myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
IRRESPONSIBLE KITER 8-15-2013
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 ... 18, 19, 20  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Northwest USA & Canada
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
daviddk



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey now! My name is daviddk not daviddick. Why are you so mean?

"Now go post something about WSing, if you know what it is."

I heard you like to BFF. Are you serious?! It makes no sense. What advantage is there to that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 6375

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wasn't there a movie a few years back, with a hit song "I am a man of constant threatening"?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yargerd



Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 31

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

daviddk wrote:

I heard you like to BFF.


The BFF post has now moved to second place on the list of the world's most ridiculous and kooky threads.

http://www.iwindsurf.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=23207&highlight=&sid=e83fb9577fd6cbe945378d1feb7fe776
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 15636

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Because every one of you knows the answer and are just trolling.
Guess who determines what posts I answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 15636

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

husby_d wrote:
But this time it paid off with a spectacular "You're gonna hear from my lawyer".

Got any better solutions to being publicly and falsely accused of a Class C felony? Do you not realize their potential culpability is why iW deleted Pete's posts? It sure as hell wasn't concern for my peace of mind or for the decorum they promise in a moderated forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daviddk



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gawd, I never thought isobaiting could be so much fun. He just can`t stop. It`s easier than fishing with M-80s and more rewarding!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
uwindsurf



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 967
Location: Classified

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:
husby_d wrote:
But this time it paid off with a spectacular "You're gonna hear from my lawyer".

Got any better solutions to being publicly and falsely accused of a Class C felony? Do you not realize their potential culpability is why iW deleted Pete's posts? It sure as hell wasn't concern for my peace of mind or for the decorum they promise in a moderated forum.


"Potential culpability"? Wha chew talkin bout Willis?

I am quite sure that you of all people, with your vast legal experience, are very familiar with the Communication Decency Act, Section 230 of which states: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

Section 230 goes on to say that "No cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any state or local law that is inconsistent with this section." This means that there is no liability for content posted online by a third party that is defamatory, offensive, violates individual rights of publicity or privacy or otherwise would trigger a claim under State law.

The fact is that the iWindsurf Nanny mods did you a favor and deleted information about you which you found offensive and you thanked them for it. They did it to protect themselves from liability? Please. Care to offer up another excuse?

You are the conductor of the Nanny train my friend and it is pulling out of the station headed to hypocrisy town. ALL ABOARD DEWD!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WATUPWITU



Joined: 21 May 2000
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

so a post about an irresponsible kiter has, many pages later, turned into a post about an irresponsible poster

same as in the "real" world, everybody talks, nobody listens

even to themselves

sorry to interrupt, carry on....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nail_Ponder



Joined: 25 Jul 2001
Posts: 1378

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sometimes we need to step back and reflect on things.

Reflect on this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAlp2WJ3ydg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 15636

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

youwindsurf wrote:
"Potential culpability"? Wha chew talkin bout Willis?

I am quite sure that you of all people, with your vast legal experience, are very familiar with the Communication Decency Act, Section 230

The fact is that the iWindsurf Nanny mods did you a favor and deleted information about you ...

You are falsely presuming Pete's accusations were true.

Besides, my unedumacated assumption that iW may bear liability is clearly supported by the following excerpt from
http://www.isoc.org/inet99/proceedings/3e/3e_2.htm :
<<<III.LEGISLATIVE RESPONSES
The problems with indirect liability have some statutory responses.

1. Congress has enacted legislation that provides ISPs some relief from indirect liability for copyright infringement. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act blocks ISPs' liability for third party copyright infringements unless they have failed to remove the offending material after notice from the copyright holders. The Act also exempts ISPs from direct or vicarious liability for infringing transmissions by third parties if the ISP did not (1) place the material online, (2) select or alter its content, (3) determine its recipients, (4) benefit financially from the infringement, (5) endorse or advertise the material, and (6) know that the material was infringing.

2. An older statute has been used to insulate ISPs from liability for defamatory statements of a user. Invoking a section of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) that survived the Supreme Court's constitutional invalidation, the Fourth Circuit applied the CDA to shield online provider AOL for a defamatory statement made on AOL by a user, outside of AOL's direct control. The court held that

Lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for the exercise of a publisher's traditional functions -- such as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone, or alter content -- are barred.

Zeran is a significant opinion, and in part resolves previous split decisions in the area that struggled for the appropriate metaphor with which to analyze on-line providers -- by opting, under the guidance of the CDA, for the publisher option, and with it the First Amendment values that will ensure a vigorous exchange of views.

3. Section 230 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has also been used by ISPs functioning solely as conduits of information to avoid liability, much as a telephone service provider is not responsible for the defamations or threats uttered by those speaking on the phone.

These statutory responses recognize the problem, but they do not solve it. ISPs and others who provide Internet access are, increasingly, hosting content; they are not simply acting as conduits, as pipelines for data. To that extent the Telecommunications Act of 1996 may not shield the ISP from liability. While the Zeran's court use of the CDA provides protection for libel, it remains unclear whether indirect liability for other wrongs are similarly barred. And the Digital Copyright Millenium Act, which addresses only indirect liability for copyright (and not any other type of claim), still requires substantial oversight by ISPs of their users, and case by case management of every single complaint that is made.

More important, these statutes do little to address the problems of indirect liability by those who are not ISPs, such as employers who manage Web sites and Internet service for their employees, and educational institutions and companies embarking on the vessel of e-commerce, attracting users, and providing as much by the way of interactive content as they possibly can.>>>

I'm guessing that (and don't know or care -- yet -- whether) the copyright considerations above also apply to defamation/libel. If they do, the bold exemptions above, combined with iW's admission that they profit from my posts and their repeated refusal to uphold their claims that this is a moderated forum, leave iW at least vicariously liable. Why else would they delete Pete's libelous claims?

Thanks for bringing the 230 legislation to my attention. It led me to its shortcomings a addressed in the source cited above. Legislation works both ways.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Northwest USA & Canada All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 ... 18, 19, 20  Next
Page 13 of 20

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group