Barry, that looks perfectly right and reasonable - The Council own the Forum and the liabilities around its use, so the Council should decide if and what should be published.
I look forward to reading the decisions of our shiny ‘new blood’ Council.
PS. As it is an ‘International’ Guild and an international forum, what would be the consequence of say a States side litigation lawyer chasing a ‘No Win, No Fee’ claim for damages in the US courts ???
Derek
Derek
There is an outside chance that our insurance would cover the Guild (if indeed the Guild were to be held liable) but it will not cover an individual who is not a Guild member or a member expressing a personal view. That said a lawyer would want a cast iron case as they might have to commit a lot of cash to taking on such a case which would be expensive to enforce against a non-US citizen. I don’t have any experience of defamation case law - if anyone does perhaps they would comment?
Barry
Barry,
I agree and hence my “remote” position.
As to “defamation” or “libel” - difference being written or spoken words, there are some important general concepts. First, the statement must be patently FALSE and the speaker/writer knows this and still publishes it. Therefore, “the truth is an absolute defense”. To constitute actionable claims, the words must be directed toward a person’s character, business or profession.
CL
That’s an interesting distinction - in the UK spoken defamation is “slander”, written is “libel”, both come under the umbrella heading of defamation. The defences of the statement being true or “fair comment” are to my mind a bit late - though not a rule I suggest that everyone should avoid any comment about a person as an individual - we can disagree, we can offer comment on eg a piece of work as long as that opinion is truly held but I cannot envisage any circumstances where a comment about an individual is justified on this forum other than perhaps a compliment. Any other comments should be restricted to the arguments etc postulated not the person who posted them. That said if anyone feels that a remark posted on here was defamatory to them (whether legally they appear to have a case or not) it should be removed immediately it is brought to a moderator’s attention - to delay could mean the difference between the forum owners being culpable or not (Demon Internet had this problem in 1997 when they took 10 days to remove material after it was brought to their attention and the courts held that that was too slow).
Barry
Mel called us all “users” this time.
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1154.msg8045#msg8045
No worries Mel. I’m sure it is as you say, lingo of the trade, so no class action suit will follow. LOL
Happy Halloween to all!
The Great Magnificent Contributor
It’s looking like a majority of no’s for posting rules, whether for a trial or permanent period, then.
So, may we conclude that those who have taken part in this post, at least, will go back into the greater forum determined to stamp out discourtesy by overwhelming it with greater courtesy, and thereby lead by example?
Regards
Glenys
I don’t greatly disagree with any of Roo’s suggested rules per se. But I agree with virtually everyone else who thinks it better to have any such rules, as far as possible, left unsaid. Two reasons:
Anyone inclined to break rules like this will do so irrespective of rules.
If one of the first things people see when clicking on a web-site is a long list of rules, most of those people will think “bossy bunch” and go elsewhere. Okay, maybe that’s just how I’d react!
The knotting world is inevitably not the most dynamic world. I’m a mere newbie, but my input would be to suggest it is made no more stuffy than it is already.
As for Glenys’s point, “…stamp out discourtesy by overwhelming it with greater courtesy, and thereby leading by example?”, I couldn’t agree more. One place where this could start is when newbies make mistakes, including spelling mistakes - eg “Bitter End” for “Working End”, or “Bite” for “Bight”. Rather than publicly pointing out their error to them, schoolmarm fashion, it has to be better simply to use the correct term “Working End” or the correct spelling “Bight” several times in our responses to such posts (not too many times though, they don’t need a sledge-hammer!). The newbie will get the message, without being humiliated. Humiliated people don’t learn, they leave.
Long ago, I got a private message that some form of rules would be composed into an official list. Letting “sea-salts be sea-salts” was an obvious failure, in addition to being an insult to seamen regarding their self-control. As time goes on, it’s apparent that this isn’t happening.
But, just in case someday things change, and some rules are composed and enforced (beyond mere spam-blocking), I’d like to add a suggestion:
Do not bump topics as an alternative to linking to them in relevant discussions.
Thank you roo.
I believe that some of these are common decency issues and they have been addressed behind the scenes with limited progress. I know that I will personally try my best to use these suggestions to moderate the forum, regardless of them being “officially posted”.
Mere Spam blocking is important as you must know and it is not the only action taken by the Administration.
We could all work together on the linking to relevant topic discussions.
SS
Hi Roo,
Just a clarification. Yes, I did send you that intention about a list of forum rules. Circumstances in my life prevented me from being in the forum as much as I wanted then, and when I came back to it I realised that in actual fact the very great majority of contributors do keep to the unwritten rules of courtesy, and it is only a minority who display discourtesy in their posts.
It seemed to me then that it would be better to deal as well as we could with incidents as they arose using other communications than a list of rules.
I should have communicated better to you my change of mind on that score, and I apologise that I didn’t.
If you would direct me to the offended sailor, I’ll be happy to message him or her about the offence caused.
Regards
Glenys