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 ... 13, 14, 15 ... 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
WATUPWITU



Joined: 21 May 2000
Posts: 46

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
reinerehlers



Joined: 25 Jul 2001
Posts: 1105

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: 14605

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
husby_d



Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:31 am    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.


I'm curious as to why they deleted my post.
But yes, here's a solution: Just shut up and let it go.
It would far less damaging to your reputation than hysterical threats of law suits.
Especially given that it's just a tiny drop in the bucket of reputation that you've already built over the years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daviddk



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars' Nannies have been very busy on this thread. He has them delete all the posts that try to get at the REAL truth. I smell conspiracy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dennis1916



Joined: 03 Aug 2000
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:45 pm    Post subject: person hit by kiter Reply with quote

Stu or anyone,

Did they find the guy that hit him?

Do we have any specific descriptions (kite color, type of board riding, color of boardshorts, hat hair or helmet color)? It is too bad that this happened and it would be nice to hear that they came forward and at the very least apologized.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 6022

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd like to highlight a couple things here. First, although many of us know that portions of this thread have been removed by iWindsurf, it seems pretty obvious to me that isobars ran over a fellow windsurfer from the Tri-Cities while he was down and in the water. You know, isobars never really comes out and admits that, but he did say that he paid to have the sail repaired and the top mast section replaced. Even though he didn't really admit his fault in the event, to his credit he did do the right thing in taking responsibility for his mistake. By the way, it isn't a mistake not to have certain gear color schemes, being down in the water, or holding on to your gear.

Second, in the two instances (that I'm aware of) where iWindsurf deleted posting from this thread, isobars arrogantly comes out and insinuates that the deletions were due to comments from others. Never once does he admit that his comments were part of the problematic dialogue. That's his MO. He is never at fault for anything no matter how untoward his commentary. Without a doubt, this thread is still overflowing with his patent nonsense. A perfect example is his childish twisting Davidk's name into a lewd moniker. isobars tries to give off this impression that he's a responsible and thoughtful contributor here, but his actions tell a completely different story. Fortunately, many folks see the true picture.

Regarding iWindsurf's deletions in this thread, I'm willing to bet that the actions were taken at isobars' insistence. The fact that isobars would send bericw a voice-mail on his work phone informing him that his lawyer would be contacting him is quite telling. What's the truth? You be the judge.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reinerehlers



Joined: 25 Jul 2001
Posts: 1105

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Wait for it, wait for it, wait for it"
That's what my youngest used to say just before he would fart.


We know what's coming...."wait for it...."
Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
noshuzbluz



Joined: 18 May 2000
Posts: 779

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Everyone please be patient. It takes time to post copy/pasted bullet points together to prove his next point.....One moment please....
_________________
The Time a Person Spends Windsurfing is not Deducted from their Lifespan...
http://www.openocean.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WMP



Joined: 30 May 2000
Posts: 623

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

husby_d wrote:

I'm curious as to why they deleted my post.


Very simple... if what you posted was even half way intelligent and appropriate, it would have vanished very quickly. That's what I've learned here.

OTOH, jokes and false accusations about child abuse are entirely appropriate here. So if you really are mad at someone just claim that they are a child molester, and then never say "I'm sorry"...... It does seem to be very effective in this forum for certain entitled members of iWindsurf.

This post is sure to destruct in 10 seconds.... just watch!
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 ... 13, 14, 15 ... 18, 19, 20  Next
Page 14 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