You are here: darlofc.co.uk » Board index » The Uncovered Forums » Fight Club
It is currently Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:21 am View unanswered posts | View active topics



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 156 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:47 pm
Posts: 982
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
charlie wrote:
One question mobi, are you aware of what DL5 does for a living? Simple yes or no answer is suffice because Botrash has my total support on this one


No idea, but you miss the point. It does not matter if the accusations are true or false. We are not in a position to decide whether someone is guilty. You can't be sure that personal accusations are true therefore you cannot allow them, ever. The rule is universal, it applies to everyone and does not change depending on each case. No board would allow it!

Posting pictures of someone has consequences, both private and public, and it may have repercussions way beyond the seriousness of the offence. Not for him, but maybe for the next person who is posted, and accused. Its fine until that person happens to be innocent. Nobody should ever end up being publically named or humilated for something they didn't do, and the only way to prevent that is to not allow accusations to be made against individuals on a public forum.


This is absolutely right. We have a due process and do not need to resort to messageboard vigilantism.

_________________
Never argue with an idiot: The best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 4:54 am
Posts: 849
Team Supported: Darlington
Fatty eats roadkill wrote:
Oh, and DL5, why didn't you nick him for urinating in public?


Yeah DL5, why didn't you eh?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
Free_Transfer wrote:
Mobi are you the lad in question?? Or a relation maybe?

Get a grip man.


Err, no, I just understand the principle of fairness. Maybe I can see the wider principle here, rather than thinking "oh he obviously did it, so its OK".

It appears the moderator is saying that we can say what we like about someone, post their photograph, and then if it turns out to be false? Its a bit like saying a newspaper can print anything they like and then ignore it if it dosen't turn out to be true. No harm done eh?


Newspapers print stuff all the time based on far less credibility than this post, then get away with as tiny printed apology, so not really the best analogy!

And I haven't once said that anyone can post anything, but when it's highly likely to be true, I really can't see what the issue is?

There's posts claiming "facts" without proof practically every day on here, should I delete them all?


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Newspapers "get away with a tiny printed apology" and a million pound damages. Maybe have a read up on libel.

Anyway, your argument is a complete straw man. We are talking about personal allegations accompanying a picture identifying an individual. This is not comparable to the other posts on this board that might state someone is a crap goalkeeper.

If you don't get the principle by now then I guess you never will.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
charlie wrote:
One question mobi, are you aware of what DL5 does for a living? Simple yes or no answer is suffice because Botrash has my total support on this one


No idea, but you miss the point. It does not matter if the accusations are true or false. We are not in a position to decide whether someone is guilty. You can't be sure that personal accusations are true therefore you cannot allow them, ever. The rule is universal, it applies to everyone and does not change depending on each case. No board would allow it!

Posting pictures of someone has consequences, both private and public, and it may have repercussions way beyond the seriousness of the offence. Not for him, but maybe for the next person who is posted, and accused. Nobody should ever end up being publically named or humilation for something they didn't do, and the only way to prevent that is to not allow accusations to be made against individuals on a public forum.


I agree that any old false rubbish can be posted. I could have posted a picture of you and said that you punched me in the face, it would have been nonsense but I could have posted it, I'd have then been wide open to any legal action

I posted what I did as I know it to be FACT, the club could verify the BTFC part if needs be. As for the pissing well myself, DTID and a few others saw it, he then posed for the photo (I can actually be seen in the background of the other one where he's with his mates) unless his identical twin was there, pissed, acting the dick and wearing the same clothes then I'm quite sure it was him.

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
Fatty eats roadkill wrote:
Oh, and DL5, why didn't you nick him for urinating in public?


What, a citizen's arrest? not sure how to do that ;)

Not getting into that debate fella, not today

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
DL5 wrote:
mobi wrote:
charlie wrote:
One question mobi, are you aware of what DL5 does for a living? Simple yes or no answer is suffice because Botrash has my total support on this one


No idea, but you miss the point. It does not matter if the accusations are true or false. We are not in a position to decide whether someone is guilty. You can't be sure that personal accusations are true therefore you cannot allow them, ever. The rule is universal, it applies to everyone and does not change depending on each case. No board would allow it!

Posting pictures of someone has consequences, both private and public, and it may have repercussions way beyond the seriousness of the offence. Not for him, but maybe for the next person who is posted, and accused. Nobody should ever end up being publically named or humilation for something they didn't do, and the only way to prevent that is to not allow accusations to be made against individuals on a public forum.


I agree that any old false rubbish can be posted. I could have posted a picture of you and said that you punched me in the face, it would have been nonsense but I could have posted it, I'd have then been wide open to any legal action

I posted what I did as I know it to be FACT, the club could verify the BTFC part if needs be. As for the pissing well myself, DTID and a few others saw it, he then posed for the photo (I can actually be seen in the background of the other one where he's with his mates) unless his identical twin was there, pissed, acting the dick and wearing the same clothes then I'm quite sure it was him.


I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't. The point is that the only way to avoid false and damaging allegations is to make sure personal accusations aren't allowed on the forum. The principle stands regardless of whether this accusation is true or not.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
DTID wrote:
Fatty eats roadkill wrote:
Oh, and DL5, why didn't you nick him for urinating in public?


Yeah DL5, why didn't you eh?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2


And miss the match? get real :lol:

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 7:31 pm
Posts: 3559
Location: On top of a 29 year old big chested woman
Team Supported: Darlington
Then why start this thread?

_________________
Waiting for Raj to shaft them!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
DL5 wrote:
mobi wrote:
charlie wrote:
One question mobi, are you aware of what DL5 does for a living? Simple yes or no answer is suffice because Botrash has my total support on this one


No idea, but you miss the point. It does not matter if the accusations are true or false. We are not in a position to decide whether someone is guilty. You can't be sure that personal accusations are true therefore you cannot allow them, ever. The rule is universal, it applies to everyone and does not change depending on each case. No board would allow it!

Posting pictures of someone has consequences, both private and public, and it may have repercussions way beyond the seriousness of the offence. Not for him, but maybe for the next person who is posted, and accused. Nobody should ever end up being publically named or humilation for something they didn't do, and the only way to prevent that is to not allow accusations to be made against individuals on a public forum.


I agree that any old false rubbish can be posted. I could have posted a picture of you and said that you punched me in the face, it would have been nonsense but I could have posted it, I'd have then been wide open to any legal action

I posted what I did as I know it to be FACT, the club could verify the BTFC part if needs be. As for the pissing well myself, DTID and a few others saw it, he then posed for the photo (I can actually be seen in the background of the other one where he's with his mates) unless his identical twin was there, pissed, acting the dick and wearing the same clothes then I'm quite sure it was him.


I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't. The point is that the only way to avoid false and damaging allegations is to make sure personal accusations aren't allowed on the forum. The principle stands regardless of whether this accusation is true or not.


Doing that would mean the forum needs purging and sanitising from top to bottom

Why don't you just trust the mods to use their judgement on what's acceptable and what's not?

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Leeds
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
Free_Transfer wrote:
Mobi are you the lad in question?? Or a relation maybe?

Get a grip man.


Err, no, I just understand the principle of fairness. Maybe I can see the wider principle here, rather than thinking "oh he obviously did it, so its OK".

It appears the moderator is saying that we can say what we like about someone, post their photograph, and then if it turns out to be false? Its a bit like saying a newspaper can print anything they like and then ignore it if it dosen't turn out to be true. No harm done eh?


Newspapers print stuff all the time based on far less credibility than this post, then get away with as tiny printed apology, so not really the best analogy!

And I haven't once said that anyone can post anything, but when it's highly likely to be true, I really can't see what the issue is?

There's posts claiming "facts" without proof practically every day on here, should I delete them all?


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Newspapers "get away with a tiny printed apology" and a million pound damages. Maybe have a read up on libel.

Anyway, your argument is a complete straw man. We are talking about personal allegations accompanying a picture identifying an individual. This is not comparable to the other posts on this board that might state someone is a crap goalkeeper.

If you don't get the principle by now then I guess you never will.


All our problems solved then, build a new stadium with our multi million payout from the Echo last week! It's a football forum, there's infinitely less chance of a payout than even that and, until such a point that there may be a legal challenge of some kind, I would much rather have helpful posts that help weed out the troublemaking element of our fanbase. There is enough proof for me that this is a totally legit claim, due to the credibility if the poster.

And I'm certainly not comparing it to posts with people's opinions, but rather, as clearly stated, things passed off as facts. But if you don't get this now I guess you never will...


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 1066
Location: Hartlepool
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
Free_Transfer wrote:
Mobi are you the lad in question?? Or a relation maybe?

Get a grip man.


Err, no, I just understand the principle of fairness. Maybe I can see the wider principle here, rather than thinking "oh he obviously did it, so its OK".

It appears the moderator is saying that we can say what we like about someone, post their photograph, and then if it turns out to be false? Its a bit like saying a newspaper can print anything they like and then ignore it if it dosen't turn out to be true. No harm done eh?


But he did obviously do it...so what's the problem? If you want to defend the utter scum that follow our club then that's up to you, but don't expect anyone to agree with you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
Fatty eats roadkill wrote:
Then why start this thread?


Because his smarmy little face on the photo was crying out for me to post about him, an ideal opportunity to share a photo of someone who is supposedly banned

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Leeds
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't.


Why not? If someone can claim fact and someone else only conjecture, why should the first be stifled from posting about it?

If someone I didn't trust the opinion of so much from experience reading the board was to throw something out there that was less likely to be able to be backed up, it certainly wouldn't have lasted this long.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
DL5 wrote:
mobi wrote:
DL5 wrote:
mobi wrote:
charlie wrote:
One question mobi, are you aware of what DL5 does for a living? Simple yes or no answer is suffice because Botrash has my total support on this one


No idea, but you miss the point. It does not matter if the accusations are true or false. We are not in a position to decide whether someone is guilty. You can't be sure that personal accusations are true therefore you cannot allow them, ever. The rule is universal, it applies to everyone and does not change depending on each case. No board would allow it!

Posting pictures of someone has consequences, both private and public, and it may have repercussions way beyond the seriousness of the offence. Not for him, but maybe for the next person who is posted, and accused. Nobody should ever end up being publically named or humilation for something they didn't do, and the only way to prevent that is to not allow accusations to be made against individuals on a public forum.


I agree that any old false rubbish can be posted. I could have posted a picture of you and said that you punched me in the face, it would have been nonsense but I could have posted it, I'd have then been wide open to any legal action

I posted what I did as I know it to be FACT, the club could verify the BTFC part if needs be. As for the pissing well myself, DTID and a few others saw it, he then posed for the photo (I can actually be seen in the background of the other one where he's with his mates) unless his identical twin was there, pissed, acting the dick and wearing the same clothes then I'm quite sure it was him.


I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't. The point is that the only way to avoid false and damaging allegations is to make sure personal accusations aren't allowed on the forum. The principle stands regardless of whether this accusation is true or not.


Doing that would mean the forum needs purging and sanitising from top to bottom

Why don't you just trust the mods to use their judgement on what's acceptable and what's not?


I really don't see why the site would require "purging and sanitising top to bottom". Are there any other threads that contain photographs of individuals with accusations about their criminal behaviour? This relates to a specific type of post and I am not aware of other forums where such posts are acceptable.

It does not require a huge upheavel or massive legal enquiries. I simply expressed my view on a point of principle, either you agree with that principle or you don't.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
Free_Transfer wrote:
mobi wrote:
Free_Transfer wrote:
Mobi are you the lad in question?? Or a relation maybe?

Get a grip man.


Err, no, I just understand the principle of fairness. Maybe I can see the wider principle here, rather than thinking "oh he obviously did it, so its OK".

It appears the moderator is saying that we can say what we like about someone, post their photograph, and then if it turns out to be false? Its a bit like saying a newspaper can print anything they like and then ignore it if it dosen't turn out to be true. No harm done eh?


But he did obviously do it...so what's the problem? If you want to defend the utter scum that follow our club then that's up to you, but don't expect anyone to agree with you.


You missed the point by about as far as is possible. Have you any idea what principle I am arguing about? Oh, and people do agree with me, read the thread.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Leeds
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
I really don't see why the site would require "purging and sanitising top to bottom". Are there any other threads that contain photographs of individuals with accusations about their criminal behaviour? This relates to a specific type of post and I am not aware of other forums where such posts are acceptable.

It does not require a huge upheavel or massive legal enquiries. I simply expressed my view on a point of principle, either you agree with that principle or you don't.


If the principle is all important, why do you want to draw the line at only posts with a photo of the accused? It's either "libel" or not, that's why the board would need a full sanitising to be consistent if we were to go down that route.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:

I really don't see why the site would require "purging and sanitising top to bottom". Are there any other threads that contain photographs of individuals with accusations about their criminal behaviour? This relates to a specific type of post and I am not aware of other forums where such posts are acceptable.

It does not require a huge upheavel or massive legal enquiries. I simply expressed my view on a point of principle, either you agree with that principle or you don't.


Well briefly picking a couple of threads Boydy is in the pub and Davey is a Twat, do we have proof of these? no so they shouldn't be allowed playing by your rules.

If people over step the mark then the mods step in, that's what they're there for.

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 1915
Team Supported: Darlington
So much flapping over a total non-event in this thread.

DL5 posts a publicly hosted photo taken of an obviously willing participant in a public place. He (and others it would seem) have seen the lad in the photo doing the things described and he's outing him as a fuckwit, which he clearly is.

No idea where all this 'he might not get a job because of this' or 'DL5 could be taken to court' protector-of-the-weak bollocks has come from, but that's exactly what it is.

_________________
Jazz Maverick wrote:
If I win the 50/50 draw I'm going to use the money to pay a tramp to throw dog s*** at you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't.


Why not? If someone can claim fact and someone else only conjecture, why should the first be stifled from posting about it?

If someone I didn't trust the opinion of so much from experience reading the board was to throw something out there that was less likely to be able to be backed up, it certainly wouldn't have lasted this long.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Again, you are declaring yourself judge and jury. You are not in the position to make this decision. I do not trust you or anyone else to make a decision over whether a personal allegation is true or false. You simply remove personal allegations as they can damage people's lives. If you don't understand this principle then you appear to be in a position that is above your capabilities.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
DL5 wrote:
mobi wrote:

I really don't see why the site would require "purging and sanitising top to bottom". Are there any other threads that contain photographs of individuals with accusations about their criminal behaviour? This relates to a specific type of post and I am not aware of other forums where such posts are acceptable.

It does not require a huge upheavel or massive legal enquiries. I simply expressed my view on a point of principle, either you agree with that principle or you don't.


Well briefly picking a couple of threads Boydy is in the pub and Davey is a Twat, do we have proof of these? no so they shouldn't be allowed playing by your rules.

If people over step the mark then the mods step in, that's what they're there for.


You (deliberately) ignored the bit where I specifically said "accusations of criminal behaviour". You also can't seem to answer the question I keep putting. Do you agree with the point of principle I am making, and if not, why not?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
I really don't see why the site would require "purging and sanitising top to bottom". Are there any other threads that contain photographs of individuals with accusations about their criminal behaviour? This relates to a specific type of post and I am not aware of other forums where such posts are acceptable.

It does not require a huge upheavel or massive legal enquiries. I simply expressed my view on a point of principle, either you agree with that principle or you don't.


If the principle is all important, why do you want to draw the line at only posts with a photo of the accused? It's either "libel" or not, that's why the board would need a full sanitising to be consistent if we were to go down that route.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Well if you gave someone's name it would be libel. But I am not aware of threads where an individual is named and criminal allegations are made about them. If there are then you are not doing your job correctly. The "sanitising" whinge is an excuse to do nothing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 4613
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
DL5 wrote:
mobi wrote:

I really don't see why the site would require "purging and sanitising top to bottom". Are there any other threads that contain photographs of individuals with accusations about their criminal behaviour? This relates to a specific type of post and I am not aware of other forums where such posts are acceptable.

It does not require a huge upheavel or massive legal enquiries. I simply expressed my view on a point of principle, either you agree with that principle or you don't.


Well briefly picking a couple of threads Boydy is in the pub and Davey is a Twat, do we have proof of these? no so they shouldn't be allowed playing by your rules.

If people over step the mark then the mods step in, that's what they're there for.


You (deliberately) ignored the bit where I specifically said "accusations of criminal behaviour". You also can't seem to answer the question I keep putting. Do you agree with the point of principle I am making, and if not, why not?


I haven't deliberately ignored anything. If you want this forum sqeaky clean and sanitised then we do it all or nothing, not just what you think shouldn't be posted.

In fact this is getting silly now the focus of this thread has shifted too much, maybe it's best just to lock it as it's getting stupid. I bet the idiot is beginning to have a chuckle at this by now. If anyone at the club wants any futher info from me about him they can PM me.

_________________
.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Leeds
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't.


Why not? If someone can claim fact and someone else only conjecture, why should the first be stifled from posting about it?

If someone I didn't trust the opinion of so much from experience reading the board was to throw something out there that was less likely to be able to be backed up, it certainly wouldn't have lasted this long.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Again, you are declaring yourself judge and jury. You are not in the position to make this decision. I do not trust you or anyone else to make a decision over whether a personal allegation is true or false. You simply remove personal allegations as they can damage people's lives. If you don't understand this principle then you appear to be in a position that is above your capabilities.


Still missing the explanation as to why we wouldn't need to review all posts in the forum for libellous material then?



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't.


Why not? If someone can claim fact and someone else only conjecture, why should the first be stifled from posting about it?

If someone I didn't trust the opinion of so much from experience reading the board was to throw something out there that was less likely to be able to be backed up, it certainly wouldn't have lasted this long.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Again, you are declaring yourself judge and jury. You are not in the position to make this decision. I do not trust you or anyone else to make a decision over whether a personal allegation is true or false. You simply remove personal allegations as they can damage people's lives. If you don't understand this principle then you appear to be in a position that is above your capabilities.


Still missing the explanation as to why we wouldn't need to review all posts in the forum for libellous material then?



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Ongoing monitoring for libellous material is kind of what a moderator does. What did you think you were supposed to be doing?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 20891
Team Supported: Darlington
DL5 has not posted anything libelous, therefore the mods need do nothing! Jesus, are you still going on?

_________________
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Leeds
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
I know you know it to be fact, but if you can post this then anyone can do it, and that means anyone can post any old false rubbish, as you said. We can't have a situation where some people are allowed to make personal accusations, because they are somehow trustworthy, while others aren't.


Why not? If someone can claim fact and someone else only conjecture, why should the first be stifled from posting about it?

If someone I didn't trust the opinion of so much from experience reading the board was to throw something out there that was less likely to be able to be backed up, it certainly wouldn't have lasted this long.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Again, you are declaring yourself judge and jury. You are not in the position to make this decision. I do not trust you or anyone else to make a decision over whether a personal allegation is true or false. You simply remove personal allegations as they can damage people's lives. If you don't understand this principle then you appear to be in a position that is above your capabilities.


Still missing the explanation as to why we wouldn't need to review all posts in the forum for libellous material then?



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD



Ongoing monitoring for libellous material is kind of what a moderator does. What did you think you were supposed to be doing?


I monitor the forum for many things, thanks, but don't let that stop you having a little dig each post you make!

I'm asking the question (repeatedly) as you earlier claimed only the post with the photo should be looked at, and that the whole board didn't need looking through. Then you're arguing a completely different point and decided only accusing people of illegal acts needs looking at. Then once again change to all potential libellous accusations.

So which is it? And if not the entire board, then what, bearing in mind the principle is the important factor?

And where you're right that it's not my place to decide what is and isn't a true fact, it's very much my place to make a judgement on behalf of the board admin over what is acceptable content, and that includes making judgements on how likely something is to have its basis in truth or in unfounded accusation. Consistently. Across the whole board.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Posts: 3299
Team Supported: Darlington
Wow, this is the thread that just keeps on giving.

_________________
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
botrash wrote:
I monitor the forum for many things, thanks, but don't let that stop you having a little dig each post you make!

I'm asking the question (repeatedly) as you earlier claimed only the post with the photo should be looked at, and that the whole board didn't need looking through. Then you're arguing a completely different point and decided only accusing people of illegal acts needs looking at. Then once again change to all potential libellous accusations.

So which is it? And if not the entire board, then what, bearing in mind the principle is the important factor?

And where you're right that it's not my place to decide what is and isn't a true fact, it's very much my place to make a judgement on behalf of the board admin over what is acceptable content, and that includes making judgements on how likely something is to have its basis in truth or in unfounded accusation. Consistently. Across the whole board.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


You agree that you aren't in a position to decide what is or isn't true, but then contradict yourself in the same sentence by claiming that you are in a position to make a decision on whether something is based in truth or not. In other words, if you think its true then you allow it! The only acceptable way to operate is to not allow these type of personal accusations to be made at all, criminal or libellous or both. It's not difficult, doesn't take time, and its fair.

I would politely request you discuss this issue with the other moderators as I do not agree with your judgement.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Leeds
Team Supported: Darlington
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
I monitor the forum for many things, thanks, but don't let that stop you having a little dig each post you make!

I'm asking the question (repeatedly) as you earlier claimed only the post with the photo should be looked at, and that the whole board didn't need looking through. Then you're arguing a completely different point and decided only accusing people of illegal acts needs looking at. Then once again change to all potential libellous accusations.

So which is it? And if not the entire board, then what, bearing in mind the principle is the important factor?

And where you're right that it's not my place to decide what is and isn't a true fact, it's very much my place to make a judgement on behalf of the board admin over what is acceptable content, and that includes making judgements on how likely something is to have its basis in truth or in unfounded accusation. Consistently. Across the whole board.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


You agree that you aren't in a position to decide what is or isn't true, but then contradict yourself in the same sentence by claiming that you are in a position to make a decision on whether something is based in truth or not. In other words, if you think its true then you allow it! The only acceptable way to operate is to not allow these type of personal accusations to be made at all, criminal or libellous or both. It's not difficult, doesn't take time, and its fair.

I would politely request you discuss this issue with the other moderators as I do not agree with your judgement.


You're very good at telling me what you think I meant instead of reading what I actually said. There's no contradiction, I accept I can't say what is 100% true as I haven't personally seen evidence that confirms or refutes the facts, but I can make a judgement on what is most likely true based on the reliability of the source.

Also there's been one other mod in here backing me up and I've openly stated that the site admins can ultimately override me and I will accept their decision. I'm not sure what more you want other than for me to delete a one off post that has a small chance of being untrue, while ignoring every other post on the board that includes a personal accusation that I also haven't been privy to any evidence of.

Sorry but it's got to be fair and consistent treatment for all posts.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: This Idiot
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 1480
Team Supported: Darlington
botrash wrote:
mobi wrote:
botrash wrote:
I monitor the forum for many things, thanks, but don't let that stop you having a little dig each post you make!

I'm asking the question (repeatedly) as you earlier claimed only the post with the photo should be looked at, and that the whole board didn't need looking through. Then you're arguing a completely different point and decided only accusing people of illegal acts needs looking at. Then once again change to all potential libellous accusations.

So which is it? And if not the entire board, then what, bearing in mind the principle is the important factor?

And where you're right that it's not my place to decide what is and isn't a true fact, it's very much my place to make a judgement on behalf of the board admin over what is acceptable content, and that includes making judgements on how likely something is to have its basis in truth or in unfounded accusation. Consistently. Across the whole board.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


You agree that you aren't in a position to decide what is or isn't true, but then contradict yourself in the same sentence by claiming that you are in a position to make a decision on whether something is based in truth or not. In other words, if you think its true then you allow it! The only acceptable way to operate is to not allow these type of personal accusations to be made at all, criminal or libellous or both. It's not difficult, doesn't take time, and its fair.

I would politely request you discuss this issue with the other moderators as I do not agree with your judgement.


You're very good at telling me what you think I meant instead of reading what I actually said. There's no contradiction, I accept I can't say what is 100% true as I haven't personally seen evidence that confirms or refutes the facts, but I can make a judgement on what is most likely true based on the reliability of the source.

Also there's been one other mod in here backing me up and I've openly stated that the site admins can ultimately override me and I will accept their decision. I'm not sure what more you want other than for me to delete a one off post that has a small chance of being untrue, while ignoring every other post on the board that includes a personal accusation that I also haven't been privy to any evidence of.

Sorry but it's got to be fair and consistent treatment for all posts.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD


If somebody complains about another potentially libellous post then you can look into it, if not, then you shouldn't have any worries. As it is, I am requesting you remove one potentionally libellous post. If you insist that you can't do that because it means you'd have to remove all potentially libellous posts then so be it. I am sure the admins will decide if that is a valid reason for doing nothing. If so, then I will accept their judgement and that's the end of it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 156 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group