Reevezie 2.0.0.8 wrote:I have removed the post by flash, i dont think the content was relivent or acceptable so therefore i have removed it!
I must thank you very much in deed. A few people on here do know who Iam and something like that could possible start a terrible ball rolling..
Self praise is no recognition no recognition at all but I must say Iam an upstanding person within the community and involved in children’s charities, therefore I thank you once again.
Reevezie 2.0.0.8 wrote:I have removed the post by flash, i dont think the content was relivent or acceptable so therefore i have removed it!
I must thank you very much in deed. A few people on here do know who Iam and something like that could possible start a terrible ball rolling..
Self praise is no recognition no recognition at all but I must say Iam an upstanding person within the community and involved in children’s charities, therefore I thank you once again.
No problem, i'm just trying to do what i think is right for OUR users and OUR site, post like that weather meant or not can cause rumours/problems ect, im trying to do my best as a new mod to try and help mike and the rest of us make the site a better site in general.......
thegimble wrote:Locking a thread is not against Freedom of Speech. In the UK we dont have a such a law. In the US they do.
Its safeguarding a persons right to privacy against rumors made by yourself on here. Whilst you allegedly say you know something you hide it in innuendo and rumors rather than say what the problem is. I find that rather gutless.
Dont come on here claiming freedom of speech when all you do is spread a rumor which might leave the owners of the website liable to a cout case.
You seem to make out your in the know in the club but i find that rather disturbing if you come on here and put on the website unfounded allegations or at worst a deliberate attempt to put more pressure on a player.
1689 Bill of Rights grants 'freedom of speech in Parliament' after James II is overthrown and William and Mary installed as co-rulers.
thegimble wrote:Locking a thread is not against Freedom of Speech. In the UK we dont have a such a law. In the US they do.
Its safeguarding a persons right to privacy against rumors made by yourself on here. Whilst you allegedly say you know something you hide it in innuendo and rumors rather than say what the problem is. I find that rather gutless.
Dont come on here claiming freedom of speech when all you do is spread a rumor which might leave the owners of the website liable to a cout case.
You seem to make out your in the know in the club but i find that rather disturbing if you come on here and put on the website unfounded allegations or at worst a deliberate attempt to put more pressure on a player.
1689 Bill of Rights grants 'freedom of speech in Parliament' after James II is overthrown and William and Mary installed as co-rulers.
thegimble wrote:Locking a thread is not against Freedom of Speech. In the UK we dont have a such a law. In the US they do.
Its safeguarding a persons right to privacy against rumors made by yourself on here. Whilst you allegedly say you know something you hide it in innuendo and rumors rather than say what the problem is. I find that rather gutless.
Dont come on here claiming freedom of speech when all you do is spread a rumor which might leave the owners of the website liable to a cout case.
You seem to make out your in the know in the club but i find that rather disturbing if you come on here and put on the website unfounded allegations or at worst a deliberate attempt to put more pressure on a player.
1689 Bill of Rights grants 'freedom of speech in Parliament' after James II is overthrown and William and Mary installed as co-rulers.
Very educational........
Ill be honest I dont even know if it is still in force, I was expecting someone to tell me different.. There is still time. :doz:
PS who ever unlocked the thread many thanks it was right thing to do and just shows that this site is different from others!
In case you didn't notice, I unlocked the thread and merged in the one about the locking.
I don't think anything at all on the thread opens the site up for any challenge.
I would prefer that WW had posted either nothing, or everything about his rumour (because I want to know what its about), but I'm not here to tell people what to say. If something had been libellous on the thread I would have deleted it.
Mike wrote:In case you didn't notice, I unlocked the thread and merged in the one about the locking.
I don't think anything at all on the thread opens the site up for any challenge.
I would prefer that WW had posted either nothing, or everything about his rumour (because I want to know what its about), but I'm not here to tell people what to say. If something had been libellous on the thread I would have deleted it.
Thanks once again, I take on board your comments and understand what you are saying. I did say originally that I was vague and apologised for that. I posted my comments on the grounds that Smith is not helping himself without actually saying what he is doing. It is clear that some members don’t like this approach and I respect them all for it.
I would not counter call someone even though I feel some comments made have been in bad taste like saying gutless and alike. But hey that’s life and FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
Wigan Watcher wrote:
1689 Bill of Rights grants 'freedom of speech in Parliament' after James II is overthrown and William and Mary installed as co-rulers.
Very educational........
Ill be honest I dont even know if it is still in force, I was expecting someone to tell me different.. There is still time. :doz:
PS who ever unlocked the thread many thanks it was right thing to do and just shows that this site is different from others!
Maybe educational but that law has been superseeded by an European law, which was incoparted in the UK in 1998.
In 1998, the United Kingdom incorporated European Convention, and the guarantee of freedom of expression it contains in Article 10, into its domestic law under the Human Rights Act. UK law imposes a number of limitations on freedom of speech not found in some other jurisdictions. For example, its laws recognise the crimes of incitement to racial hatred and incitement to religious hatred. UK laws on defamation are also considered among the strictest in the Western world, imposing a high burden of proof on the defendant.
As i stated before we dont have a freedom of speech in the UK. But to all who post on here need to understand the meaning of the last bit. If you dont have proof then you are open ot the owner of the site to a court case.
Id also guess the 1689 bill would have been changed at times as to protect the upper class from any unwanted attention.
Wigan Watcher wrote:Flash your comments are totally disgraceful. You should be ashamed of yourself.. I dont mind anyone arguing their point and using examples to argue their case..
I for one like most would never use the context you have and again your a disgraceful person to do so.
I for one will never have a debate with you again but i will always remember your comments for future reference
You should be warned for writing such text, and in my opinion banned from the site.
Your a disgraceful person
If Flash's post has been removed (I never sae it) should this rebutal not be removed as well. It is not relivent to the thread and serves no purpose other than point out there was a post by Flash that was offensive. Fair play, Jim
