Our New Year's resolution

  Forum Editor 01:21 04 Jan 2003
  Forum Editor 01:21 04 Jan 2003

is to delete without comment any threads or posts which contain potentially libellous and/or defamatory comments.
There has been a slight increase in this type of contribution of late - hence this warning. Recently there have been several successful actions against web forums which permitted libellous posts to remain 'on air', and we have no intention of finding ourselves in a similar situation.

Statement A:

"I think that PCA supercomputers Ltd. have treated me very badly, and I have lost faith in their ability to deliver my order."

Is permissable.

Statement B:

"PCA supercomputers are a load of con merchants - don't buy from these cowboys."

Will be deleted without warning or explanation, there will be no right of appeal, and our decision will be final. I'm sorry to adopt such a dictatorial tone - I'm sure you'll all understand the serious nature of this matter.

  tbh72 02:27 04 Jan 2003

Giving up smoking, drinking & drug's will be a breeze compared to your's.... Good Luck!!!

  Non Welsh Local 06:25 04 Jan 2003

Fair enough I think.
However, what about those who (to my mind anyway) rather suspiciously endorse certain sites and or products? It's difficult if not impossible to prove a definite connection but I have seen some posts where it looks very much like someone plugging a site/products etc.

As an aside here, I very much approve of people recommending various sites & products etc providing they don't have a vested interest(that would obviously put the recommendation into question). As otherwise how would we know the good from the not so good.

  hoverman 07:28 04 Jan 2003

Not only should libellous posts be deleted but the offenders should be banned from the Forum. After all FE, you given all of us fair warning and anyone who chooses to ignore it have no complaint. A suggestion, why not put this warning on the registration page so new members are immediately informed.

  Forum Editor 07:49 04 Jan 2003

of whether some people are 'plugging' sites or products for commercial reasons has cropped up before. We have no sure way of detecting peoples' motives, but we do watch the threads very carefully for this kind of thing.

When all is said and done no system can be perfect, and ultimately it's for each individual to make up his/her mind about endorsements. In the main, you'll find that the endorsement of a supplier will quickly attract supportive posts from other forum members, and a short while spent reading the threads will usually help you to form an overall impression.

  jazzypop 07:56 04 Jan 2003

Sorry, I can't agree with you until PCA finally get around to putting a 'Start Here' link in a prominent position alongside Helproom, ConsumerWatch etc.

With a suitable and clear warning there (as well as guidance on how to search for previous threads before starting a new one, expected etiquette etc), then I might be able to support your more radical policy.

This thread will be long gone within a week, and for a new member to be banned for transgressing a rule that they were unaware of does not fit my personal sense of 'natural justice'.

By all means delete the thread, and send a pro-forma email with the reasons for deleting the thread - but an immediate ban?

  Forum Editor 08:16 04 Jan 2003

Your lack of support for our "more radical policy" - as you put it - is noted, although exactly what is so radical about wanting to avoid a libel action is beyond me.

The site policy, together with comprehensive hints about site etiquette is clearly explained already, and if you click the 'site policy' link at the bottom of this page you'll be able to read it for yourself. Each new forum member is pointed to it when they sign up, and I'm not sure how much more you expect us to do.

There isn't always time to send emails with reasons for deleting posts, and frankly I don't see why we should do it. If someone emails us for an explanation they will almost certainly get one.

Immediate ban? I don't think I mentioned anything about that did I?

  hoverman 08:21 04 Jan 2003

Fair comment - perhaps I did go over the top a bit. I will amend that to: ban repeated offenders.

  Forum Editor 08:31 04 Jan 2003

I realise that it was someone else who mentioned immediate bans, although my post inferred that you thought it was me.

  jazzypop 08:58 04 Jan 2003

Firstly, thanks for the correction.

Allow me to expand a little. I was referring to hoverman's suggestion that transgressors should be immediately banned, when I used the phrase "more radical policy". As in, hoverman's suggestion was a more radical policy than the one that you stated at the beginning of the thread.

I do not think that your desire to avoid any sort of legal action is at all radical. Indeed, I have posted two responses within the past 24hrs to people who have asked for advice regarding copying of CDs. Both posts (hopefully) explained clearly why their question simply could not be answered without exposing the operators of the PCA forum to possible legal action. click here for an example.

To repeat once more, I do not condone any posts that may ultimately lead to the closure of this forum. I also do not support the immediate banning of anyone who breaks your stated policy (unless it is a wilful, repeated series of transgressions), although I fully support deletion of such threads.

Finally, your view seems to be that the location and title of the 'Site Policy' link is sufficient - I disagree. It seems that we will have to agree to have different opinions.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Best Black Friday Deals 2017

Black Friday Deals for Designers & Artists: Adobe, Apple, Corel Painter, Microsoft Surface, Wacom &e…

Best Black Friday Apple Deals 2017

Black Friday 2017 : date, sites participants & bonnes affaires