Jump to content

I disagree with this statement


August1991

Recommended Posts

To login and access the forum and post, I had to read a long form and then agree, or disagree.

I wish to state that I agreed - but under "duress".

=====

Greg,

MapleLeafForum works because people say stuff, freely.

It is wrong to ask posters (me, for example) to check boilerplate nonsense.

But I checked yes to your questions - and posted this fact to show that you're wrong.

 

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Charles Anthony said:

I did not bother reading it.  I just clicked and moved on. 

Did I miss anything? 

Yes, you did. MLW is no longer responsible for anything you ever wrote here - and MLW has proof since it has all your postings.

If you posted something contrary to current "progressive/politically correct/Catholic/Islamic" thought, MLW disavows all responsibility.  You're on your own.

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, August1991 said:

Yes, you did. MLW is no longer responsible for anything you ever wrote here - and MLW has proof since it has all your postings.

If you posted something contrary to current "progressive/politically correct/Catholic/Islamic" thought, MLW disavows all responsibility.  You're on your own.

Is this what you are talking about?  

You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless Maple Leaf Web with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s).

By participating in these forums, you grant us the right and licence to use, reproduce and display any submissions to the forum without compensation to you or any one else.

We at mapleleafweb.com also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a legal action arising from any message posted by you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have hoped that MLW would never be held accountable for the postings it hosts. 

I can see a responsibility to remove certain things, given a length of time beyond which approval might be inferred by someone upset at a post, but if that's the case, I guess the agreement handles that.

Edited by bcsapper
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2016 at 8:52 AM, cybercoma said:

Of course they disavow all responsibility. Why should MLW and Greg specifically be legally accountable for your actions?

Cybercoma, you make a reasonable point. I should account for my actions and words. But what if someone claims that my actions and words were different? Should MLW be an arbiter? (This is your reasonable thinking.)

====

But in this 21st century, this is 2015 as our PM said (imitating but missing his father's reference), we are entering a new world where I fear saying/posting something "outrageous" that offends someone. MLW and Greg are protecting themselves against future human rights/civil rights/political correctness police.

This is the slippery slope that kills originality. 

 

 

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, August1991 said:

Cybercoma, you make a reasonable point. I should account for my actions and words. But what if someone claims that my actions and words were different? Should MLW be an arbitor? (This is your reasonable thinking.)

I'm unclear on what you mean here. GIve me an example of what you mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, August1991 said:

Cybercoma, you make a reasonable point. I should account for my actions and words. But what if someone claims that my actions and words were different? Should MLW be an arbiter? (This is your reasonable thinking.)

 

Yes, if the owner(s) of MLW do not want to be a liable party in a defamation lawsuit.    Nothing in a user TOS acknowledgment would release MLW from the obligation to remove defamatory or illegal content immediately once made aware of its existence on the forum.

http://www.entertainmentmedialawsignal.com/if-you-know-about-it-youre-the-publisher-website-operator-liability-for-defamation

If this forum is found to exist in a U.S. jurisdiction instead, owners/operators may fare better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2016 at 8:44 PM, August1991 said:

I wish to record my disagreement with the statement that I was required to check in order to make this post.

MapleLeafForum is a public forum. I have been posting here for many years. Why ask me to check this now?

I second this. What is troubling is that the supposed 'agreement' doesn't indicate WHAT the change was and to WHY. The wording too about what it NOT allowed raises concerns and to the absolute right of the site to discriminate IS a censorship that threatens my OWN right to copy protection. It also now hides the site from those NOT signing up which makes it an completely private forum. 

So, I only signed up now to state this disappointment and assert that I will  no longer come here. I discourage others too. Politics IS necessarily problematic because it involves real concerns that affect people. To dictate the terms going in to LIMIT what people are allowed to say, (from the 'agreement' taken by its wording, we cannot even discuss "sex issues". Is there some government intervention trying to force this site into complying with some censorship. Is the 'agreement' intended to both allow this site to take the Benefits of right to censor or even take ownership of content BUT also allow them to USE such information to give to governments as well? Is this not proof that you guys here are likely disappointed particularly with some specific personal biases? 

So good bye. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Admin
On 2016-10-14 at 0:38 AM, August1991 said:

Yes, you did. MLW is no longer responsible for anything you ever wrote here - and MLW has proof since it has all your postings.

If you posted something contrary to current "progressive/politically correct/Catholic/Islamic" thought, MLW disavows all responsibility.  You're on your own.

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill.  

When the upgrade was complete, the original link to the forum Rules and Guidelines was removed (it was coded into the original theme - however when we upgraded we could no longer use the old theme; hence why this place looks different nowadays).

I then had to recreate the Rules and Guidelines and manually insert the link on this new version of the forums.  I used the same version as we had before, BUT I made a few slight revisions.  You can see the diff report here: https://www.diffchecker.com/NhLedBYK

You can see from the diff report that the old version referred to the current Prime Minister as Stephen Harper - which is obviously wrong.  I also made a few corrections to character, word and paragraph spacing and a few other insignificant issues.

Near the end, I changed the following:

We at mapleleafweb.com also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any message posted by you.

to

We at mapleleafweb.com also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a legal action arising from any message posted by you.

I did this because after some consideration I felt that revealing someones forum identity should only come from a legal action, not just a complaint. Therefore, I removed that from the new Rules and Guidelines.

So you see, I'm not some evil agent of the government plotting to censor or manipulate anyone.

We have always had this type of Terms of Service (in this case, called the Rules and Guidelines) and we will continue to use it in the future.  

Also, the reason why you were asked to accept this new version of the TOS/Rules and Guidelines is because whenever I make a change to this document, it's a good practice to make everyone aware that a change as been made.

On 2016-10-15 at 7:12 PM, August1991 said:

But in this 21st century, this is 2015 as our PM said (imitating but missing his father's reference), we are entering a new world where I fear saying/posting something "outrageous" that offends someone. MLW and Greg are protecting themselves against future human rights/civil rights/political correctness police.

This is the slippery slope that kills originality. 

There is no slippery slope here, it's the same TOS that has been used for nearly 16 years - the only difference is really cosmetic, and you can see those changes in the link above.

On 2016-10-15 at 8:51 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

Yes, if the owner(s) of MLW do not want to be a liable party in a defamation lawsuit.    Nothing in a user TOS acknowledgment would release MLW from the obligation to remove defamatory or illegal content immediately once made aware of its existence on the forum.

http://www.entertainmentmedialawsignal.com/if-you-know-about-it-youre-the-publisher-website-operator-liability-for-defamation

If this forum is found to exist in a U.S. jurisdiction instead, owners/operators may fare better.

The forum is located on a server in the US - however, legal action can be initiated on both sides of the border.  However, legal action can arise even if the TOS is perfect, so I don't really see the physical location of the server from being a huge determining factor.

On 2016-10-15 at 10:30 PM, Scott Mayers said:

I second this. What is troubling is that the supposed 'agreement' doesn't indicate WHAT the change was and to WHY. The wording too about what it NOT allowed raises concerns and to the absolute right of the site to discriminate IS a censorship that threatens my OWN right to copy protection. It also now hides the site from those NOT signing up which makes it an completely private forum. 

So, I only signed up now to state this disappointment and assert that I will  no longer come here. I discourage others too. Politics IS necessarily problematic because it involves real concerns that affect people. To dictate the terms going in to LIMIT what people are allowed to say, (from the 'agreement' taken by its wording, we cannot even discuss "sex issues". Is there some government intervention trying to force this site into complying with some censorship. Is the 'agreement' intended to both allow this site to take the Benefits of right to censor or even take ownership of content BUT also allow them to USE such information to give to governments as well? Is this not proof that you guys here are likely disappointed particularly with some specific personal biases? 

So good bye. 

I have no idea what you're talking about.

The forums are live to anyone that wants to view them. Registration just allows you to post and reply in the forums.

I've explained above what changes were made to the TOS.

You can discuss sex all you want, just so long as it isn't explicit. If you want to talk about explicit sex, go somewhere else.  That's not censorship, that's common decency, we have underage members who don't need to be reading these types of discussions.

And to the last few sentences in your reply... We're not censoring anyone, we're just trying to set the ground rules for respectful debate.  If you don't like the rules, then I guess it's a good thing you're leaving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Greg said:

The forum is located on a server in the US - however, legal action can be initiated on both sides of the border.  However, legal action can arise even if the TOS is perfect, so I don't really see the physical location of the server from being a huge determining factor.

 

Right...I think we are saying the same thing.   The TOS does not indemnify MLW from defamation liability regardless of expressed agreements or acknowledgements by members.  

I also wanted to point out that there is a legal MLW responsibility to remove defamatory and/or illegal content once notified.   Some members may interpret this as "censorship" when clearly it is not.   Those who wish to defame can start their own forum and take their chances.

The physical location of the server can impact jurisdiction and liability.   I am not an expert on such matters, but current rulings would appear to make Canada more restrictive than the U.S.

http://www.blogherald.com/2011/07/29/why-where-you-host-your-site-matters-legally/

 

Quote

And to the last few sentences in your reply... We're not censoring anyone, we're just trying to set the ground rules for respectful debate.  If you don't like the rules, then I guess it's a good thing you're leaving.

 

Agreed...MLW is an enduring and well managed forum resource in an environment where many others have failed.   Must be doing something well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Admin
5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Right...I think we are saying the same thing.   The TOS does not indemnify MLW from defamation liability regardless of expressed agreements or acknowledgements by members.  

The physical location of the server can impact jurisdiction and liability.   I am not an expert on such matters, but current rulings would appear to make Canada more restrictive than the U.S.

http://www.blogherald.com/2011/07/29/why-where-you-host-your-site-matters-legally/

Agreed, bush_cheney2004 - we're on the same page.

Thanks for the link, I'll take a closer look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see anything wrong with the terms of service for posting, and I agree with Greg that if it changes it should not be done silently. I was a bit worried if the site was not made available for casual anonymous viewing, and I hadn't tried that since the upgrade but Greg says that hasn't changed and (trust be verify) I just did and was able to view without signing in or accepting any TOS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only actions are postings.

On 15/10/2016 at 9:12 PM, August1991 said:

But what if someone claims that my actions and words were different? Should MLW be an arbiter? (This is your reasonable thinking.) 

Please clarify.

If you want to see the forum database history to confirm post content of any post, that is technically possible.

or

Are you asking should Greg (or mod staff) be expected to interpret posts? 

I would rather not be asked to interpret any member's post in the resolution of a dispute. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

Are you asking should Greg (or mod staff) be expected to interpret posts? 

I view public forums like the soap box at the town square. The forum staff are not responsible for any content. If they see someone get up on the soapbox and become very offensive (yelling obscenities, point to people in the audience and making fun of them, etc.) then they may (in their judgement) yank that person from the soapbox but they are not responsible for what he says. If they are ever to get subsequently involved in a dispute, the most they should do is say if they saw the person there at the date/time and if they have any recorded footage of the incident then hand it over (hopefully they have their own standards as to when, like with a court order). They are not responsible for the content, or for interpreting it in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2016 at 10:51 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

...the owner(s) of MLW do not want to be a liable party in a defamation lawsuit....

On 10/15/2016 at 9:13 PM, cybercoma said:

I'm unclear on what you mean here. GIve me an example of what you mean.

Fu***kkk.

Greg, I can't even easily reply to your post above.

 

There is no slippery slope here, it's the same TOS that has been used for nearly 16 years - the only difference is really cosmetic, and you can see those changes in the link above. 

If there is no slippery slope, then why ask me to click "Yes" to boiler plate nonsense? .

======

Before, MLW was a great, relaxing, easy, free, simple place to stop by, have a glass and use my laptop to say what I wanted to say (or easily respond to other anglophones from across Canada, the US or even Australia) about Canadian politics. (I had a place in French where I could do the same but for various reasons, it no longer exists).

If you stop into a bar, the bartender doesn't first ask you to sign a paper disavowing all responsibilty for anything you say. Yet, the bartender and other patrons learn (remember) who you are. We all know that anything said in public is not forgotten.   

MLW seems to be suffering a similar fate of my French forum. Too complicated, too many restrictions, missing the entire point. 

Enough. I think I am leaving MLW. The Internet is a work in progress.

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Greg, Michael, Charles,Kimmy:

I just want a place to stop by and talk/comment. I know that my comments are public.

This current software misses the entire point.of the exercise. Please don't upgrade any further.

The previous software was far better.

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,752
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Dorai
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...