FYI.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Defamation+of+character
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/libel
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/right-of-free-expression/defamation/defamation-elements-of-a-claim.html
Open for discussion:
- What constitutes libel in a forum setting? Are we being too sensitive....not sensitive enough?
- When we talk trash, are we making untrue statements or just opinions about someone?
- Did you know that true statements, no matter how damaging, does NOT constitute defamation?
- Private individuals have more protection from Libel than do public figures.
- In the United States, the person (alleged victim) must prove that the statement was false, caused harm, and was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement.
etc.
Excellent topic for discussion Poynt!
It is my belief that considerable freedom
of expression is essential to the success
of any forum. As discussion progresses
there are occasions when emotions may
become inflamed and truth may suffer in
the heat of conflict. But, it is possible to,
with finesse, express emotion and truth
without entering into the realm of nastiness.
well I prefer a more "Institutional" approach with my Behavior on these public forums.
I am a guest in another mans house [forum] and would never do or say anything that would represent a liability to him or his interests.[Nor mine for that matter]
Seems common sense to me!
some presume they have true anonymity when they post in these venues?
As long as they Honor the rule of law this is true, No matter how passionate
Or "right" they believe they might be ...........!
Thx
Chet
Chet,
I agree we should all try to be respectful and sensible when using these forums.
We must also accept that communicating on these forums is a two-way street. Meaning one form of communication (or lack thereof) often calls for an appropriate counter-response.
I often see folks getting upset when others won't take their word as fact. Especially when it comes to making claims of extraordinary nature. IMHO, proof must flow in both directions (i.e. proof vs. disproof), and be given the opportunity to do so.
It's a complex problem with truth.
If company A say they make pure Sodium. (say 99.91%)
Company B make a statement saying "Company A makes Sodium greater than 50% impurity".
Company B makes 99.96% Sodium. So company B say that company A have 50% more impurity than company B Sodium.
Company B is speaking the truth.
Let's say the market both companies target fall largely in the range of 95% pure Sodium, we can see that there is politic going on here.
It takes intelligent and honesty in these issues.
Worry not, even Congress people who do this for a living subject to bias. The problem is not lack of intelligent. Or is it?
If I were the paranoid type, I might think that I was largely responsible for this topic... but I'm not, so I consider Chet to be the culprit with his ungracious comments in calling my curtains 'tatty'. Do I have a case for suing him? :)
The thing is, if we let people say what they want to say and claim what they want to claim, and indeed in many circumstances profit from such claims without ever even proffering one jot of proof, what does that make us? I'll tell you what it makes us... mindless fools!
Yes things can get rather unpleasant at times, but in truth this is usually only when someone continually posts nonsense or continuously makes claims they are not willing to support in any way. There has to be a point where the gloves come off and they either put-up or shut-up! It's all very well being nice and polite, but this doesn't always cut through the crap very efficiently, does it? Sometimes you have to be blunt in order to make a point.
Quote from: ramset on 2013.10.06, 16:13:51
well I prefer a more "Institutional" approach with my Behavior on these public forums.
I am a guest in another mans house [forum] and would never do or say anything that would represent a liability to him or his interests.[Nor mine for that matter]
You are not a guest in another man's house, you are a member of a club, so take your boots off and make yourself at home. The guests are the people that stick their noses through the door every now and then to see what's going on, but never actually join the party.
Have you tried the bible forums Chet? I hear they're ever so polite and never say any rude words!
Quote
Seems common sense to me!
Chet, with all due respect, the infamous Sonic Boiler seemed like common sense to you! How is that project going by the way?
Quote
As long as they Honor the rule of law this is true, No matter how passionate
Or "right" they believe they might be ...........!
It not about right and wrong, it's about truth. How much honour do you think the conmen and scam merchants have when they will happily take money from the gullible?
Like I always tell you, the real world is not all soft and fluffy.
Farrah
Throwing stones from behind the curtain of anonymity at a known public person whilst "calling" his name and the attention of others to join in ?
Well as they say in the Penitentiaries accross the land .
""You do you !!""
Its not what I do ,life is to short and the world is much to small to take
such a stand with so little evidence, it's a hugh [Huge for some:'} leap of faith.
I don't like looking over my shoulder ,and I sleep much better at night.
------------
There are people in this world who have done things in these fields of
science for their own benefit that could benefit all,some times they get a conscience for the rest of the world and try to give back things which are no longer theirs to give,or in some cases not even Legal to discuss in public.
That always looks messy from the other side of the fence.
I have learned to never judge ,I have learned to be grateful !
Life is too short and the need is to great!
thx
Chet
Ok Chet And Farrah
Whats a sonic boiler?
OOHHHH
you shoulden't have............!
Gas on the embers..... ;D
THANKS BRAD !!
Chet
ps
A sonic boiler is a cavity resonator immersed in water which makes more heat then the energy used to run it. [very hard to get right]
Chet, your somewhat lame attempts at these philosophical posts don't quite cut the mustard really... do they? I'm sure you post just for the hell of it most of the time, hoping that random words will just fall in place to make a meaningful sentence.
I never really understand what you're going on about, but on the bright side, you keep me amused. :)
Tinman, out of the goodness of his heart, Chet bought the patent and was making 100's of Sonic Boilers for third world countries across the globe. His little sonic boiler, that could fit inside a tea cup, was like a mini power station! The world is a much better place because of the sonic boiler and none of us need ever worry about heating our houses again. ;)
Quoteps
A sonic boiler is a cavity resonator immersed in water which makes more heat then the energy used to run it. [very hard to get right]
Yep, so hard to get right that no one has actually ever done it!!
lol You just can't help yourself, can you, Chet! C.C
Mmm-i seem to remember a small device that fits that description.
I will see if i can hunt it out.
Farrah
I know my Brooklyn accent doesn't manifest very well into Your Queens Written English .........
However , I have also learned to never hand a man a stick to beat me with [An OU patent]
And I always try to do the next right thing,which saves me quite a bit of time that otherwise would have been wasted looking for stones to throw.........
So Lunch is off then??
Later
Chet
Chet & Farrah, you two as a joint team have found Underunity!
You two keep going at each other with no positive return. Amazing and its so easy.
In fact you two have actually circumvented all known laws of logic too. You both go at it like divorcees in the ring with no referees and with all your efforts nothing but aggravated sniveling abounds. Rabid clowns... The sad part is the one who claims those most scientific prowess slings the most fecal mud. And the other party obliges with diabolical aim. So who now smells the best? Tis I who sports the best odoure with tenure of encrustmentment?
If we were back on the farm i would pit both of you against each other in a flooded pigsty with cattle prods. A true battle to stench.
GK,
I hope there would be no charge for onlookers. Pun intended ;D
GK
As Curly used to say [3 stooges]
""Hey ,I resemble that remark"".
I will try to be less disruptive!
thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2013.10.07, 14:41:52
So Lunch is off then??
No, not if you're paying. We might not see eye to eye very often (or even, ever), but I'm not one to turn down a free lunch!
Take no notice of GK's hurtful comments, he just doesn't understand our complex relationship. ;)
Quote from: ramset
I know my Brooklyn accent doesn't manifest very well into Your Queens Written English .........
Well, how about that?
Fenimore Street near Flatbush Ave. in the Prospect Park
area. Long, long ago.
B-lyn and NYC as a whole is a jumpin' place!
Dumped
A very nice part of Brooklyn !!
Thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2013.10.08, 01:49:05
Dumped
A very nice part of Brooklyn !!
Thx
Chet
Mmm, think i will stick to the kangaroos digging up the grass in the back yard.
Im up for lunch to Chet,but you'll have to post the plane ticket,so as i can get there.
An important topic, Poynt.
QuoteDefamation - Elements of a Claim
Under Article 10(2) of the Convention, the protection of the reputation of others is a legitimate ground for restricting the right to freedom of expression. Libel and slander are legal claims that protect an individual's reputation against defamation. An individual is defamed when a person publishes to a third party words or matter containing an untrue imputation against his or her reputation.
Libel and Slander
If the publication is in a permanent form (for example in a book, magazine or film), then the defamation is libel. It is slander if the publication is in a transient form (speech). Signs, gestures, photographs, pictures, statues, cartoons etc. can also give rise to a claim for defamation, but the most obvious types of defamatory statements are written or spoken words.
The principal practical difference between claims for libel and claims for slander is what a claimant must prove to succeed in his or her claim. In libel claims, the claimant does not have to prove that he or she has suffered loss or damage as a result of the publication. In contrast, in claims for slander, the claimant must prove actual damage. There are however several exceptions to the rule that actual damage must be proved in claims for slander.
For example, if the spoken words accuse the claimant of committing a crime; of having a contagious disease; of being unfit for his or her office, business or profession; or if the communication is an attack of the credit of trades people; or an accusation of being unchaste or adulterous against a woman or girl. In these cases damage is presumed and need not be proved.
If person A accuses person B of MURDER on the internet, with little or no basis and certainly contrary to the TRUTH, is person A accountable for libel or for slander?
And if both persons live in the US but in different states, what recourse for redress does B have?
TinMan
Quote
""Mmm, think i will stick to the kangaroos digging up the grass in the back yard.""
----------------------------------------------------
HMmmm He's diggin up the garden Huh......
Seems we're half way to Lunch already ,I hear they taste like Chicken !!
@Physics Prof
Thx for the back on Topic post !!
Chet
Quote from: Definitions
For example, if the spoken words accuse the claimant of committing a crime; of having a contagious disease; of being unfit for his or her office, business or profession; or if the communication is an attack of the credit of trades people; or an accusation of being unchaste or adulterous against a woman or girl. In these cases damage is presumed and need not be proved.
Within the Legal System barriers have been
erected to discourage truth which may be
critical of political office or appointment.
Some folks really do need protection from
slander or libel but politicians (professional
liars) should be fair game, as should be
anyone else who engages in deception.
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2013.10.08, 14:37:10
An important topic, Poynt.
If person A accuses person B of MURDER on the internet, with little or no basis and certainly contrary to the TRUTH, is person A accountable for libel or for slander?
And if both persons live in the US but in different states, what recourse for redress does B have?
'Contrary to the truth'? The key word here Prof, is 'TRUTH'.
Make numerous, unsubstantiated claims and provide no evidence to the contrary and who really is the guilty party?
And I don't always agree with Dumped, but here he puts it in a nutshell.
QuoteSome folks really do need protection from
slander or libel but politicians (professional
liars) should be fair game, as should be
anyone else who engages in deception.
@Dumped
QuoteSome folks really do need protection from
slander or libel but politicians (professional
liars) should be fair game, as should be
anyone else who engages in deception.
There is an easier option and it depends on the context of the statement.
A) This person is a liar and a cheat
B) In my opinion, This person is a liar and a cheat
In statement B we are not directly accusing anyone of anything we are simply stating our opinion. To my knowledge their is no court of Law in the free world which could fault anyone for having an opinion on anything nor expressing said opinion in public or otherwise. Which is kind of like the game show Jeopardy where the answer must be in the form of a question however in this case our statement is in the form of an opinion and nobody can be at fault for having an opinion, lol.
Words are very much an art and can mean almost anything to anyone depending on their perspective. As you may know I like to be make ambiguous statements and I do this on purpose because life is ambiguous and almost nothing is ever as it seems. If ever we find it is not then were just not thinking on the correct level or not thinking at all, such is life.
AC
@FarrahDay
Quote'Contrary to the truth'? The key word here Prof, is 'TRUTH'.
Make numerous, unsubstantiated claims and provide no evidence to the contrary and who is the guilty party?
And I don't always agree with Dumped, but here he puts it in a nutshell.
"What is the truth when the truth is unacceptable" T.H.Moray
The problem I see with the truth is that there are so many of them, two scientists of impeccable credentials enter a room and one has absolute proof global warming is a fact and the other absolute proof it is not... now what is the truth?. You see the truth must always digress to an opinion and the opinion a belief.
Why I could lay out a number of facts to any number of people and get any number of different opinions on them in which case our truth isn't actually a truth at all it is simply our opinion isn't it?. You see the truth by definition cannot change, it is constant in a universal sense, so why is it every time we learn something the truth does change.
In any case to retain my sanity I have come to the conclusion there is no black nor white only infinite shades of gray.
AC
Quote from: AllCanadian
The problem I see with the truth is that there are so many of them, two scientists of impeccable credentials enter a room and one has absolute proof global warming is a fact and the other absolute proof it is not... now what is the truth?
I expect in a short time we shall know the Truth
regarding the Global Warming Agenda. If, that
is, we'll be able to believe our
Lying Eyes.
Quote from: allcanadian on 2013.10.08, 21:46:39
@FarrahDay
"What is the truth when the truth is unacceptable" T.H.Moray
The problem I see with the truth is that there are so many of them, two scientists of impeccable credentials enter a room and one has absolute proof global warming is a fact and the other absolute proof it is not... now what is the truth?. You see the truth must always digress to an opinion and the opinion a belief.
Why I could lay out a number of facts to any number of people and get any number of different opinions on them in which case our truth isn't actually a truth at all it is simply our opinion isn't it?. You see the truth by definition cannot change, it is constant in a universal sense, so why is it every time we learn something the truth does change.
In any case to retain my sanity I have come to the conclusion there is no black nor white only infinite shades of gray.
AC
I see your example of the two scientists more of a paradox, because clearly they both can't be right. And what any individual 'believes' to be the truth is totally irrelevant. But I might have known that you would go out of your way to complicate the issue. In science there are always grey areas, I think we all know this, and so finding an absolute truth may be elusive.
And I really don't agree that the truth must always digress to individual opinion, nor do I understand why you would say this. An individual opinion is just that, an opinion. And opinions often have little in common with the truth.
So let's just back up and keep things simple. An individual can either be telling the truth or be telling porkies - pretty black and white! And furthermore, anyone's opinion on the matter is has no bearing whatsoever on the truth.
@FaraDay
QuoteI see your example of the two scientists more of a paradox, because clearly they both can't be right. And what any individual 'believes' to be the truth is totally irrelevant. But I might have known that you would go out of your way to complicate the issue. In science there are always grey areas, I think we all know this, and so finding an absolute truth may be elusive.
I was having a bad hair day ,lol, I watched a few documentaries and it got under my skin. One was how the NFL denied that a bunch of supposedly grown men bashing their heads together to get a pig skin ball was not harmful.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24051122/frontline-pbs-doc-league-of-denial-examines-nfl-concussion-problem
Amazing isn't it?, that the NFL and their doctors would deny CTE found in 9 out of 10 players was not related to football and was basically turning most of the players into violent retards.
It just seems as if damn near everyone is corrupt in one way or another and would do damn near anything in pursuit of the almighty dollar or job protection. I just pisses me off that as a professional person I am compelled to deal with only the facts and act in a professional manner while so many others lie and cheat without a second thought. Now I'm not proclaiming to be an angel in any way but I do know the difference between right and wrong, above all else I know this.
I'm really losing faith in people's ability to do the right thing when we see so much BS going on in the world today.
AC
Deception is part of life.
I see deception as overestimate or underestimate the reality of things. The ability to succeed is jeopardized when you can't assess reality. Overestimate reality don't give you the confident needed to accomplish tasks. Underestimate reality and you won't be prepared enough. The exact understanding of a situation is most efficient.
When people view is off, they deceived themselves and pass the same view to others. It's like a virus. If you see deception as a virus, a disease, then the cure for deception is wisdom, immunity.
In fighting off sickness, people need strong immune system. This can be done by living healthy or medication. In the same way, wisdom can be boosted with life experience or education. People who have higher education tend to have more immunity to deception if knowledge gives them wisdom. The possibility of artificial virus is also there.
Another technique to fight deception is giving dead doses of deception. Like vaccination, dead doses of deception can comes in forms of contrary jokes. It spurs different thinking and makes us wiser.
No one is the blame for deception. It originates from living and cure from living.
Save others, one day they will be saving you.