Protect our Right to Post: ScubaBoard Legal Defense fund

[johnnyheavens]

I got a bit for SB. Glad it worked out!

P.S. Might I suggest making it easier to collect. Put a PayPal button up or something. Maybe another drop down in the supporters section? Yes, I saw a few links in signatures and the OP but when asking for money I try to make it as easy as possible to collect I help with more then a couple other websites and a button to click on goes a long way to those of us that are went intentioned but lazy

[D_B]

I think (IIRC) there is a legal reason for not putting up a dedicated donation link


Glad it's getting closer ... wish I could do more Pete

[Uber]

How many pennies left now?

[barbixy]

The lawsuit is not over "the freedom of speech first amendment". Everyone has the right to free speech, but they do not have the right to libel, slander or defame others or businesses by posting distorted accounts of events between themselves and others, which are not verified by forum moderators as fact. It is unrealistic to expect forum moderators to research and verify libelous "reviews" of businesses, and this is what the lawsuit is about. If complaints cannot be verified as indeed fact, they should not be allowed to be posted. This isn't a peanut gallery opinion, please reference the exact same issue that came up with the NY Times, over mistruths included in a libelous article about some prominent people in Washington. The First Amendment in this case related to the Times posting quoted statements allegedly made by Party X, which were being reported by Party Y, and which were not only very damaging to Party X's reputation and integrity, but were also found to be blatantly false, upon closer examination. So the article the NY Times followed up with, is, should reporters be required to verify the truth of what they are putting in print? People grossly abuse and misuse forums to destroy others, so much so that there have been laws passed against doing just this, and by allowing negative and damaging reviews to be posted without verifying the facts, forum moderators are allowing a public venue to be used to break the law. These laws are related to internet libel, and cyberharassment.
My suggestion is that no forums of any kind, allow members to post what are clearly egregiously negative reviews casting aspersions on people's character and integrity, or better yet, no reviews at all. This would eliminate the risk of lawsuit period.
This happened to me, a really awful review after building 20 years of good will in my business, where the poster was sympathized with and everyone reading it jumped to attack me.
I don't believe people have any kind of First Amendment right to attack and slander others in print, where the facts can't be verified, and the object of the libelous statements is being slurred behind their back, on the world wide web, for the whole world to read.
This is also what the scubaboard lawsuit is about. This happened to another business owner, and if any of you have ever run a business that deals with the public, you know that there are a lot of people out there who no matter what you do, are going to be customers you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy.
I would also like to donate to Scubaboard however, because I've seen that the people running the site are fair and good people. I still suggest to ban any kind of reviews, which are off topic, and restrict the use of a forum to topics related to diving. This seems like a no-brainer policy, for self-preservation. Are you going to defend others' right to "free speech" at the cost of your own existence?

[SeaHorse81]

So the article the NY Times followed up with, is, should reporters be required to verify the truth of what they are putting in print?

I think the whole idea of journalism is (or was) supposed to be about digging up the facts and reporting them. Otherwise, it's just gossip or slander, not journalism. With journalism, you're talking about people who are presumed to be professionals, vetted by employers, with some ethical code that forms their work product. If a journalist knowingly publishes something false or unverified, it makes sense to me that legal consequences will ensue.

Online, you have a bunch of total strangers who may or may not be who they say they are, who haven't been vetted by anyone, who are free to say anything they are able to type. Everyone online knows this, or should. I don't think it makes sense to hold strangers on the Internet to the same standard as that for professional journalists. I don't see how it's possible or reasonable to expect moderators to investigate the veracity of the posts of thousands of people.

I hear you about the fact that one lone nut job can ruin the reputation of a perfectly good businessperson who's done nothing at all wrong. I'm in that same position, that someone could do that to me, and was in fact just talking about that the other day. It's nerve-wracking to be sure, but the ability of people to communicate their every thought online makes it impossible to police.

I hope that people will still be able to submit their opinions and experiences on forums like this one. It's up to each reader to decide whether they think the information has merit or not, based on their previous experience with the poster. If somebody posts a negative review here, I'll look at it differently if it's the first time the person ever posted, or if I've noticed from previous posts that they seem like an argumentative and unreasonable sort anyway. On the other hand, if it's someone who always sounds pretty rational and well-informed, I'll pay more attention.

The genie's out of the bottle in any event. All we can do is hope that most people apply the necessary critical thinking to what they see. There's nothing we can do about those who don't, and putting a gag on everyone seems like an extreme way to deal with the problem. I don't know what to suggest for avoidance of nuisance lawsuits, which are expensive and stressful no matter how unfounded they are. I'd hate for it come to everyone being afraid to speak honestly.

[NetDoc]

How many pennies left now?

Donations have crept to almost a standstill and we had an increase in what we owe as well. As it is we need to come up with about $1750 to be in the clear.

[NetDoc]

The lawsuit is not over "the freedom of speech first amendment".

While I am not at liberty to disclose much at all about this suit, I feel that you missed the point entirely. The Online Service Provider Law provides that I am not a publisher as a Newspaper is and there are no legal grounds to sue me over what others post.

[ajtoady]

Hell, I have given before and I figure I can do it again. I'm giving another 10 bucks and sure would like to see some other on this board help out. Can you as well help out? I've lost a hell of alot more than this in a hand of poker and didn't get the satisfaction there that I get on this board. Come on people lets end this thread!!

[ajtoady]

Pete, I hope this helps and possibly infects the rest on this board to give just a little more. Keep up the great work!!

[barbixy]

While I am not at liberty to disclose much at all about this suit, I feel that you missed the point entirely. The Online Service Provider Law provides that I am not a publisher as a Newspaper is and there are no legal grounds to sue me over what others post.

I didn't miss any point, I came into the discussion way late, due to receiving an email only yesterday asking for donations. I couldn't read all 137 pages of posts, but many were defending the original posters negative reviews as a right endowed by the First Amendment. I didn't author this position, I just responded to it and in fact I countered it. Its not an objective position to take any post out of context, when its clearly a response to prior posts.

I don't agree that forums should allow "reviews", but just because I don't agree, doesn't mean I'm not going to support the site. I sent a donation, because I believe the energy behind the site is positive, and I sense that the people running the site are fair and good people, who also took the time to address my concerns and offer help in the way of suggestions, when I was really upset that my business was being attacked in the same manner.

Of course I don't support reviews on forums, but I do support the people behind scubaboard. That's the only point I was trying to express.