Steady Eddie

Did you miss the bits where I said “I’m not disagreeing with you” and “You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with” in your rush to pile in?

What for?

I’m not disagreeing with you I’m disagreeing with Alberts post which was basically an attack and a claim that the whole fabric of the forum was now in jeopardy. If that is the case then you need to remove the ability to re-post. You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with. As I said from what I can see Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. I know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone in that piece. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. A newspaper could easily report on that as “news” (local businessman makes public allegations of DBC corruption on Twitter - and reproduce parts of the tweets) in that situation and I’m sure some might.

Agree no persons name has been mentioned in relation to any criminal activity either and two known people have simply been insulted by being called thick. So Jason said it. He said it on his own Twitter profile. We know he exists. He hasn’t named anyone. And he hasn’t made specific allegations against a known person either. As I said almost everything could be “potentially” defamatory on here based on the above so remove the facility to post clips - there must be loads from Twitter and FB in relation to Ashford and Glover made over covid on here that are potentially defamatory too if “potential” is going to be used to remove posts.

That’s the most ironic statement made on here ever I’d say.

I’m waiting for Johns reply.

That’s fine so what’s a journalist going to do to fact check it. 1. Do you know Jason Scales is a real person. Tick 2. Is that Jason Scales actual genuine Twitter feed. Tick 3. Did Jason Scales post that content under his own name on his own Twitter feed at the times shown. Tick 4. Have any specific names been mentioned? No. Tick. 5. Have any specific claims been made about any illegal acts undertaken by named people. No. Tick. So it’s news that can be reported. Whats the issue.

As I said John this forum needs to remove the facility to post screen shots if you’re going to view any material cut and paste from anywhere else on the www as potentially defamatory. There are hundreds and hundreds of clips on here that might be potentially defamatory in hindsight if you want to take that approach.

Anything published here is potentially defamatory. See above post.

I don’t need to re-read it. Jason Scales published it and it’s freely readable in the public domain elsewhere attributed to a known person. Are you suggesting the forum should stop everyone screen shotting or re-posting things they read anywhere else on the internet just in case? If so your probably well advised to remove the post a clip facility from the platform.

Well I suppose at least he has no connection to DBC. If it’s an issue then take down but it seems to be that almost everything of late to do with DBC seems to be taken down or censured in one way or another. It’s public domain info that will probably end up in a press report at some stage anyway which seems to be the intention of the poster.

What claims would those be and where would I find them? Also 1. How can I put anything at risk by posting something that’s freely in the public domain under a known persons (ie, not anonymous) social media profile? 2. Another poster posted the link to Twitter before I did. It’s public domain information that anyone can read or check.

You’ve been told almost your whole account was wrong by a committee member of the committee that sold the place.

I’m guessing it’s someone with a short name by the size of the blank.

What specifically am I trolling? I’ve just repeated what’s on Twitter if people don’t have Twitter to follow the other link. You sound absolutely furious today has a teacher taken the last sandwich that you had your eye on in M&S?