What do you want from a blog? [no names please]

onthemitch · 14-03-2016 06:08PM

Dav wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure why Boards stopping you from defaming people is somehow Boards being sexist. It's really not. Every time you name a blog and make a negative statement about it or its owner, you are putting Boards.ie Ltd at risk of legal action. It doesn't matter that you're the ones who said it, we're legally responsible (the 2009 Defamation Act is yet another of Fianna Fáil's great contributions to Irish society).

So, unless you're willing to prepare me an affidavit that identifies you and indemnifies Boards.ie Ltd against any legal action arising from you're defamatory comments about another person's work, there won't be any "name and shame." Then you can go to the high court and appeal the case, we have no interest in spending two hundred grand to allow you to defame someone.

Um, so I personally have no interest in naming people necessarily, but this still doesn't answer the question as to why it's okay to discuss other individuals in different threads – is it because the blogger threads tend to get nastier than others?

retro:electro · 14-03-2016 06:15PM

Dav wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure why Boards stopping you from defaming people is somehow Boards being sexist. It's really not. Every time you name a blog and make a negative statement about it or its owner, you are putting Boards.ie Ltd at risk of legal action. It doesn't matter that you're the ones who said it, we're legally responsible (the 2009 Defamation Act is yet another of Fianna Fáil's great contributions to Irish society).

So, unless you're willing to prepare me an affidavit that identifies you and indemnifies Boards.ie Ltd against any legal action arising from you're defamatory comments about another person's work, there won't be any "name and shame." Then you can go to the high court and appeal the case, we have no interest in spending two hundred grand to allow you to defame someone.

Why don't you apply these principles to other threads who name and shame other celebrities?

Also nobody wants to "name and shame". And in any event, this doesn't change the fact that we should be allowed to discuss bloggers who have posted something on their social media for everyone to see. Please tell me how us naming the blogger in a discussion about what they have posted on social media constitutes libel? It's only defamatory if it's untrue.

I don't think they'd get very far in a defamatory case if that was the case;
Judge: sure you posted it all over social media for people to discuss.
Case closed!

anothernight · 14-03-2016 06:16PM

Dav wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure why Boards stopping you from defaming people is somehow Boards being sexist. It's really not. Every time you name a blog and make a negative statement about it or its owner, you are putting Boards.ie Ltd at risk of legal action. It doesn't matter that you're the ones who said it, we're legally responsible (the 2009 Defamation Act is yet another of Fianna Fáil's great contributions to Irish society).

So, unless you're willing to prepare me an affidavit that identifies you and indemnifies Boards.ie Ltd against any legal action arising from you're defamatory comments about another person's work, there won't be any "name and shame." Then you can go to the high court and appeal the case, we have no interest in spending two hundred grand to allow you to defame someone.

I was under the impression that defamation (libel and slander) only occurs if the statement is false. Also, how is Boards.ie vulnerable when people talk about bloggers, but not when they talk about politicians, businessmen, singers, football players, etc? And doesn't defamation involve a statement, rather than a discussion?

Stheno · 14-03-2016 06:29PM

anna080 wrote: »

Why don't you apply these principles to other threads who name and shame other celebrities?

Also nobody wants to "name and shame". And in any event, this doesn't change the fact that we should be allowed to discuss bloggers who have posted something on their social media for everyone to see. Please tell me how us naming the blogger in a discussion about what they have posted on social media constitutes libel? It's only defamatory if it's untrue.

I don't think they'd get very far in a defamatory case if that was the case;
Judge: sure you posted it all over social media for people to discuss.
Case closed!

If the blogger removes the post being discussed and there is still discussion on here about it, there is no way to reference the post that was being discussed or prove that it was made.

retro:electro · 14-03-2016 06:36PM

Stheno wrote: »

If the blogger removes the post being discussed and there is still discussion on here about it, there is no way to reference the post that was being discussed or prove that it was made.

And if they don't remove it?
So maybe we should come to a compromise where if they blogger removes the post then we discontinue to name them.

Dav · 14-03-2016 06:41PM

This isn't unique to bloggers, but it's certainly a lot more prevalent in discussion of bloggers (and if you think blogging's bad, we have had to ban all discussion about web hosting because that's such a horrible and childish community of people who can't stop behaving like 12 year olds). No one should be defaming anyone anywhere on the site (please report it if you see it), it just so happens that when it happens to a blogger, they're much quicker to spot it and notify us - when one considers that a blogger's entire livelihood exists online, they're a lot more pro-active in shutting down negativity and defending their reputation (as they should be to be fair).

For all of you saying "sure it's not defamatory if it's true" it still costs Boards.ie Ltd somewhere between one and two hundred thousand euro to set foot inside the high court for a day to explain this. We're not in a position to verify statements you made. We can be hit with an injunction without any notification - that's how fked up this law is - they don't have to tell us that we're under injunction, nor do they have to make any attempt to contact us before seeking this injunction. Next thing we know, our directors are being taken to jail for contempt of court for failure to comply with a court ordered injunction (and there is no appealing contempt, you go straight to jail).

So if you want to name people, by all means do so on your own site where you can take all the financial and legal responsibility.

retro:electro · 14-03-2016 06:47PM

Dav wrote: »

This isn't unique to bloggers, but it's certainly a lot more prevalent in discussion of bloggers (and if you think blogging's bad, we have had to ban all discussion about web hosting because that's such a horrible and childish community of people who can't stop behaving like 12 year olds). No one should be defaming anyone anywhere on the site (please report it if you see it), it just so happens that when it happens to a blogger, they're much quicker to spot it and notify us - when one considers that a blogger's entire livelihood exists online, they're a lot more pro-active in shutting down negativity and defending their reputation (as they should be to be fair).

For all of you saying "sure it's not defamatory if it's true" it still costs Boards.ie Ltd somewhere between one and two hundred thousand euro to set foot inside the high court for a day to explain this. We're not in a position to verify statements you made. We can be hit with an injunction without any notification - that's how fked up this law is - they don't have to tell us that we're under injunction, nor do they have to make any attempt to contact us before seeking this injunction. Next thing we know, our directors are being taken to jail for contempt of court for failure to comply with a court ordered injunction (and there is no appealing contempt, you go straight to jail).

So if you want to name people, by all means do so on your own site where you can take all the financial and legal responsibility.

You're still not explaining why we can't name someone who has posted something online that we would like to discuss. Why can't we name them then?

anothernight · 14-03-2016 06:50PM

Dav wrote: »

This isn't unique to bloggers, but it's certainly a lot more prevalent in discussion of bloggers (and if you think blogging's bad, we have had to ban all discussion about web hosting because that's such a horrible and childish community of people who can't stop behaving like 12 year olds). No one should be defaming anyone anywhere on the site (please report it if you see it), it just so happens that when it happens to a blogger, they're much quicker to spot it and notify us - when one considers that a blogger's entire livelihood exists online, they're a lot more pro-active in shutting down negativity and defending their reputation (as they should be to be fair).

For all of you saying "sure it's not defamatory if it's true" it still costs Boards.ie Ltd somewhere between one and two hundred thousand euro to set foot inside the high court for a day to explain this. We're not in a position to verify statements you made. We can be hit with an injunction without any notification - that's how fked up this law is - they don't have to tell us that we're under injunction, nor do they have to make any attempt to contact us before seeking this injunction. Next thing we know, our directors are being taken to jail for contempt of court for failure to comply with a court ordered injunction (and there is no appealing contempt, you go straight to jail).

So if you want to name people, by all means do so on your own site where you can take all the financial and legal responsibility.

So........
You'll allow discussion of other people, not all of whom have willingly placed themselves in the public sphere, in the hopes that they're not as quick as bloggers to complain to boards.ie. Is that it?

anothernight · 14-03-2016 06:51PM

Stheno wrote: »

If the blogger removes the post being discussed and there is still discussion on here about it, there is no way to reference the post that was being discussed or prove that it was made.

The Wayback Machine can be very useful.

doireannod · 14-03-2016 07:30PM

Dav wrote: »

This isn't unique to bloggers, but it's certainly a lot more prevalent in discussion of bloggers (and if you think blogging's bad, we have had to ban all discussion about web hosting because that's such a horrible and childish community of people who can't stop behaving like 12 year olds). No one should be defaming anyone anywhere on the site (please report it if you see it), it just so happens that when it happens to a blogger, they're much quicker to spot it and notify us - when one considers that a blogger's entire livelihood exists online, they're a lot more pro-active in shutting down negativity and defending their reputation (as they should be to be fair).

For all of you saying "sure it's not defamatory if it's true" it still costs Boards.ie Ltd somewhere between one and two hundred thousand euro to set foot inside the high court for a day to explain this. We're not in a position to verify statements you made. We can be hit with an injunction without any notification - that's how fked up this law is - they don't have to tell us that we're under injunction, nor do they have to make any attempt to contact us before seeking this injunction. Next thing we know, our directors are being taken to jail for contempt of court for failure to comply with a court ordered injunction (and there is no appealing contempt, you go straight to jail).

So if you want to name people, by all means do so on your own site where you can take all the financial and legal responsibility.

I actually finally feel that this answers my question!! Bloggers are on patrol watching every word that's said. So while 99.99% of what is said may not be defamatory, some posters may make throw away derogatory comments that do actually constitute defamation and then Boards will hear from the blogger.

I get it now. Bloggers patrol Boards and shut down any comments that they don't like. Shame. But I finally understand it. Don't agree with it. But I understand it.

dudara · 14-03-2016 07:50PM

From my perspective as a mod of Consumer Issues, we also remove business names when "derogatory" remarks are being made. It's to protect Boards from possible legal action, and trust me, threats of legal action do pop up reasonably regularly. Boards errs on the side of caution. As Dav says, there is precedent in other areas of Boards.

It's well worth reading up on defamation in Irish law. Sample link. The onus is on the defenendent (the person who made the alleged defamatory statement) to prove it. Simply screen snapping a statement may not be enough to "prove your statement" or show it's the truth. There may be other factors at play to which you are not privy. And bizarrely, defamation can still hold true, even if the individual is not named.

defamation differs from other torts in that a statement will be presumed to be defamatory until proved otherwise. If a defendant wishes to plead justification as a defence, he has to prove the truth of the statement.

meeeeh · 14-03-2016 07:58PM

doireannod wrote: »

I actually finally feel that this answers my question!! Bloggers are on patrol watching every word that's said. So while 99.99% of what is said may not be defamatory, some posters may make throw away derogatory comments that do actually constitute defamation and then Boards will hear from the blogger.

I get it now. Bloggers patrol Boards and shut down any comments that they don't like. Shame. But I finally understand it. Don't agree with it. But I understand it.

I have an idea, you can start your own blog where you name all the unethical bloggers. You can also invite others to contribute examples of dishonest actions. Sure it's only a free speech and you know it's all true.. Think how many vulnerable teens would be protected and informed.

Anyway let me know when someone does this. I will bring popcorn.

anothernight · 14-03-2016 08:11PM

dudara wrote: »

From my perspective as a mod of Consumer Issues, we also remove business names when "derogatory" remarks are being made. It's to protect Boards from possible legal action, and trust me, threats of legal action do pop up reasonably regularly. Boards errs on the side of caution. As Dav says, there is precedent in other areas of Boards.

It's well worth reading up on defamation in Irish law. Sample link. The onus is on the defenendent (the person who made the alleged defamatory statement) to prove it. Simply screen snapping a statement may not be enough to "prove your statement" or show it's the truth. There may be other factors at play to which you are not privy. And bizarrely, defamation can still hold true, even if the individual is not named.

I don't think it's bizarre at all that it can be considered defamation even when the individual is not named. In those cases, it's upheld because the individual can be identified, which is a fair enough reason in my opinion.

On the other hand, I don't think Boards.ie are erring on the side of caution considering how they allow discussion of most people who might complain anyway, while disallowing discussion of very specific groups of people (and yes, I remember the MCD thing years ago).

As for the legislation itself... If someone copies the content of my blog word for word, or if they take my images, they translate my work, publish a derivation of it, etc (and all these have happened to me too often), I can contact them or their host to ask them to take down the content. If that doesn't happen, I'd technically have a legal case against them. 100% of the times I've had to make such a request, the content was taken down. Why isn't that the first port of call for online defamation cases? That's what's bizarre, in my opinion.

dudara · 14-03-2016 08:17PM

That not defamation, that's theft of intellectual property. You are not publishing a potentially defamatory statement about them.

anothernight · 14-03-2016 08:21PM

dudara wrote: »

That not defamation, that's theft of intellectual property. You are not publishing a potentially defamatory statement about them.

I realise that. I didn't say it's the same thing at all. I just think it's weird that a blogger either allows people to talk about them or apparently makes boards.ie spend "somewhere between one and two hundred thousand euro to set foot inside the high court for a day", with no other options in between. We're not talking about print media here. Content could easily be taken down on request.

doireannod · 14-03-2016 08:34PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I have an idea, you can start your own blog where you name all the unethical bloggers. You can also invite others to contribute examples of dishonest actions. Sure it's only a free speech and you know it's all true.. Think how many vulnerable teens would be protected and informed.

Anyway let me know when someone does this. I will bring popcorn.

GOMI does this. Manhattan popcorn is best.

lazygal · 14-03-2016 11:13PM

doireannod wrote: »

GOMI does this. Manhattan popcorn is best.

Irish bloggers are pretty thin skinned if boards is as bad as it gets. GOMI is BRUTAL.

doireannod · 14-03-2016 11:33PM

anothernight wrote: »

So........
You'll allow discussion of other people, not all of whom have willingly placed themselves in the public sphere, in the hopes that they're not as quick as bloggers to complain to boards.ie. Is that it?

That's exactly it!

Stheno · 14-03-2016 11:34PM

doireannod wrote: »

That's exactly it!

Does it make sense that the fact bloggers complain and can take legal action means discussion of them is not allowed?

biko · 14-03-2016 11:43PM

Discussion is perfectly fine. As long as it is civil and constructive.

doireannod · 14-03-2016 11:44PM

Stheno wrote: »

Does it make sense that the fact bloggers complain and can take legal action means discussion of them is not allowed?

It doesn't make sense to me. The same rules should apply to all. But I now understand the anxiety amongst moderators about naming bloggers; they seem to be the only group in the public domain that are watching what is said here. Conor McGregor is too busy training to come on here. He doesn't see what's being said about him. The "mods" don't get nervous when people repeatedly call him racist because he more than likely won't see it. But if an Irish blogger was called tacky for wearing pyjamas as outer wear all hell would break loose because the "mods" would know that she'd see it and complain.

As I said, I don't agree with it but I understand where it's all coming from now.

Stheno · 14-03-2016 11:45PM

doireannod wrote: »

As I said, I don't agree with it but I understand where it's all coming from now.

Well at least that's progress.:)

doireannod · 14-03-2016 11:47PM

Stheno wrote: »

Well at least that's progress.:)

Definitely!

Stheno · 14-03-2016 11:51PM

doireannod wrote: »

Definitely!

You can actually see it in action across multiple forums on the site, businesses/individuals cannot be named/discussed in many forums as there is a history of it casuing issues, particularly if there are negative/unproveable posts/posts based on peoples individual experience.

If it wasn't contained in those areas of the site where it is most likely to cause issues, then the entire site would be gone tbh.

I guess a bit of it is Ireland is a small place, so while it may not be a person directly posted about who may see something, it could be a friend of theirs or a friend of a friend etc.

doireannod · 15-03-2016 08:51AM

Stheno wrote: »

You can actually see it in action across multiple forums on the site, businesses/individuals cannot be named/discussed in many forums as there is a history of it casuing issues, particularly if there are negative/unproveable posts/posts based on peoples individual experience.

If it wasn't contained in those areas of the site where it is most likely to cause issues, then the entire site would be gone tbh.

I guess a bit of it is Ireland is a small place, so while it may not be a person directly posted about who may see something, it could be a friend of theirs or a friend of a friend etc.

Yes, Ireland being a small place has a bit to do with it. Genuinely, I didn't understand for the longest time why it was only bloggers we couldn't mention. But now I do. So thank you!

scarbouro · 15-03-2016 10:24AM

lazygal wrote: »

Irish bloggers are pretty thin skinned if boards is as bad as it gets. GOMI is BRUTAL.

Are Irish/Uk bloggers discussed on this site? I had a look but I can only see mainly American bloggers on it and it's kinda hard to follow.

karensgal · 15-03-2016 12:01PM

scarbouro wrote: »

Are Irish/Uk bloggers discussed on this site? I had a look but I can only see mainly American bloggers on it and it's kinda hard to follow.

I'd you Google the gomi bloggers and the name of one of Ireland first bloggers now a brand name you'll find an interesting thread!

scarbouro · 15-03-2016 12:20PM

Yes, that's the only irish blogger I can see being discussed on it and it's only a small thread at that.

I don't follow any US bloggers really, mainly UK or Irish.

doireannod · 15-03-2016 01:18PM

karensgal wrote: »

I'd you Google the gomi bloggers and the name of one of Ireland first bloggers now a brand name you'll find an interesting thread!

Really?! Must check this!!

lazygal · 15-03-2016 03:30PM

doireannod wrote: »

Really?! Must check this!!

Check the international blogger section.
GOMI really opened my eyes to all the tricks Irish and UK bloggers are now using.

What do you want from a blog? [no names please]

Comments