Originally Posted by Gecko Den
I went back and re-read up to your post where you made the statement that I quoted. Nothing was mentioned about libel prior to you getting up on your soap box. Perhaps an important post was deleted prior to your post. Regardless, there is little that you could enlighten me about, and if I decide to insert my foot somewhere you won't like where I put it, well actually from what I have heard you might....
Pathetic really that you stoop to childish insults. I also love how hiding behind a forum how every one is a "big man" ready to at least hint at the threat of something physical. Some how I think if you were standing face to face with an average 16 year old kid much less a guy my size that tone just might be a bit more civil.
As for the libel/liable I meant LIABLE as in
liable - exposed or subject to some usually adverse contingency or action
And yes the part where I said that was deleted for some reason, probably due to the responses to it and the who way that got slanted, who knows.
Just to educate you,
"libel" is basically slander in the form of print, which one might make the case is what the poster I responded to did. However, one would have a very weak case if they did so because the poster not recognized as an authority or in an official position (such as a paid member of a recognized publication, etc.). Libel is a serious charge and can only be successfully sued for if the individual has a "recognized power to do harm" or if "sufficient harm can be proven".
However, an individual can be "liable" for damages if one makes "knowingly fallacious statements in public medium (either in print or verbally) where it is reasonable to believe that such statements could have a financially damaging effect on an individual, group of individuals or corporate entity".
Reply With Quote