At last, the club's official website has reinstated the online "forum" which was abruptly shut down in 2006 by former ex-commodore Mike Larsen because too many people were posting criticisms of the club. Of course, the club still doesn't like criticism, so all postings in the new "forum" will have to be made under your own name. Although the First Amendment guarantees anonymous publishing, that apparently doesn't apply in The H o o f e r Zone.
In addition, the new official club "forum" is only for current club members and other people who are approved by club leaders. Read that last sentence again. Yup, they plan to limit which non-club-members can post comments. Is that even legal? Doesn't sound like it, but even if it is, what does that say about club leaders..? What kind of leaders don't allow/cannot tolerate criticism, or only allow it under a person's real name? (Answer: Ones who want to be able to retaliate against individuals who criticize them.)
But never fear! This unofficial forum will be available for more open discussion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Although the First Amendment guarantees anonymous publishing, that apparently doesn't apply in The H o o f e r Zone."
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should more closely read the first amendment before attempting to incorrectly apply it's principles to a private forum of a member only club.
They have the right to allow or disallow anything they want, within the law, on their premises (including their website). If they want to moderate it, or prevent anonymous posting, it's well within their right.
I dare you to find a law to quote that would go against what I just said.
"In addition, the new official club "forum" is only for current club members and other people who are approved by club leaders."
A forum which only allows members and former members, unless specifically barred for breaking of the rules, to post...Sounds on the up and up to me.
I know of one person in the history of Hoofers who has been banned and wouldn't be allowed to post...It might be our friend Bob from the previous posting.
"Read that last sentence again. Yup, they plan to limit which non-club-members can post comments. Is that even legal?"
The onus is on you to prove it isn't legal. Asking the question, "Is that even legal?" Really carries no weight and shows your ignorance by requesting others to do your due diligence instead of doing it yourself.
However, to answer your question, Yes, it is legal. If you disagree, cite a law to prove otherwise.
Guy with bad attitude is very defensive of the club's happy new official forum. One wonders if he is a Hoofer leader because he completely ignored this point:
ReplyDelete"What kind of leaders don't allow/cannot tolerate criticism, or only allow it under a person's real name? "
The blog already gave a pretty obvious answer. Perhaps bad atitude guy can explain why Hoofer leaders have in the past committed criminal acts and retaliated against people who criticized the club.
Anonymous completely ignored bad attitudes points and went on rambling. One cannot help but wonder if he is mental handicapped.
ReplyDelete"What kind of leaders don't allow/cannot tolerate criticism, or only allow it under a person's real name? "
It's their forum, their rules. Don't like it? Make your own or don't post there.
"Perhaps bad atitude guy can explain why Hoofer leaders have in the past committed criminal acts and retaliated against people who criticized the club."
Hints and allegations will get us nowhere. Provide us with Statutes that were broken or torts that were committed and provide us with sufficient evidence and perhaps we will believe you. Otherwise you're just blowing smoke.
How about you can explain why "Bob" has in the past committed criminal acts and retaliated against people who criticized him in the club?
"The blog already gave a pretty obvious answer. Perhaps bad atitude guy can explain why Hoofer leaders have in the past committed criminal acts and retaliated against people who criticized the club."
ReplyDeleteThe blog has lots of innuendo, but no obvious answers. The first step in any criminal process is the complaint which alleges a specific criminal act. Would Fleet Commander care to state a specific complaint or two?
I will consider how to present some actual cases where Hoofer leaders have libeled/slandered club members or committed other abuses or criminal acts. The problem is that it's difficult to do without using actual names, which I'm reluctant to do for various reasons.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, the very existence of this blog should demonstrate the degree to which some people have been upset and abused by Hoofers.
I look forward to it. Remember that the truth is an absolute defense to libel charges.
ReplyDeleteActually, the law says it's not libel only "if the defamatory matter was true and was communicated with good motives and for justifiable ends" (Wis. stat. 942.01).
ReplyDeleteIn other words, if you spread something about someone that's true and defamatory (i.e. damages his reputation), but you do it for a malicious reason, it is still libel--even if what you said was completely true.
Is Anonymous suggesting that Fleet Commander's motives are not pure?
ReplyDeleteDude, stop being a chicken and name some names. If you just want to complain, that's your right, but it doesn't get anybody any closer to a constructive solution.
ReplyDelete"Is Anonymous suggesting that Fleet Commander's motives are not pure?"
ReplyDeleteNot at all. I was simply correcting somali pirate on a point of law. As for naming some names, I second that motion.