REMOVED

[bignos]

REMOVED.

[Guest]

All,

After some thought I felt as though I should remove this thread.

I feel as though this forum (or any forum for that matter) is not the place to solve things like problems with a manufacturers product.

The correct route would be something like.

Call if no reply, e-mail, if no reply , write, if no reply seek legal advice.

Posting messages with company names which could be considered to 'cause damage' put the PMC in a position which could end us up in court. I don't want this, or even to think about it for that matter. Flying is much more fun don't you think?

I know that it's hard, when you feel like you have been ignored by a company, more so when you have already purchased the product it seems like the first rational way to 'get heard' Indeed this is exactly why the protection is there.

There are some forums that dont seem to worried about this (as they are not a company), so if you do just feel like you have to 'vent' maybe they will allow your posts.

It got air time, loads of people saw it. I think the job was done.

I have no comercial or personal connections with the company involved.

Please warm to me a little and see it from my side. I am sure you can all understand.

SW

[Phil_P]

Sorry Simon, got to disagree with you. We've been down this road and I'm sure everyone knows my position.

Phil

[Guest]

As sad as it is, you cant 'disagree' with the law.

SW

[bignos]

the ebay feedback system helps stop this kind of thing and i dont know the difference ?

if manufacturers are not reputable then other consumers should be aware.

To me it feels like censorship

[Guest]

E-bay has a full time legal team?

At the end of the day, It is (MY) risk. I am not prepared to take it.

Feel free to set up a freebie website forum for ranting / reviewing on.. And I dont say that in a 'go away' way... I mean it for real. You could post messages on it, and link to it from this forum.

That removes (ME) from the legal responsibility and hands it over to you.

SW

[lib]

forums are personal expression of opinion are covered by freedom of speech laws. That's my understanding.

Certainly I have never heard of a forum censoring in this way. Your forum, your choice, but I think you are worrying about nothing and limiting peoples expressions is neve a good thing!

[Guest]

This is a copy of the first line from the Yahoo groups code of conduct.

You must not.

"upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;"

This is not just to make it a nicer place, this is to protect them against legal issues.

Any business or person, who considers a post to be any of the above has legal right to ask for there name, and or company name to be removed.

If I then decline, it will could end up in court. I just dont want that

I can understand that you feel it has been censored, because it has, but not by anything other than the rules that every forum owner worth there salt lives by. It's not that we would even automatically loose in court, I am not saying that.. I am just saying the process of it is not worth the few extra posts of activity on the forum.

I DO 100% understand that there is a need for the information to get out there, and I wish I could think of a way to do it that wont leave me open to a load of poo.

As I say, please just spend a second and consider my position. What if it were you? This is my life, its all I do, If the posts stay, I risk it all! if just 1 single company could prove that they lost business as a result of a post on this forum............

I am in between a rock and a hard place here, ideas welcome!!

SW

[Guest]

Another example is you tube.

If you, your voice, your business, your land even!! is in a you tube video and you dont want it to be (even if its not a 'bad review' ) and you send a message asking for it to be removed, they will 100% remove it.

Same reasons...

One of the best articles about reckless postings on the internet. "Is Your Blog Exposing You To Legal Liability" was written by Lawrence Savell and appeared in the online journal. http://www.law.com

http://www.law.com/jsp/llf/PubArticleLL ... 6695602960

Mr. Savell, a counsel in the New York office of Chadbourne & Parker, concentrating on products liability and media law points out that defamation is a major issue relating to blogs. He says that while definitions vary from state to state, generally speaking a defamatory statement is a false and disparaging statement about another that causes injury to reputation or in some cases causes emotional distress. "It is a communication that exposes people to hatred, ridicule, more than a simple joke or satire, or contempt; lowers them in the esteem of others, causes them to be shunned or injures them in their business.

His Conclusion:- "CONCLUSION

Blog operators need to be alert for situations possibly raising liability issues. Use common sense, use appropriate disclaimers and, if you are not a lawyer, consider legal review. Check your insurance policies to determine if your risks may be covered. "

SW

[alan]

Well my take on this is it could have been re-worded and read something like this ; I bought a Walkerjet paramotor that has since gone faulty and all my efforts to resolve this issue has proved fruitless i am now considering (dropping a dead cow on the owners head as i live close to an abattoir and they are readily available preferably a diseased one that was unfit for human consumption this post did start off seriously but this is the light hearted bit i digress) legal action as a last resort.

So subsequently any one thinking of buying one of these paramotors please think twice as there customer service is not what it is beefed up to be and there are udder paramotors out there where you wont be on a hiding to none it just gets worst, sorry this is what drinking rum does to you.

But seriously just a bit of tweeking and the post would not have overstepped the mark for both parties.

[surrey-dad]

...As I say, please just spend a second and consider my position. What if it were you? This is my life, its all I do, If the posts stay, I risk it all! if just 1 single company could prove that they lost business as a result of a post on this forum............

I am in between a rock and a hard place here, ideas welcome!!

SW

Simon - totally understand your dilemma, and for what it is worth I think your openess and honesty about it does you great credit !

However bottom line: this site is not a democracy, it is your business.

The point of having Moderators and Administrators is to ensure that the general rules and principles of the forums are adhered to.

Should any of you feel that something has crossed that line, then it is your call to invoke the term of use and pull that post.

99% of folks will respect that right, even if individually some won't always agree on specific topics.

Not sure if the following helps but you did ask - few suggestions:

1) Ask forum members with gripes to simply highlight their concerns in a post that is linked to their full rant on of the many legally moderated consumer complaints forums.

2) Search web for similar forum sites, to see how they deal with such issues and adopt whichever policy appears most appropriate. You could even get members to vote on this choice - if you prefer to be as democratic as possible.

3) Continue as you are, but spend some £'s to get legal advice to strengthen your forum useage policy.

• Forum Rules (Sample)
  Registration to this forum is free! But we do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' checkbox and press the 'Register' button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.
  Although the administrators and moderators of <?> will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages.
  All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of <?>, nor phpBB Group (developers of the forum software) will be held responsible for the content of any message.
  By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, slanderous or otherwise violative of any laws.
  The owners of <?> reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

Andy

[surrey-dad]

...i am now considering (dropping a dead cow on the owners head as i live close to an abattoir and they are readily available preferably a diseased one that was unfit for human consumption...

Hi Alan - have you been taking too much medicine ?

Hope you are feeling better.

Andy

[alan_k]

Hi Alan - have you been taking too much medicine ?

Hope you are feeling better.

Andy

Andy I really think you do need to catch up on your sleep, it' Alan K here feeling unwell.

alan wrote:

...i am now considering (dropping a dead cow on the owners head as i live close to an abattoir and they are readily available preferably a diseased one that was unfit for human consumption...

is a different Alan, though I wish I had come up with his special present for scumbags, very amusing

Cheers all,

Alan K

[norman]

I think this was tough call for Simon requiring some trust and understanding from members.

I am a moderator here and occasionally remove adverts for Viagra and Cialis along with the occasional ranting pratt. There have been occasions where we have had to consider other issues and threads but have let them run for a while to see if resolution could be found between parties, thankfully that often happens.

I have to say that I left this one for Simon due to its sensitivity but we did discuss it before it was removed.

I can't tell you what the Law would do should a targeted manufacturer decide that enough was enough, but I can say that in the same position as Simon I would protect my personal interests by doing the safe thing. In my view (FWIW) he did the right thing but like us all appreciate and respect the counter view.

[Phil_P]

There could only EVER be a legal case against Simon or the poster if what was said about a product was untrue or defamatory of an individual.

I still believe we should be able to report factual findings and information about motors or equipment be they good or bad. That is one of the fundamental raison d'etre of fora such as this. Are you going to remove any posting that says 'My ParaBoys wing is crap in low wind' or 'my HyperJet motor is hard to start'? Because postings such as those would be JUST as open to legal intervention were such possible.

Take away that information and we are just a bunch of guys exercising our jaws in a mutual admiration club. This is the ONLY forum I have heard of that actively bans criticism of a brand.

Phil

[Guest]

I still believe we should be able to report factual findings

Agreed, who decides if it's factual?

Saying I find wing X hard to launch in nil wind is not the same as saying 'dont buy wing x, its crap and a nightmare to launch in nil wind'

There is a way that it can be done, as mentioned above. Its more the way its said.

I did ask for the message to be changed 2 days before it was removed.

SW

[norman]

A view was expressed, it remained for a while and people read it. Then it was decided that defaming manufacturers was not a thing to be encouraged, whether there was actual guilt or not.

I don't think an opinion of kit is a bad thing, that IS to be encouraged but what we saw here was a definite recommendation NOT to buy because of perceived failings in product support. A bit different in my view...

Stating facts and truths are not actionable as Phil P mentioned. You cannot be done for slander under those circumstance ... but who wants a court case defending a defamation accusation? THAT is surely the question, not necessarily the legality of an issue or otherwise.

This removal was not an arbitrary action in order to censor or control, it was thought about...

[learner_driver]

Hello - just thought I would join in the bun fight - there is no doubt of the following

---Bignos must report his findings to allow us all to make more informed decisions

---Simon must protect his interest.

reporting ones findings and making recommendations are two different things.

An unmoderated forum is a disaster and so is an over moderated one.

- Just an idea -

use the surrey dads guidelines idea and state in a sticky what is likely to get moderated / is acceptable.

Then if something is written that is in effect outside the guidlines it can be moderated to express the facts only - rather than the opinion with a note to re read the guidelines.

then the spirit of the post is not lost and the information is imparted - yet the risk of defamation is greatly mitigated.

baaa

[druffuk]

I agree, the re-wording of the post would probably have made it more suitable and indeed protect Simon's and the forum's interests. This action should be agreed offline from the forum and with agreement between the parties involved.

The other solution might be to contact WalkerJet and ask them to respond and thus giving both angles of the story.

If indeed all avenues of complaint had been tried and no response given then I see no problem with informing others of this fact - but in a fair and constructive way rather than a rant.

Of course, the issue now is that the post is gaining more focus and generating more discussion since it was removed than it would probably have done if it had stayed. It is a balancing act and one that is difficult.

The key is to state clearly the rules of the forum and then everyone knows what the approach to a particular situation will be.

One thought: Surely it would only become a legal issue if WalkerJet requested that the post be removed and it wasn't or ??

[druffuk]

So Meds, what you're saying is:

Had the doctor not asked for the post to be taken off then it would NOT be a legal issue.

Had the post been removed when asked then it would NOT be a legal issue.

Either way, the post could be re-worded to be more factual and less of a rant with agreement of all parties involved, otherwise it will be removed. I think this is a fair approach and one that benefits the forum and protects Simon's interests.

[tommcb6016]

Having followed this post with interest, For what it's worth I agree with Simon's stance on this.

I don't doubt that you have been having problems with there products and I for one appreciate having this forum as a way of finding that out, Same as all the people who post "parajet what amazing service" (it was the reviews on this site that made me want one)

Censorship is not a good thing but if you were asked to alter the post and didn't then did you not expect it to be removed?

The problem is there is a big difference between a post sharing problems that you have experienced with a product with the intention of informing people.

And posting three posts that basically said that they're shit and do not buy one,use them,touch them with a barge poll (not a review)

The post was intended to stop people from buying there product and if they can prove they lost business as a result of this forum then SW will have a big head ache and it's not worth the risk.

I would like to see the post back in a different format as I believe it's important to get the information out there as poor customer service is not good!

Tom

[bignos]

i did not get the PM as i do not login daily, the first that i knew it had been removed, simons PM's were fair enough and i do understand his position. My 'rant' is, i admit, wrongly worded and i should have said 'in my opinion' or something. I have been told to stop posting on this subject but not sure if this counts (my defence) so if im not around much longer then you know why!

Facts - i was sold a second hand motor as 'new' (it has come to light) then emails were ignored when i tried to claim on the warranty, even after paying for the items as 'in stock' they have ignored my contact via email also by telephone they will not talk. i can prove all of that so if legal action was taken it will be me talking it. When i had done so, will i be allowed to post the result?

as for the review aspect, i asked for a review area in the forum. 2 posts not 3

[Guest]

As it mentions in a few posts above. (Its the way that you say it)

Please dont take my message as to mean that you can not post messages about this subject, just think of a way of posting it.

SW

[druffuk]

Would it not now be best to lock this thread, take the focus away and to move on to other more fun topics?

The right choice was made in removing the post, if bignos can reword it then I'm sure Simon will allow it to be reposted and can benefit the community. This issue though should now be dealt with off the main forum and between the parties involved or ??

[bignos]

so druff, what you are saying is that simon should 'lock the thread' and stop people discussing freedom of speech?!

(which is all this thread is about now)