in an online board like this one) should calm down. Of course if people feel accused that is not my problem.
And finally, I ask again, what was the reason the specific sister worker stopped from the work? Stop evading the question and give a real answer please.
|
|
Claire
Senior Member
Posts: 489
|
Post by Claire on Jul 24, 2008 3:06:27 GMT -5
ghost,
calm down.
There. Someone has said it.
Any information in your message is getting lost in the noise of your delivery.
/c wondering if she'll get classified as a 2x2 again ...
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 24, 2008 3:14:34 GMT -5
Any reply on the real questions ♪♩♫♪ ?? Or just unrelated «calm down» admonitions to the person asking ?
|
|
Claire
Senior Member
Posts: 489
|
Post by Claire on Jul 24, 2008 3:32:50 GMT -5
Any reply on the real questions ♪♩♫♪ ?? None whatsoever. I'm in no way close enough to the running of this place, or the F&W Church for that matter, to be in any way useful. I'm just a bored old bat sitting on the sidelines. Admonition? If I wanted to deliver an admonition it would look a lot different. Trust me on that one Besides, we're in the splendid position where we can each ignore what the other says - imo no sting in any admonition when that's the case. /c
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 24, 2008 7:43:25 GMT -5
Finally we seem to agree.
But the issues remain.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2008 18:03:05 GMT -5
ghost, I know you're upset about this. I am a bit too because I have this nagging concern that the issue of 'libel' might have been raised to stifle genuine canvassing of issues.
I honestly don't know any of the background so am in no position to judge if or how close those threads went to libel.
Here is the advice from top of this board, going back to my predecessor's time:
Libelous posts are strictly forbidden. Please provide news links if you are accusing someone of a criminal offense. Otherwise, don't post such articles.
Subsequently the board got shut down and we discovered that ProBoards lawyers regard libel as much more than accusations of criminal offenses.
I definitely have an intention of not letting TMB get shut down again, over this or any other matter. If you like, that is my agenda. Inevitably I am going to err on the side of caution at times.
I am prepared for you and others to have a go at cleaning up anything that could risk TMB falling foul of ProBoard's libel requirements from those threads. Or you can re-post with the libel issue in mind.
It's tricky because there's so much gray but I think we can still be effective while keeping on the right side of the libel issue.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 25, 2008 3:49:54 GMT -5
ghost, I know you're upset about this. I am a bit too because I have this nagging concern that the issue of 'libel' might have been raised to stifle genuine canvassing of issues. I honestly don't know any of the background so am in no position to judge if or how close those threads went to libel. Here is the advice from top of this board, going back to my predecessor's time: Libelous posts are strictly forbidden. Please provide news links if you are accusing someone of a criminal offense. Otherwise, don't post such articles.Subsequently the board got shut down and we discovered that ProBoards lawyers regard libel as much more than accusations of criminal offenses. I definitely have an intention of not letting TMB get shut down again, over this or any other matter. If you like, that is my agenda. Inevitably I am going to err on the side of caution at times. I am prepared for you and others to have a go at cleaning up anything that could risk TMB falling foul of ProBoard's libel requirements from those threads. Or you can re-post with the libel issue in mind. It's tricky because there's so much gray but I think we can still be effective while keeping on the right side of the libel issue. Thanks Administrator for taking the time to deal with this. Let me ask you some questions first: 1. Was the issue raised by the people whose names were mentionned in the original posts or by some unrelated outsiders? I could pretend that some posts on e.g. the Michigan issue or on other issues are libelous, but I do not have a direct relationship with any of the people involved nor can I prove that I was affected personnally. 2. Were the posts really libelous in the first place? I would let a court of law decide on this and I declared that I was prepared to take the full responsibility, even pay restitution if the story proved wrong. One has to take up a stand in life, not be afraid all the time. Of course a court of law functions with real people and the judge will most probably want to know the whole context of the issue, the precedents, etc. etc. - Oh I love the thought of it ... 3. Does the Proboard Team accept the accusation of libel without examination? Google for example will not consider something libelous unless there is a formal court decision establishing this. Does Proboards close down a site because some (unidentified and mostly unrelated) individual says this post is libelous? I do stand by my initial information on the two individuals mentioned. I DO accept to censor my posts (in fact I will oficially retract them apologising and making amends) ONLY on the basis of information received directly by the individuals involved. However, YOU have already modified my posts before puting them out of site, so you have already «altered the evidence». Thanks for your replies.
|
|
|
Post by To Ghost on Jul 26, 2008 18:30:59 GMT -5
And finally, I ask again, what was the reason the specific sister worker stopped from the work? Stop evading the question and give a real answer please. The sister worker in question left the work due to stress. This has already been mentioned on the boards in direct response to your question, so I'm not sure what you want to hear. The boring truth or some wild story? She was in Albania (a very difficult area by all accounts) for a number of years and as far as I can recall, spent her final year in the work in Italy, somewhere she'd been before moving on to Albania. Those that know her do not question the explanation; her anxiety was plain to be seen. It is better the threads are removeda - she is an only daughter with fiercely protective parents and brothers with deep pockets so libel action had they known of this, was a distinct possiblity. The fact that at least half of them aren't part of the fellowship removes whatever restraints that might deter libel action immediately. Ghost, I understand you are excited by the gossip and probably surprised and delighted with what you stirred up, but posting specific names and alleged specific "sins" is not posting in the spirit of the board. Vague allusions may be a better idea and I am sure you have noticed from the main board, that even these can be figured out. The advantage is you don't need to post with proof of alleged wrong-doings and really, if you must make wild accusations about people, regardless of position or occuaption, you are obliged to have proof. Why else do you think the red-top news rags are always getting themselves in trouble with the law?
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 27, 2008 4:35:38 GMT -5
I asked three questions to the administrator. I am waiting his/her replies.
I have no problem whatsoever with the brothers and relatives of the ex-sister worker. Maybe they should know what really went on in Albania. And I do not think that mentioning that their sister had an affair with a brother worker would be such a problem. However, knowing that it was the handling of this affair that possibly led their sister to a nervous breakdown, may mean that I would not be in the stand of the accused but some other parties (workers, overseers, etc) would have to answer for a possible cover up and for handling a delicate case in the usual 2x2 way - expulsion, lies, half-truths.
In anyway, I never had a problem facing a libel case - in the US, in Ireland, in Albania, in Greece. It looks as if the administrator fears this more than I do. But let us wait his/her reply first.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 27, 2008 4:45:27 GMT -5
Here is a major problem with this cult. One reports a story about wrongdoings of workers without mentioning names. Everybody cries foul and requests names and details. One gives names and details. The cult reacts asking for proof e.g. court proceedings or condemnations. One provides these as well. Then the cult massively reacts by saying that the accused was not a good worker after all and that (s)he had stress problems and was removed from the work or moved to another place or is resting. And after all we should have mercy and pary for his/her soul ...
However, the real victims are never taken care of and the people who were deceived into believing that the workers were speaking with the Kingdom of God in their heart or that they were guided by the Holy Ghost, are still kept in the dark, are still lied to that the workers perach he Truth, are still given some distorted version of the real fact or asked (even ordered in the name of the delegation of powers from Christ to the workers) to shut up.
Well if people shut up, the stones will speak ...
|
|
|
Post by To Ghost on Jul 27, 2008 6:42:18 GMT -5
I have no problem whatsoever with the brothers and relatives of the ex-sister worker. Maybe they should know what really went on in Albania. And I do not think that mentioning that their sister had an affair with a brother worker would be such a problem. How do you know what really went on in Albania? Did you witness the alleged incident(s)? If not, then one can only presume you are repeating hearsay and the reliability of your information naturally is open to question. As for the final sentence in the quoted excerpt, I would not presume any such thing of her family. As mentioned, they are fiercely protective and I'd be inclined to guess that whether the stories carried any credence or not, the mere fact that you are gossiping about someone whom you do not know and is very dear to them, would be enough to make them stir up quite a storm, libel action or not. Ghost, you are very kind to be concerned for the worker in question but she's big enough and old enough to look out for herself. If she needs help, she knows where to go and if she felt so terribly wronged by the fellowship, I can assure you she has enough backbone to leave and stir up a storm with or without the help of her family.
|
|
|
Post by watchout ghost on Jul 27, 2008 9:41:09 GMT -5
Watch out Ghost and be careful what you are saying
FIA President Max Mosley has won action in the UK courts against a UK Sunday newspaper for breach of privacy (involving alleged orgy participation) and has won damages of £60000 plus the paper suffers legal costs of about £850000. Double that to get an idea of the american dollar equivalent.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 27, 2008 11:41:16 GMT -5
I am watching out, waiting for the Administrator's replies.
I may add that I take threats seriously, by people who «feared not God, neither regarded man», but I am not afraid. I know what the 2x2s are capable of, but they will have to come out of the woods and attack publicly, and LIGHT, I think, terrifies them most of all.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 27, 2008 18:47:12 GMT -5
I will respond to the questions asking about libel, by giving the ProBoards position (owners of the site that hosts our board) in a post on the main board. Either later tonight or tomorrow.
admin
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Jul 30, 2008 6:15:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Aug 4, 2008 12:38:27 GMT -5
The «Advice on libel» thread on the main board was (as was expected) buried under. Here is the original reply of the administrator: On the European sub-board, some questions have been raised regarding what is and isn’t libel. The short answer is, whatever ProBoards as owners decide to police in this regard. As has been said (see the previous thread on libel in the sub-board 'Administrative Threads') "ProBoards can set their ToS rules any way they want, they can make their ToS much more strict than the law, they can do that because they own the boards.
Another way to look at it is layers of discipline.
People are asking about section 230 implying it limits providers from liability exposure. ProBoards doesn't want to go there, they want to clip problems before they become legal risks. Since they own the boards they have the right to do it."It doesn’t matter how legal dictionaries or different countries define libel. Because TMB is hosted by ProBoards, their Terms of Service (ToS) mean we commit to complying with their rules. Violations of the ToS can result in them shutting boards down (something that they won't hesitate to do). The question was asked "Does the Proboard Team accept the accusation of libel without examination? Google for example will not consider something libelous unless there is a formal court decision establishing this. Does Proboards close down a site because some (unidentified and mostly unrelated) individual says this post is libelous?"The best answer to this is the precedent that occurred last September when ProBoards did just that. Shut TMB down. Some of the background is on these threads: support.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=support&action=display&n=1&thread=1189117415&page=2#1189459290support.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=support&action=display&n=1&thread=1189446357&page=1#1189459781Here’s some excerpts from ProBoards staff: Sept 10, 2007, 1:32pm:
Could you elaborate on what specific posts or discussions were on the board that resulted in your complaint?
In other words, what exactly was on the other board that was legally libelous?
Are you referring to the discussion of the worker from Minn?
------------------------------------------
Basically, any post which contained a name. You can't name someone as doing something (as in posting as fact), unless they have been proven guilty in a court of law... otherwise it libel, slander or defamtion of character, whichever you want it to be called, and can result in legal proceedings, and hence the removal. And there were a few. My main issue with the board is it's lack of administration. The last post by the main admin was 4 months ago, and thus why it was deleted, and not warned, which is normally what would occur.
If the main admin is around, and can contact me.
Craig Suffolk ProBoards.com Staff
Sept 11, 2007, 1:40pm, mrleo wrote:My desire for an answer. If you can answer my question, please do so. If this support forum is not the place to ask this question, please redirect me to the appropriate forum.
-------------------------------------
Well, it would help if i knew in what regards i was answering. I guess you are referring to the professing board.
I don't know who mrleo is, he could have been referring to anything, which is why i asked. Additionally, we are liable when we are made aware of the content, and do not take action.
If you want to blame someone, blame your admin, for abandoning the forum, without any moderation. I cannot be held responsible for this. I have to follow policies, and take the appropriate actions. In this case, because of the content of the board, and disappearance of the admin without any form of secondary moderation, i had to remove the board….
Craig Suffolk ProBoards.com Staff
It's your responsibility, as the admin, to control what's posted.
In legal terms, an opinion is fine, but it has to be very clear it is an opinion. For example "Lisa is made of spaghetti" is presented as fact, and therefore if it isn't true, could be considered libel (which would also be against PB rules) but "In my opinion, Lisa looks like she's made of spaghetti" is ok.
A good way to decide whether what's been posted about is ok or not is to think how you'd feel if it was actually referring to you. If you'd be upset or offended, and the statement isn't 100% verifiably true, then it's probably better not to have it posted.************************************************** It was made clear that for ProBoards, posting even initials or anything else that could identify a person about whom allegations are made could result in TMB again being shut down by them. There is no point in my arguing with them on this, Craig Suffolk also posted: your persistence is growing tired with me. I have been courteous in responding to your questions thus far, although, you did not own the board, and i am in no way obliged to respond to any of your questions, or give you the ins and outs of my actions. However, there's only so many times one can answer the same question.In other words, ProBoards don't need to justify their actions with us. Another question that was asked on the European board "Were the posts really libelous in the first place? I would let a court of law decide on this and I declared that I was prepared to take the full responsibility, even pay restitution if the story proved wrong. One has to take up a stand in life, not be afraid all the time."This is a good place to point out that for a post to meet the definition of libel, the statement must be FALSE. True statements cannot be construed as libel. The issue is what constitutes proof that something is true or false. Obviously a court decision is acceptable standard of proof. Quoting something published in a newspaper or journal would also meet the standard, I imagine. A statement or confession from the subject would also do the trick. The issue for TMB is not that we can publish an accusation, however firmly we believe it to be true, then have it tested in a court of law (even allowing that the original poster indicates that he is prepared to take full legal responsibility). ProBoards would shut us down long before any court got to make a decision. The order would have to be, take it to court and get the decision first, then publish completely freely here. Finally, the question was asked of who raised the issue of potential libel with me in regard to those threads. It was a number of registered members of TMB, firstly on the threads themselves and followed up in PMs. I don’t believe any who contacted me were those whose names were mentioned in the allegations, but it is possible I suppose. Because I had no background, thus no personal knowledge on which to determine the truth or otherwise, I had to form a judgment and in particular, to try to view this as ProBoards would be likely to do. They like me would have no knowledge, and on past precedent I have no doubt how they would react to any complaint. As I said on the European board, I definitely have no intention of letting TMB get shut down again, over this or any other matter. If you like, that is my agenda. Inevitably I am going to err on the side of caution at times. I also stated that I have a nagging concern that the issue of 'libel' might have been raised to stifle genuine canvassing of issues. The solution as I see it is to work within the constraints imposed by ProBoards and find ways to make the issues known anyway. Or to find a board elsewhere other than a ProBoards site. However, a recent response from Craig Suffolk of ProBoards indicates that ProBoards are no different from most other forums: Libel is the same whether it is on ProBoards, Yahoo, EBay, MSN or any other site, or means of publication. It is not ProBoards who defines what Libel is.
CraigSome definitions of libel/defamation: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libelwww.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/7613C25C-8E5D-47A5-9E0D93B952DE16E7/alpha/L/Even with ProBoards, this is a rather poorly defined area: And "no libel" is not specifically referenced, but the ToS does state that the user's forum may not promote illegal activity. Going with the above posted legal definition of libel, it is illegal - if someone is committing libel (and bear in mind not just on your forum, but going around and spreading the untruths) and it is being promoted through the use of a ProBoards forum, it is against ToS.What is legal varies from country to country. How the owners ProBoards will interpret this is best understood from Craig's response on September 10th, 2007.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Aug 4, 2008 12:39:34 GMT -5
Here is my detailed reply: Thanks Administrator for your long reply. However, allow me to disagree extensively. First, let me give a brief background of the story for those who did not follow it from the beginning. In the UK/Europe board I wrote that I was informed about an affair between a brother and a sister worker. According to what I heard, the sister worker stopped from the work while the brother worker continues. I contacted him by e-mail asking him to refute or confirm the information and promising to make restitution. Until today I have received no reply. Several anonymous commentenators «tore their garments» pretending the information was false and it could be termed as libel. They even threatened legal action. The administrator, first modified my posts (altered evidence) then moved the threads to the password protected part of the site, although (s)he admited that (s)he was «going to err on the side of caution». I asked the administrator three questions, and his/her post above is considered to be his/her reply. Here are the questions with the replies of the arministrator and my comments. Question 1. Was the issue raised by the people whose names were mentionned in the original posts or by some unrelated outsiders?The administrator replied that: «It was a number of registered members of TMB, firstly on the threads themselves and followed up in PMs. I don’t believe any who contacted me were those whose names were mentioned in the allegations, but it is possible I suppose. Because I had no background, thus no personal knowledge on which to determine the truth or otherwise, I had to form a judgment and in particular, to try to view this as ProBoards would be likely to do. They like me would have no knowledge, and on past precedent I have no doubt how they would react to any complaint.» A libel case by defintion can be introduced only by the parties concerned. By taking up the allegations of unconcerned parties the administrator in fact panicked and censored the posts then the whole thread without proper basis. The fact that I publicly undertook to offer my apologies, delete the posts and pay restitution to the parties concerned, if they refuted the published information means, in my opinion, that the administrator acted against free speech and was bullied by hard-line 2x2s to censor information that could protect people from falling victims to unscrupulous workers. Question 2. Were the posts really libelous in the first place? I would let a court of law decide on this and I declared that I was prepared to take the full responsibility, even pay restitution if the story proved wrong. One has to take up a stand in life, not be afraid all the time. The administrator replied that: «This is a good place to point out that for a post to meet the definition of libel, the statement must be FALSE. True statements cannot be construed as libel.
The issue is what constitutes proof that something is true or false. Obviously a court decision is acceptable standard of proof. Quoting something published in a newspaper or journal would also meet the standard, I imagine. A statement or confession from the subject would also do the trick.
The issue for TMB is not that we can publish an accusation, however firmly we believe it to be true, then have it tested in a court of law (even allowing that the original poster indicates that he is prepared to take full legal responsibility). ProBoards would shut us down long before any court got to make a decision.
The order would have to be, take it to court and get the decision first, then publish completely freely here. ... As I said on the European board, I definitely have no intention of letting TMB get shut down again, over this or any other matter. If you like, that is my agenda. Inevitably I am going to err on the side of caution at times. I also stated that I have a nagging concern that the issue of 'libel' might have been raised to stifle genuine canvassing of issues. The solution as I see it is to work within the constraints imposed by ProBoards and find ways to make the issues known anyway. Or to find a board elsewhere other than a ProBoards site.
However, a recent response from Craig Suffolk of ProBoards indicates that ProBoards are no different from most other forums:
Libel is the same whether it is on ProBoards, Yahoo, EBay, MSN or any other site, or means of publication. It is not ProBoards who defines what Libel is.
Some definitions of libel/defamation: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/7613C25C-8E5D-47A5-9E0D93B952DE16E7/alpha/L/
Even with ProBoards, this is a rather poorly defined area:
And "no libel" is not specifically referenced, but the ToS does state that the user's forum may not promote illegal activity. Going with the above posted legal definition of libel, it is illegal - if someone is committing libel (and bear in mind not just on your forum, but going around and spreading the untruths) and it is being promoted through the use of a ProBoards forum, it is against ToS.
What is legal varies from country to country. How the owners ProBoards will interpret this is best understood from Craig's response on September 10th, 2007.» Again the administrator acted on the basis of a narrow-minded 2x2-based approach. On the basis of the definitions of libel given at the links provided (but also in several other places like www.cyberlibel.com/libel.html#Number%202 or www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html) it is evident that for a statement to be libel: - it has to be FALSE, and - it must injure the person's reputation or standing in the community or it may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. Now of course the administrator centered his/her reply only on the truthfulness or not of the published information and not on the second part of the definition. And even if my initial statement was considered by the 2x2 hard-liners false, what they really cared was the reputation not of the individuals mentioned but of the group. However, a statement of the type «Al Capone is a thief» or «Rocco Valenti is a bully» would certainly injure the personality of those two mafiosi and would give a negative immage of the mafia, but would certainly not be upheld by any judge as injurious to their «reputation or standing in the community» - unless of course the judge is also a member of or is blackmailed by the mafia. Now given the fact that in the TMB board many people publish much stronger accusations, aften citing names of (present or past) overseers, I do not see why a statement about a man and a woman having an affair, can be considered libel FOR THE COMMUNITY - and we speak about the community at large, not the 2x2 community per se (which accepts much more serious accusations and allegations on this board). So in my opinion, the administrator acted by applying a double standard, by considering as libelous a statement that in fact cannot be proved to be such under a normal definion of libel. Question 3. Does the Proboard Team accept the accusation of libel without examination? The administrator replied that: «The best answer to this is the precedent that occurred last September when ProBoards did just that. Shut TMB down. Some of the background is on these threads: support.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=support&action=display&n=1&thread=66355&page=2 support.proboards.com/?board=support&action=display&thread=66355&page=1
Here’s some excerpts from ProBoards staff: ...» I studied the Proboards thread (as well as some other related threads like this support.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=support&action=display&n=1&thread=66488&page=1#1189459781 and this support.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=support&action=display&thread=66355&page=1) and concluded that the suspension of the TMB was mostly due to the fact that the board has gone wild and there was no administrator. For Proboards this was reason enough to suspend the board following JesseLanckman's generic accusations about libelous posts not removed. Furthermore, the generic reply of Proboards « Basically, any post which contained a name. You can't name someone as doing something (as in posting as fact), unless they have been proven guilty in a court of law... otherwise it libel, slander or defamtion of character, whichever you want it to be called, and can result in legal proceedings, and hence the removal», is, in my opinion, at least as naive as the reaction of the administrator. They both ignore the real notion of libel as described above as well as the context. Conclusion. In my opinion, by editing the initial posts then removing the threads from public consultation, the administrator acted in the best interests of the 2x2 cult (probably under their direct influence or constraint), by obstructing free speech and exerting unnecessary censorship - something that is also illegal as it violates a fundamental human right and the first amendment of the US constitution. Proving that the 2x2 cult is not what it pretends to be - the one and only Truth and the unique way the salvation of the soul - by citing true facts about its so-called workers cannot be considered libel in any way and before any jurisdiction (maybe the Vatican would rule otherwise but I doupt it). Of course fighting people, who in my opinion are obsessive about their way of dealing with life and others is a waste of time and certainly I will not try to fight the decision of the administrator any further - the time of the Proboard administrators is also valuable to deal with what in my opinion one could consider a bunch of .... well no more opinions from me.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Aug 4, 2008 12:43:15 GMT -5
Here is an exchange with Jesse: Ghost, I don't know the truth of your accusation, whether imagined or real. I'm sure like all of us you too have a few ghosts in your closet - so, consider the actions of Jesus, and the accusers, in this public confrontation over an accusation just like the one you are making; Jhn 8:3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
Jhn 8:4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Jhn 8:5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
Jhn 8:6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with [his] finger wrote on the ground, [as though he heard them not].
Jhn 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Jhn 8:8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
Jhn 8:9 And they which heard [it], being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
Jhn 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
Jhn 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. Jesse Adultery was a sin, and may be grounds for a divorce in a post-christian society (the same it may still be grounds for stoning in a muslim society). Having an affair is not a sin. However, people who declare themselves THE apostles of Christ on earth should be more honest with their own selves and take a more responsible and honest stand before they try to preach to others. Even if the allegation is not true the way the 2x2s dealt with it (the admnistrator of this bord included) is, in my opinion, a disgrace. Ghost, fornication is a sin. The accusers in the quoted story were honest enough to realise they were in no position to accuse, that's why they left. I love how wise the words of Jesus were - such that the accusers were convicted from within. I don't think Jesus condemned them either. ~ Is it possible to defend the truth of a matter against the imaginations of others - especially on an internet board like this? If so I'd like to know how. take care, Jesse Ghost, fornication is a sin. For a limited group of people this may be true. For the society at large it is quite natural and, when conducted between two consenting adults, very enjoyable. However, a (non-verbal) exchange took place between the three parties. This was not the case in the alleged libel case we are discussing. Is it possible to defend the truth of a matter against the imaginations of others - especially on an internet board like this? If so I'd like to know how. The accused themselves just reply publicly to the e-mails refuting the allegations and giving some valid explanation for the departure from the work of the sister worker. It is so simple really. In my opinion, only people who have to hide something will deal with the issue the way this was dealt in this board. As somebody on another thread mentioned «come to the point». However, in my reply to the administration many more issues were raised beyond the veracity of the alleged accusations. Any comments on the rest of the post? To me free speech means having the freedom to acquire your own printing press, magazine, newspaper, web site, blog etc. and say on them whatever you want - it doesn't mean you can say whatever you want on someone else's printing press, magazine, newspaper, web site, blog. ProBoards boards are hosted on Proboard servers thus all content is subject to ProBoards rules. ProBoards owns the server space, they own the board software, therefore the final say on content is theirs. If someone bought board software like vBulletin or a free one like phpBB (what VOT uses) and installed it on their own server space they would not have to abide by ProBoards libel guidelines. take care, Jesse In my earlier post I proved that the alleged libel was not a libel at all - at least not in the context of the general community. But as you seem keen at continuing using the same falacious arguments, maybe I should bring the case to the Proboards people explaining all the relevant facts. If however I do this I will be obliged to ask the shutdown of the TMB alltogether as many of the material published here could, in my opinion, fall under the same interpretation - unproved statements about living or deceased people, about old or new criminal activities and about religious hatred and manipulation. Now I do not think this would be very popular or wise a movement - but you should know better as it was your intervention that got it closed in the past. On another chapter, I think that your argument about free speech may stand for a web site and a blog but certainly not for newspapers and printing presses - these inventions were ment for MANY people to be able to express their opinions freely nad not only the editors in chief or the owners. And the same applies for forums like this one - if they serve for the dissemination of the opinions of only one person they are nothing more than propaganda machines. Of course, in the opinion of some, this would be the case of the TMB also - a 2x2 propaganda medium. P.S. I like the hypocritical phrase «in my opinion». It reminds me of my time with the 2x2, who like old monks could «baptise» a nice lamb and rename it «fish» so they could eat meat on the days they were supposed to fast.
|
|