Steve
Well-known member
- Messages
- 437
- Likes
- 108
Our position and the actions we take when threatened with legal action need to be made clear. The reasons for this are:
1. We must be more transparent wherever possible about what is happening/has happened in cases where action is taken within posts/threads. I say ‘where possible’ as our lawyers will often advise us not to make any public comment as it is remarkably easy to make our position worse. I don’t like this and nor will you but we have to live with it.
2. There has been much speculation over the years about posts that have been mysteriously removed, bets taken as to how long certain threads or posts will last and comments made about us being in cahoots with the people making the complaints. It has been a conspiracy theorists paradise and frankly I can see why. We have not been as transparent as we should have been and there have been some inappropriate decisions made. But that’s the past, I’m setting the stall out today and, while you may not agree with the approach I’m taking, at least you’ll be clear what it is and can be sure we’ll stick to it.
3. The law governing internet content is extremely complex especially in the area of who is responsible for it. It seems that there is one test case that clarifies the position only to be contradicted in a higher court. As a result the question of responsibility is far from clear and we can no longer rely on being able to separate ourselves from it. Recent developments have made this whole area much more fluid, we must keep a watchful eye on these and adapt accordingly.
4. There have to be boundaries as to what is acceptable and what isn’t. The days of being able to post whatever you like with complete freedom are over. You now have a duty to think about what you are saying and how this might detract from the very intention behind your post. If you are trying to protect members from what is very clearly a scam then choosing your language can make all the difference. Let me be clear on this point, I support 100% any activity that does away with these people and brings their disgraceful actions to the public eye and in doing so helps put them out of business.
5. If you persist in using inflammatory language and making claims that cannot be backed up by some evidence then there will be a very real risk that your post will be altered or removed. This will be a great pity especially if the actual content and warning contained within was of some importance. Please spare me the protestations about free speech! I am not saying for one minute that we are going to embark on a blitz on posts of this nature but you will find more comments being made if appropriate. The last thing I want is for us to lose this position of being able to expose these people just because of the way we go about it.
6. Some of this stuff is obvious. I recall a thread not too long ago declaring one of the main spread betting firms to be a bunch of scam artists, fraudsters etc. The person making the post had experienced something negative and was using our pages to tell everyone how unhappy he was without giving the firm in question a chance to put it right. The thing ran on for some time and in the end the OP posted to the effect, ‘sorted’. So, they were no longer scammers or fraudsters because they had fixed the problem. By then the damage was done and this isn’t on. I’ll no longer tolerate our forums being used to air personal grievances unless there is clear evidence of attempts being made to resolve the situation. I’ll also expect the posts to be made sensibly and without the drama that has characterised posts of this nature in the past.
7. I am putting into place a clearly defined management process for this aspect of our operations. Roles and responsibilities will be clearly defined and communication with you an integral part of it. This communication will be about what is happening in general terms rather than specifics about the complaint as our advice is clearly not to do this. This may well look as if we are hiding behind things, we are not and I’ll just have to live with the impression this gives as I will not prejudice our case just for the sake of some dialogue.
8. I remember seeing a post a while back asking why we ‘fold like a cheap suit’ when other sites seem to leave things running and not be afraid of potential litigation. I have absolutely no idea if this is the case and certainly I’m not in a position to comment on the policies of other sites. I could speculate that they have deeper pockets than we do. It is also possible that their content has not come to the attention of the person or firm being talked about. I just can’t say and it is not that relevant as we have our policy and we’ll stick to it.
9. Finally I want to comment on the money side of this. I work to clearly defined budgets and spending this allocation on expensive legal advice is not the best way of enhancing our member experience. I would far rather be spending it on other things that add value and I will no longer be subsidising personal crusades. What I will do is let things run, moderated properly and if it goes ‘legal’ deal with the situation according to policy. This will mean defending our position and removing things that parties agree should be removed, communicating with you along the way.
I’m sorry this has been so long but there was some important stuff to cover and it is important to me that you understand where we are coming from and the rationale behind the decisions we make.
The end!
1. We must be more transparent wherever possible about what is happening/has happened in cases where action is taken within posts/threads. I say ‘where possible’ as our lawyers will often advise us not to make any public comment as it is remarkably easy to make our position worse. I don’t like this and nor will you but we have to live with it.
2. There has been much speculation over the years about posts that have been mysteriously removed, bets taken as to how long certain threads or posts will last and comments made about us being in cahoots with the people making the complaints. It has been a conspiracy theorists paradise and frankly I can see why. We have not been as transparent as we should have been and there have been some inappropriate decisions made. But that’s the past, I’m setting the stall out today and, while you may not agree with the approach I’m taking, at least you’ll be clear what it is and can be sure we’ll stick to it.
3. The law governing internet content is extremely complex especially in the area of who is responsible for it. It seems that there is one test case that clarifies the position only to be contradicted in a higher court. As a result the question of responsibility is far from clear and we can no longer rely on being able to separate ourselves from it. Recent developments have made this whole area much more fluid, we must keep a watchful eye on these and adapt accordingly.
4. There have to be boundaries as to what is acceptable and what isn’t. The days of being able to post whatever you like with complete freedom are over. You now have a duty to think about what you are saying and how this might detract from the very intention behind your post. If you are trying to protect members from what is very clearly a scam then choosing your language can make all the difference. Let me be clear on this point, I support 100% any activity that does away with these people and brings their disgraceful actions to the public eye and in doing so helps put them out of business.
5. If you persist in using inflammatory language and making claims that cannot be backed up by some evidence then there will be a very real risk that your post will be altered or removed. This will be a great pity especially if the actual content and warning contained within was of some importance. Please spare me the protestations about free speech! I am not saying for one minute that we are going to embark on a blitz on posts of this nature but you will find more comments being made if appropriate. The last thing I want is for us to lose this position of being able to expose these people just because of the way we go about it.
6. Some of this stuff is obvious. I recall a thread not too long ago declaring one of the main spread betting firms to be a bunch of scam artists, fraudsters etc. The person making the post had experienced something negative and was using our pages to tell everyone how unhappy he was without giving the firm in question a chance to put it right. The thing ran on for some time and in the end the OP posted to the effect, ‘sorted’. So, they were no longer scammers or fraudsters because they had fixed the problem. By then the damage was done and this isn’t on. I’ll no longer tolerate our forums being used to air personal grievances unless there is clear evidence of attempts being made to resolve the situation. I’ll also expect the posts to be made sensibly and without the drama that has characterised posts of this nature in the past.
7. I am putting into place a clearly defined management process for this aspect of our operations. Roles and responsibilities will be clearly defined and communication with you an integral part of it. This communication will be about what is happening in general terms rather than specifics about the complaint as our advice is clearly not to do this. This may well look as if we are hiding behind things, we are not and I’ll just have to live with the impression this gives as I will not prejudice our case just for the sake of some dialogue.
8. I remember seeing a post a while back asking why we ‘fold like a cheap suit’ when other sites seem to leave things running and not be afraid of potential litigation. I have absolutely no idea if this is the case and certainly I’m not in a position to comment on the policies of other sites. I could speculate that they have deeper pockets than we do. It is also possible that their content has not come to the attention of the person or firm being talked about. I just can’t say and it is not that relevant as we have our policy and we’ll stick to it.
9. Finally I want to comment on the money side of this. I work to clearly defined budgets and spending this allocation on expensive legal advice is not the best way of enhancing our member experience. I would far rather be spending it on other things that add value and I will no longer be subsidising personal crusades. What I will do is let things run, moderated properly and if it goes ‘legal’ deal with the situation according to policy. This will mean defending our position and removing things that parties agree should be removed, communicating with you along the way.
I’m sorry this has been so long but there was some important stuff to cover and it is important to me that you understand where we are coming from and the rationale behind the decisions we make.
The end!
