TheTeapot Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 5 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: Whats the issue. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 3 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: That’s fine so what’s a journalist going to do to fact check it. 1. Do you know Jason Scales is a real person. Tick 2. Is that Jason Scales actual genuine Twitter feed. Tick 3. Did Jason Scales post that content under his own name on his own Twitter feed at the times shown. Tick So it’s news that can be reported. Whats the issue. My take isn't so simplistic. I'd like to think the kid isn't so stupid as to do what he's done without considering what would happen next. What's been highlighted is potentially criminal(?) actions, he mentioned no names and carefully blocked out any names. I also read through the screenshots and took a view that whoever that civil servant is, is a pig. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steady Eddie Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 (edited) 12 minutes ago, NoTailT said: I'd like to think the kid isn't so stupid as to do what he's done without considering what would happen next. What's been highlighted is potentially criminal(?) actions, he mentioned no names and carefully blocked out any names. Agree no persons name has been mentioned in relation to any criminal activity either and two known people have simply been insulted by being called thick. So Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. We know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. As I said almost everything could be “potentially” defamatory on here based on the above so remove the facility to post clips - there must be loads from Twitter and FB in relation to Ashford and Glover made over covid on here that are potentially defamatory too if “potential” is going to be used to remove posts. Edited January 3, 2023 by Steady Eddie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 I'll get you to defend my next £60 parking ticket Eddie...I could do with a free 2 year holiday with three squares a day, heating paid for and a playstation thrown in 😀 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 20 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: As I said John this forum needs to remove the facility to post screen shots if you’re going to view any material cut and paste from anywhere else on the www as potentially defamatory. There are hundreds and hundreds of clips on here that might be potentially defamatory in hindsight if you want to take that approach. But it’s not every screen shot or cut and paste. Its ones that are defamatory and specifically identify someone, by name, job description, or other means that lead to someone making an identification ( even a misidentification ). In the one about DoE he names names. In the DBC one he’s talking about only two, maybe four, people in the position to do what he claims. It’s fairly easy, potentially, to join dots. It only takes the person defamed, to have his attention drawn to your post and the embedded tweet, take a screen shot, and get his lawyers to write to the webmaster/admin/mods. It doesn’t even need to be the correct person identified. He/she only has to produce evidence that some mates thought it was them. And if they’re one of a small number that’s possible. My approach would be to warn you to think before you post, remind you that, if it’s defamatory then, linking by you is another act of publication BY YOU. It’s you who would have to justify, not Mr Scales. MF would set invisible once a complaint is received, and hand over any info that might identify you. That’s MF protected. It’s all they have to do under Electronic Communications/Transactions Acts and the international conventions they are based on. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 Latest score... John Wright 107 Barrack Room Lawyers 0 Listen to the advice Eddie. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steady Eddie Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 (edited) 14 minutes ago, John Wright said: My approach would be to warn you to think before you post, remind you that, if it’s defamatory then, linking by you is another act of publication BY YOU. It’s you who would have to justify, not Mr Scales. MF would set invisible once a complaint is received, and hand over any info that might identify you. That’s MF protected. It’s all they have to do under Electronic Communications/Transactions Acts and the international conventions they are based on. I’m not disagreeing with you I’m disagreeing with Alberts post which was basically an attack and a claim that the whole fabric of the forum was now in jeopardy. If that is the case then you need to remove the ability to re-post. You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with. As I said from what I can see Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. I know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone in that piece. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. A newspaper could easily report on that as “news” (local businessman makes public allegations of DBC corruption on Twitter - and reproduce parts of the tweets) in that situation and I’m sure some might. Edited January 3, 2023 by Steady Eddie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 Just now, Steady Eddie said: I’m not disagreeing with you I’m disagreeing with Alberts post which was basically an attack. What are you talking about? I warned you of exactly the same consequences a qualified advocate has now since just warned you about. ...and ironically how it could be you that ends up getting most of the DBC thread cut out or hidden if they come after you. Wake up man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 5 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: I’m not disagreeing with you I’m disagreeing with Alberts post which was basically an attack and a claim that the whole fabric of the forum was in jeopardy. You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with. As I said from what I can see Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. I know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone in that piece. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. A newspaper could easily report on that as “news” in that situation and I’m sure some might. Historically the forum has rather relied on posters exercising a modicum of self censorship. Some dicks didn’t. Inevitably they didn’t last long. You’re moving to the wrong side of the biggus dickus line in my personal view. But I don’t moderate, so my personal view isn’t important. Id have warned you sooner and then banned you, permanently, well before now. Not because DBC asked or has any influence, certainly not because Frank, who I’ve met 3 times in 15 years, is a councillor and admin. But because you’re deliberately pushing the boundaries and challenging moderation. More than anything because I was a volunteer and wanted a quiet life. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 10 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: Latest score... John Wright 107 Barrack Room Lawyers 0 Listen to the advice Eddie. Type 5 plastic 50 Barest minimum 0 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steady Eddie Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 2 minutes ago, John Wright said: Id have warned you sooner and then banned you, permanently, well before now. What for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 1 minute ago, Steady Eddie said: What for? It after 3 and in front of 5. Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 2 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: What for? You need to read on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinderella Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 21 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: I’m not disagreeing with you I’m disagreeing with Alberts post which was basically an attack and a claim that the whole fabric of the forum was now in jeopardy. If that is the case then you need to remove the ability to re-post. You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with. As I said from what I can see Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. I know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone in that piece. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. A newspaper could easily report on that as “news” (local businessman makes public allegations of DBC corruption on Twitter - and reproduce parts of the tweets) in that situation and I’m sure some might. Did you read John’s response? Or you just think you know better, regardless … (Head hitting desk) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted January 3, 2023 Share Posted January 3, 2023 23 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: I’m not disagreeing with you I’m disagreeing with Alberts post which was basically an attack and a claim that the whole fabric of the forum was now in jeopardy. If that is the case then you need to remove the ability to re-post. You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with. As I said from what I can see Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. I know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone in that piece. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. A newspaper could easily report on that as “news” (local businessman makes public allegations of DBC corruption on Twitter - and reproduce parts of the tweets) in that situation and I’m sure some might. A bit like reposting the Michelle Mone stuff in my view. Nobody causing grief about that. But I'm heeding the warning and conscious not to be a critic of DBC. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.