drLaser
Member
CONTEXT:
In a thread titled "The Keys to Speed" in the "Laser Talk" board of TLF, I offered some thoughts on May 7 on five determinants of "average speed over the course". On May 11, an unidentified subscriber (username "geoff") replied simply as:
> Shevy Gunter is a bum
MacKenzie Wesson promptly responded as:
> Please try to refrain from comments like that, we're all
> trying hard to make relations better and forgive previous
> actions/sayings.
Goonie added:
> How about we don't flame, ok?
According to Brad's request that we "keep the discussion on topic within its thread", this discussion has no place in the thread titled "The Keys to Speed", and is hence started here under its own thread for any interested parties.
----------------------------------------------------------
Guys!
I think Goonie and probably even Mac are playing with the wrong control line here, if they are not on the wrong tack.
Our new "Terms of Service" is clear: we have no rules against "flaming". Flaming is a network tradition, and netiquette does not mess with tradition!
In addition, a statement that "X is a someone who obtains by begging, or someone who sponges off others and avoids work" may be demonstrated to be an honest opinion. If it is such an "opinion", it would be worthy of protection. After all, the Forum's TOS notes "TLF is dedicated to allowing free speech."
But "free speech" is a well-defined legal term. The protection granted to any "opinion" in the eyes of the readers (and law) depends on the extent to which it is explained. Here, there is no explanation.
In fact, some can argue that the claim is presented not as a personal opinion, but as a "factual statement", as if the author were saying "X is gay" or "X is a thief".
As such, in my humble opinion, one "ethical" question here is whether such unexplained statements devoid of any signs of personal accountability and respect for other subscribers (which would have been demonstrated by a logical justification of the opinion) should still be respected.
On the other hand, the only "administrative" question is whether Geoff's pronouncement may be interpreted as "defamatory", "libelous", "tortious" or "hateful" (which are some of what are not allowed in TLF by the new TOS).
This case will offer a small example of how our young Owner, Bradley Green, will interpret and implement the principles in his new TOS. It will have implications affecting the quality of on-line Lasering correspondence.
Regards,
Shevy Gunter
In a thread titled "The Keys to Speed" in the "Laser Talk" board of TLF, I offered some thoughts on May 7 on five determinants of "average speed over the course". On May 11, an unidentified subscriber (username "geoff") replied simply as:
> Shevy Gunter is a bum
MacKenzie Wesson promptly responded as:
> Please try to refrain from comments like that, we're all
> trying hard to make relations better and forgive previous
> actions/sayings.
Goonie added:
> How about we don't flame, ok?
According to Brad's request that we "keep the discussion on topic within its thread", this discussion has no place in the thread titled "The Keys to Speed", and is hence started here under its own thread for any interested parties.
----------------------------------------------------------
Guys!
I think Goonie and probably even Mac are playing with the wrong control line here, if they are not on the wrong tack.
Our new "Terms of Service" is clear: we have no rules against "flaming". Flaming is a network tradition, and netiquette does not mess with tradition!
In addition, a statement that "X is a someone who obtains by begging, or someone who sponges off others and avoids work" may be demonstrated to be an honest opinion. If it is such an "opinion", it would be worthy of protection. After all, the Forum's TOS notes "TLF is dedicated to allowing free speech."
But "free speech" is a well-defined legal term. The protection granted to any "opinion" in the eyes of the readers (and law) depends on the extent to which it is explained. Here, there is no explanation.
In fact, some can argue that the claim is presented not as a personal opinion, but as a "factual statement", as if the author were saying "X is gay" or "X is a thief".
As such, in my humble opinion, one "ethical" question here is whether such unexplained statements devoid of any signs of personal accountability and respect for other subscribers (which would have been demonstrated by a logical justification of the opinion) should still be respected.
On the other hand, the only "administrative" question is whether Geoff's pronouncement may be interpreted as "defamatory", "libelous", "tortious" or "hateful" (which are some of what are not allowed in TLF by the new TOS).
This case will offer a small example of how our young Owner, Bradley Green, will interpret and implement the principles in his new TOS. It will have implications affecting the quality of on-line Lasering correspondence.
Regards,
Shevy Gunter