Libellous posts

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

There have been far too many instances recently of vitriolic posts which have arguably been libellous. We cannot and will not tolerate any more slanging matches about the way the club is run. We all have our opinions about the management of the club and we are all entitled to those opinions. However, when they decent into name calling, trolling and likening the actions of an individual to Nazism, then it's clear that we need to act.

Any more extreme behaviour will be acted upon strongly and decisively.

[Deppo]

Crumbs!

[St.Patrik]

Finally - bring back the talk about football on this forum again. Oh happy days : )

[jam]

There have been far too many instances recently of vitriolic posts which have arguably been libellous. We cannot and will not tolerate any more slanging matches about the way the club is run. We all have our opinions about the management of the club and we are all entitled to those opinions. However, when they decent into name calling, trolling and likening the actions of an individual to Nazism, then it's clear that we need to act.

Any more extreme behaviour will be acted upon strongly and decisively.

 

Are you talking about Daren_W's post? Because the subject of his post was clearly his perception of the attitude of posters on this board, not the actions of Cortese.

[alpine_saint]

Are you talking about Daren_W's post? Because the subject of his post was clearly his perception of the attitude of posters on this board, not the actions of Cortese.

 

Let sleeping dogs lie, eh ?

[westmidlandsaint]

brilliant well said and about time. nothing worse than reading a thread but having to trawl through pages of arguments and insults, lets get it back to football

[Secret Site Agent]

There have been far too many instances recently of vitriolic posts which have arguably been libellous. We cannot and will not tolerate any more slanging matches about the way the club is run. We all have our opinions about the management of the club and we are all entitled to those opinions. However, when they decent into name calling, trolling and likening the actions of an individual to Nazism, then it's clear that we need to act.

Any more extreme behaviour will be acted upon strongly and decisively.

 

Here, here. I fully agree with this, and posted as such this morning. It's one thing to make comment and debate, it's another to make reference to a persons politics. Especially considering NC is Italian and the connetations that has.

[alpine_saint]

Here, here. I fully agree with this, and posted as such this morning. It's one thing to make comment and debate, it's another to make reference to a persons politics. Especially considering NC is Italian and the connetations that has.

 

What connotations ? Please stop right now, mate.

Edited 4 August, 2010 by alpine_saint

[Breeny]

Excellent news. Back to the team topics and the game in general .It will be worth logging in again !

[Lance]

Crumbs!

 

Wreeeeeyyyyy!!! moooove closer!!!!

[Secret Site Agent]

What connotations ? Please stop right now, mate.

 

I'm simply making reference to the fact that Italy was the home of Fascism, which I think most have forgotton about.

I thought you and I were on the same page, Alpine?

Edited 4 August, 2010 by Secret Site Agent

[saint1977]

Good, well done DSM. A lot of the more moderate posters that want to talk about football and topics related to football (such as where to get a good beer before the match) have been deterred from doing so by the extremist postings and aggressive responses of a minority of people. I am in no way advocating halting free speech and informed debate, those attributes have a place on a forum such as this but a number of lines have clearly been crossed recently. The Lounge is useful at times and General Sports is good for discussing cricket but primarily I come on here as a Saints fan. My hope is that once the season gets underway on Saturday some of nonsense may stop of it's own accord.

[Thedelldays]

at bloody last

[Huntingdon]

Didn't Graham Turner threaten legal action against a poster on the Hereford United forum?

[arfurdent]

Let sleeping dogs lie, eh ?

 

surely if the dog is asleep how can you hear it lie

[RobM]

About bloody time. This, people who feel the need to respond to every remark made, the personal attacks and the way threads go way off topic far too quickly should all be stamped out. It's up to the moderators to grow a pair a deal with it directly now that this message has gone out.

[Scudamore]

surely if the dog is asleep how can you hear it lie

Sleeping dogs are still ITK

[Dave Benson Phillips]

Right, so what you actually mean is that any opinions that you don't agree with will be locked, because you are a super dooper Mod? I hope you will also lock threads involving transfer speculation ( unless they can prove beyond reasonable doubt that they have spoken to the player then they should be banned IMO, if we are going to have transparant rules and consistancy ) .

 

You locked a thread because a well respected and like it or not 'ITK' poster decided to take the opportunity to pass on some information for debate. And you threaten people with banning if you don't agree with what they post? You need to get off your high horse DSM.

 

People are entitled to have their opinions, and are entitled to speculate, as are people entitled to join in the debate, disagree with it and indeed express their own views. This is supposed to be an independant forum and you and Ponty ( note I don't say the OWNERS Boj and Steve ) are turning it into another SFC propaganda machine by yourself locking threads with 'rumour' or 'speculation' and Ponty by being sarcastic and basically not practicing what he preaches when it comes to main board behaviour.

 

Just because some of the stories or speculation posted on here are negative, it doesn't mean they are any less worthy of a place on the forum. Fair enough if posts become libellous, but deal with them individually not locking the whole thread.

 

And thus endeth my lesson on how to moderate a forum.

 

You know what... if a thread doesn't interest me, I don't bother posting on it, far too many people get their knickers in a twist over subjects which actually, either have no effect on them or they don't really care about.

 

Looking at Pilchards thread on the main board... let's see how you deal with that one eh? As it is exactly what you are threatening to take action against.

[sussexsaint]

at bloody last

 

This

 

and thank you

[JustMike]

Right, so what you actually mean is that any opinions that you don't agree with will be locked, because you are a super dooper Mod? I hope you will also lock threads involving transfer speculation ( unless they can prove beyond reasonable doubt that they have spoken to the player then they should be banned IMO, if we are going to have transparant rules and consistancy ) .

 

You locked a thread because a well respected and like it or not 'ITK' poster decided to take the opportunity to pass on some information for debate. And you threaten people with banning if you don't agree with what they post? You need to get off your high horse DSM.

 

People are entitled to have their opinions, and are entitled to speculate, as are people entitled to join in the debate, disagree with it and indeed express their own views. This is supposed to be an independant forum and you and Ponty ( note I don't say the OWNERS Boj and Steve ) are turning it into another SFC propaganda machine by yourself locking threads with 'rumour' or 'speculation' and Ponty by being sarcastic and basically not practicing what he preaches when it comes to main board behaviour.

 

Just because some of the stories or speculation posted on here are negative, it doesn't mean they are any less worthy of a place on the forum. Fair enough if posts become libellous, but deal with them individually not locking the whole thread.

 

And thus endeth my lesson on how to moderate a forum.

 

You know what... if a thread doesn't interest me, I don't bother posting on it, far too many people get their knickers in a twist over subjects which actually, either have no effect on them or they don't really care about.

 

Looking at Pilchards thread on the main board... let's see how you deal with that one eh? As it is exactly what you are threatening to take action against.

 

agree with most of what you have written Stu but I have come to the conclusion that no-one, no matter how respected as an ITK'er they were in the past, is ITK now. NC et al have played things close to their chest for a reason, and as long as we get results on the pitch I happy for it to stay that way

[Gemmel]

Has the forum been contacted by the club? Any warning shots fired?

[Daren W]

Let sleeping dogs lie, eh ?

 

Oh right, so you accuse me of likening Cortese to a Nazi but we'll forget about that one shall we?

 

Erm... No, actually, I won't...

[torsaint]

Right decision. About 2 months too late. Good on you.

[alpine_saint]

Oh right, so you accuse me of likening Cortese to a Nazi but we'll forget about that one shall we?

 

Erm... No, actually, I won't...

 

Up to you. You chose the bizarre anecdote, whether it was NC or those who support him you were distastefully using a Nazi-era anecdote with which to criticize/abuse , it doesnt matter....

 

Please note the difference - I said you were OTT and offensive, not that you had accused someone of being a Nazi. An important distinction, I think.

 

Anyway, I am not getting myself banned over something you wrote, so its my last word on the subject.

Edited 4 August, 2010 by alpine_saint

[hypochondriac]

I'm making an effort not to post on here at the moment because I am sick of it but this is out of order I feel. Below is the message I have sent to DSM:

 

 

Had it confirmed that you were acting alone and did not have the agreement of the other mods when you were locking threads for seemingly no reason (because you disagree with the content.) and telling people off for libel (there was none that I can see if you read the post by Darren.) I can't tell you how to do your job, but I think you need to respect the views of others, especially someone like patred who has impeccable sources and who is a longstanding and trustworthy member of the forum. I doubt you would have done a similar thing if it was a positive rumour.

[Gingeletiss]

I'm making an effort not to post on here at the moment because I am sick of it but this is out of order I feel. Below is the message I have sent to DSM:

 

 

And you felt the need to share this because?

[Deppo]

I'm making an effort not to post on here at the moment because I am sick of it but this is out of order I feel. Below is the message I have sent to DSM:

 

That is libellous

 

Sue him DSM.

[Saint Charlie]

Why not just have a rule of don't post a rumour unless you name the source. All the ITKs post such cryptic stuff like the know way more than they are letting on. In fact there are probably very few ITK sources at Saints now. People may have used to have good sources but the fact none of our transfers have been broken by ITKs shows they are on the wane. Most of the sources that these ITKs get info from are probably some part of the 'old' regime and as such are probably bitter about their power and knowledge being taken away.

 

Lets leave this rubbish behind and get on with the football- its what the club exists for and we should be about to have a very sucessful season.

 

COYR

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

Just to get this in perspective. As far as I know, no-one in the club has approached us about content; Stu, I am not protecting Cortese or the club in this, my opinions are my own but I know for a fact that Cortese, Liebherr and the Club have a sh*t load more money than the Forum and if they make up their minds to, could sue us for libel in a heartbeat without even caring about costs. I am a strong advocate for free speech and am happy to let threads run their course, but without back-biting, name-calling and offensive or libellous posts.

Patred's thread was closed because of the usual sniping amongst posters, not because of anything else. In fact, I apologise to Patred for implying that his knowledge was worthless just that the antagonism between posters was getting too much.

[stmusicdude]

Right, so what you actually mean is that any opinions that you don't agree with will be locked, because you are a super dooper Mod?

 

I hope you will also lock threads involving transfer speculation ( unless they can prove beyond reasonable doubt that they have spoken to the player then they should be banned IMO, if we are going to have transparant rules and consistancy ) .

 

You locked a thread because a well respected and like it or not 'ITK' poster decided to take the opportunity to pass on some information for debate. And you threaten people with banning.....your a fine one to talk about threats. your like a 14 year old when someone challenges your posts! if you don't agree with what they post? You need to get off your high horse DSM.

 

People are entitled to have their opinions, are you finally accepting this yourself then? and are entitled to speculate, as are people entitled to join in the debate, disagree with it and indeed express their own views. This is supposed to be an independant forum and you and Ponty ( note I don't say the OWNERS Boj and Steve ) are turning it into another SFC propaganda machine by yourself locking threads with 'rumour' or 'speculation' and Ponty by being sarcastic and basically not practicing what he preaches when it comes to main board behaviour.

 

Just because some of the stories or speculation posted on here are negative, it doesn't mean they are any less worthy of a place on the forum. Fair enough if posts become libellous, but deal with them individually not locking the whole thread.

 

And thus endeth my lesson on how to moderate a forum.

 

You know what... if a thread doesn't interest me, I don't bother posting on it, far too many people get their knickers in a twist over subjects which actually, either have no effect on them or they don't really care about.

 

Looking at Pilchards thread on the main board... let's see how you deal with that one eh? As it is exactly what you are threatening to take action against.

 

 

i looked at it as them saying ... If the debate dipps into unsubstantiated attacks ..then the plug would be pulled.. lets face it there is normally plenty to talk about with the personal attacks that seem lately to be getting far to close for comfort to libel.

[hypochondriac]

Just to get this in perspective. As far as I know, no-one in the club has approached us about content; Stu, I am not protecting Cortese or the club in this, my opinions are my own but I know for a fact that Cortese, Liebherr and the Club have a sh*t load more money than the Forum and if they make up their minds to, could sue us for libel in a heartbeat without even caring about costs. I am a strong advocate for free speech and am happy to let threads run their course, but without back-biting, name-calling and offensive or libellous posts.

Patred's thread was closed because of the usual sniping amongst posters, not because of anything else. In fact, I apologise to Patred for implying that his knowledge was worthless just that the antagonism between posters was getting too much.

 

Thank you for the apology DSM. If someone jumps on a thread and is offensive then that isn't the OP's fault though. I would suggest that if someone can't debate a rumour or a bit of info that someone passes on sensibly then their posts should be deleted and they should be infracted. That goes for both sides.

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

i looked at it as them saying ... If the debate dips into unsubstantiated attacks ..then the plug would be pulled.. lets face it there is normally plenty to talk about with the personal attacks that seem lately to be getting far to close for comfort to libel.

 

This

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

Thank you for the apology DSM. If someone jumps on a thread and is offensive then that isn't the OP's fault though. I would suggest that if someone can't debate a rumour or a bit of info that someone passes on sensibly then their posts should be deleted and they should be infracted. That goes for both sides.

 

To be fair, it does depend on the original post though. There are some members who can't post a thread without deliberately trolling.

[hypochondriac]

This

 

But that just gives an incentive to people who disagree with a thread to get personal in the hope that a thread is locked.

[hypochondriac]

To be fair, it does depend on the original post though. There are some members who can't post a thread without deliberately trolling.

 

Most of the topics I have seen of late are able to easily be debated without getting personal. Sure there are some idiots I agree with that. The likes of Stu though, he can go over the top sometimes but it is quite possible for posters to debate the points he makes sensibly but most choose to attack him personally just because of who he is.

[Pilchards]

If I would of read this before posting, then I would not of done what I did.

I tried to change it to a music thread but it was locked before I could.

Anyway moving on from this now.

 

Hey Stu, you fancy coming for a beer?

 

 

;-)

Edited 4 August, 2010 by Pilchards

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

But that just gives an incentive to people who disagree with a thread to get personal in the hope that a thread is locked.

 

Possibly, but there is always the option to delete the odd post without resorting to deleting the whole thread. I do this a fair bit, as do the other mods, but when you get to thirty pages of a non-story like Nick Illingworth getting his season ticket money refunded containing 90% *****ing about this that and the other then we've gone past the point of no return IMO.

[Deppo]

People are entitled to have their opinions, and are entitled to speculate, as are people entitled to join in the debate, disagree with it and indeed express their own views. This is supposed to be an independant forum and you and Ponty ( note I don't say the OWNERS Boj and Steve ) are turning it into another SFC propaganda machine by yourself locking threads with 'rumour' or 'speculation' and Ponty by being sarcastic and basically not practicing what he preaches when it comes to main board behaviour.

 

DSM and Ponty are ruining the board by turning it into a SFC propaganda machine? Idiot.

And it has been noted that you excluded Boj and Eddie from your criticism.....you would do, they spend half their lives residing up your bumhole.

[Daren W]

Up to you. You chose the bizarre anecdote, whether it was NC or those who support him you were distastefully using a Nazi-era anecdote with which to criticize/abuse , it doesnt matter....

 

Please note the difference - I said you were OTT and offensive, not that you had accused someone of being a Nazi. An important distinction, I think.

 

Anyway, I am not getting myself banned over something you wrote, so its my last word on the subject.

 

Not bizarre, you just don't have the fecking intelligence to understand it. Your reply just shows you for what you are...

 

Now you're just doing what you usually do when you lose an argument or act like thick twonk .. you run and hide...

 

For what it's worth I'd rather be OTT or offensive than a sad, bitter, thick, bigotted, blinkered , thick little troll who lives to get attention because he's probably so ineffectual or dull in real life and revels in the "notoriety" he gets on here...

 

Sorry DSM, ban me, please but I just had to get that off my chest... Phew, feel so much better for that....

[hypochondriac]

Possibly, but there is always the option to delete the odd post without resorting to deleting the whole thread. I do this a fair bit, as do the other mods, but when you get to thirty pages of a non-story like Nick Illingworth getting his season ticket money refunded containing 90% *****ing about this that and the other then we've gone past the point of no return IMO.

 

How is that a non story though? Nick actually posted an update saying it was not a clerical error. It's a potentially huge story IMO.

[Smirking_Saint]

Most of the topics I have seen of late are able to easily be debated without getting personal. Sure there are some idiots I agree with that. The likes of Stu though, he can go over the top sometimes but it is quite possible for posters to debate the points he makes sensibly but most choose to attack him personally just because of who he is.

 

I have to disagree with this Hypo, problem is that he just can't debate himself, he only EVER sees his side and will never admit he is in the wrong, more often than not he gets personal abuse in if you argue against him or even resorts to character attacks because he is unable to see both sides of an arguement and actually debate it. Unfortunately he gets the abuse he gets as he is far too quick to give it out himself.

 

I have said it before and will again, both you and SteveGrant are much better as you are able to see both sides and debate sensibly and intelligentely.

 

As for DBP attack on DSM and Ponty, you have to laugh at that really, they probably bring a much more common sense approach to infractions and moderating than Baj/Steve IMO, also DBP seems inside one of the owners pockets seeing as he gets away with so much. I can't see any impartiality from Baj or Steve, Baj seems to ignore anything i write even if directed at him and since all this NC crap it is clear Steve has an agenda and IMO i was unfairly and rashly infracted for one of my threads which coincidentally was in opposition to the anti NC camp.

 

Personally i would have left the Patred thread in the interest of fairness however you have to see it from the forums perspective, unless the OP could give credible evidence it could be libelous, you can effectively say anything otherwise.

[Smirking_Saint]

How is that a non story though? Nick actually posted an update saying it was not a clerical error. It's a potentially huge story IMO.

 

We don't know the whole story though.

 

I wouldn't let someone in my shop if they were continually calling it sh*te and writing blogs on the inadequacies of my management, but then we have been through this, its all about perspective.

[SuperMikey]

I like how the thread about libellous posting and trolling has turned into another trolling thread.

[St Lej]

Not bizarre, you just don't have the fecking intelligence to understand it. Your reply just shows you for what you are...

 

Now you're just doing what you usually do when you lose an argument or act like thick twonk .. you run and hide...

 

For what it's worth I'd rather be OTT or offensive than a sad, bitter, thick, bigotted, blinkered , thick little troll who lives to get attention because he's probably so ineffectual or dull in real life and revels in the "notoriety" he gets on here...

 

Sorry DSM, ban me, please but I just had to get that off my chest... Phew, feel so much better for that....

 

Unlike you to lose your temper and get personal

[Big John]

And so say all of us.

 

Now that the culling season is under way can we also put an end to those self-proclaimed comedians who have more thn the required ONE identity?

 

I for one like to know who i am reading and talking to, even if it's just an internet persona, it would at least lead to a bit of consistency. Or does the rule only apply if one is not 'pally' with the site owners/mods/admin etc?

[hypochondriac]

I agree with you Smirking Saint that Stu does go over the top and bring it on himself. He does however make quite a few good points on occasion and sometimes puts them across in a reasonable manner, only to be abused or personally insulted. I understand that he gives out his fair share, but that doesn't excuse the same behaviour from others who then moan that Stu is being too forceful with his opinions.

[Barry the Badger]

I really don't think it's that hard to disagree with people without resorting to insulting each other.

 

I basically disagree with everything Alpine says, but would like to think that on the occasions I've "taken him on" I've generally stuck to the point we're disagreeing it on rather than turning it personal. I stick with it until I give up trying to change his mind, and then I walk away.

 

I don't understand why some posters find it so hard to do this.

[hypochondriac]

I really don't think it's that hard to disagree with people without resorting to insulting each other.

 

I basically disagree with everything Alpine says, but would like to think that on the occasions I've "taken him on" I've generally stuck to the point we're disagreeing it on rather than turning it personal. I stick with it until I give up trying to change his mind, and then I walk away.

 

I don't understand why some posters find it so hard to do this.

 

Totally agree. I have on occasion been driven to insults by some posters who I think post deliberately to wind people up (like delldays) but I like to think that I am civil most of the time.

[Smirking_Saint]

I agree with you Smirking Saint that Stu does go over the top and bring it on himself. He does however make quite a few good points on occasion and sometimes puts them across in a reasonable manner, only to be abused or personally insulted. I understand that he gives out his fair share, but that doesn't excuse the same behaviour from others who then moan that Stu is being too forceful with his opinions.

 

He does give some decent posts, but unfortunately he is what he is Hypo, people shouldn't personally insult him but why not ? You only have to disagree with him to take flak from him, he started giving me sh*t when i was only debating his posts.

 

So in a way i can excuse it, you get treated how you treat others i am afraid, respect.......... in my world is earnt not given and can be easily taken away.

[St Marco]

Basically i think the mods have done the right thing.

 

It is not about having your opinions censored it is about having claims about people proven.

 

Some posters on here have become way to malicious of late and when pushed for evidence on their claims offer nothing but insult. If you question their claims they will try and attack you. The sad part of it is that they don't see that is how they are behaving. That if you don't believe what they are saying then there must be something wrong with you.

 

Basically as said before. If you have something malicious to say, want to start a rumour based on something dave at the chippie told you. Back it up with proof. If not then don't post it. If you want to do ilegal activities then do it somewhere else because it is just a matter of time before some dumbass's stupid rumour will effect us all.