Locked thread....

[lroberts]

Thanks for the info Dave....I'm a fairly new member and hadn't seen any threads like that before. I agree on your rules though....if they haven't been officially found guilty names should be left out. The guy in Florida was busted fair and square though.....he admitted to it actually...so in a case like that his name should be published that so us honest fisherman/tx anglers can avoid scum like him!

[jamwerx]

If the "alleged cheaters" name is publicly available ANYWHERE then they have no recourse against this site or any site for posting their names and alleged crimes. Now if you heard it 'HEAR-SAY" and you post it then yes the poster could get into legal trouble but this site would not so long as there is a disclaimer that they do not endorse or agree with anything or everything posted on the site.

[Hershey102]

If the "alleged cheaters" name is publicly available ANYWHERE then they have no recourse against this site or any site for posting their names and alleged crimes. Now if you heard it 'HEAR-SAY" and you post it then yes the poster could get into legal trouble but this site would not so long as there is a disclaimer that they do not endorse or agree with anything or everything posted on the site.

I do agree that if someone is arrested, although not convicted, that would be public information and not libelous. I don't necessarily agree that the board could NOT get into legal trouble. The board could get caught in the middle. A recent comment in a discussion thread at the bottom of an online article in the Lex Herald Leader landed the newspaper squarely in the middle when an attorney filed legal action against the poster. The attorney then went after the newspaper to get at the identity of the poster. I'm not weighing in on the appropriateness of the locked thread, only making the observation that the board has a right to do that if there is ANY doubt about a thread or post. You may disagree with me on this, but I figure the moderators have carte blanche on limiting discussion if they feel it is a gray area where board rules come into play. I don't mind it a bit. In fact, IMO Dave Stewart should be commended for finding the time during his day to log in and respond to our questions, address profane comments (yes, I reported one recently), and keep us from wandering into hazards (political or otherwise). He's just trying to keep us in the main channel and off the stumps.

Duff Ortman
Lexington, KY

[coombro]

I see said the blind man, after he bumped his head. Didn't know what the deal was but I do now.

[Dave Stewart]

If the "alleged cheaters" name is publicly available ANYWHERE then they have no recourse against this site or any site for posting their names and alleged crimes. Now if you heard it 'HEAR-SAY" and you post it then yes the poster could get into legal trouble but this site would not so long as there is a disclaimer that they do not endorse or agree with anything or everything posted on the site.

Bottom line here is the rules here are not going to change on this. Period.

[Dave Stewart]

If the "alleged cheaters" name is publicly available ANYWHERE then they have no recourse against this site or any site for posting their names and alleged crimes. Now if you heard it 'HEAR-SAY" and you post it then yes the poster could get into legal trouble but this site would not so long as there is a disclaimer that they do not endorse or agree with anything or everything posted on the site.

Glad you understand...going to lock this thread now also...no need for further discussion...anyone that wants to make a comment on the administration of this site should follow the Discussion Board Rules and email your comments to [email protected]. It is his site and he makes the rules...not the moderators.