6 SUSPENSIONS FOR USING THIS SITE!!

cfps · Post by **cfps** » 24 Oct 2007, 19:24

oops.

cfps · Post by **cfps** » 24 Oct 2007, 19:36

Scottishlass wrote:How about this scenario then. I replied to a post on another thread on Friday. Someone who replied to my post then sent me a PM with my own name and a question mark. I just replied by asking " Who are you". That night at work , my line manager asked me if I use this site as ***** ***** ( manager's name) asked him to find out. At no time have I told anyone my username and the post mentioned above was only my 4th on here. Ok , so a manager has sussed out who I am. Not only that , he has told other managers on my shift. Through asking my line manager , I now know that he also lurks on here , and so does one of our acting managers. So , I now feel that every time I come on here , there are at least 3 managers possibly checking to see if I post or what I post. If I ever said something they don't like , in these circumstances wouldn't that be entrapment ? Even the police don't get away with that one !

Scottishlass, i PM'd you because you "waved" to the warehouse manager in your posting.. nice to be nice and all that... I asked your manager to find out if you were scottishlass as we had talked about this site and others like it and i knew i would not get a chance to speak to you that night... nothing cloak and dagger about it. sorry if you feel there was.

Feel free to post what you like in here, but stick to the guidelines set out by POSTMAN the Moderator as libelous posts... which i am sure you would not do.. could land people in trouble. If anybody wants to have a pop at me then that is fine, but dont use my name or give out my details... which i am sure you wouldn't anyway, you can use "my manager" and i would probably reply giving my side of the story

You should remember that not all managers may have this attitude though!!

Entrapment?

Not a lawyer, but don't think so.

Right gotta go get ready for work.. c u later.

We all have opinions

mark21 · Post by **mark21** » 24 Oct 2007, 19:36

postman43 wrote:
mark21 wrote:
bulbhead42 wrote:sounds to me brynau could be a D.O.M
Could not agree more brynau the D.O.M

Bang on mark 21 a real legend , this brynau twat is the pits , im sure the sheep say the same in the welsh valleys .

Report us all you welsh nark .

ONCE A POSTIE ALWAYS A POSTIE

BRING BACK ARTHUR SCARGILL

Here he is

cfps · Post by **cfps** » 24 Oct 2007, 19:54

Scottishlass wrote:
PostfromNotts wrote:Your manager is just a sad case!! simple as that!! no life probably no girlfriend.

Anyway you've only posted 7 times!!

you must have a lot of influence!!
He's married ! Before he was made up to full manager , he used to work all hours. He wants to go far in RM , at any cost .

Thanks for clearing that up... a few of our colleagues believe im gay!!!

Yep, i did work all the hours going .. i had a life plan and set myself goals.. these goals have now been met and i no longer do so.

cfps · Post by **cfps** » 24 Oct 2007, 19:55

PostfromNotts wrote:Your manager is just a sad case!! simple as that!! no life probably no girlfriend.

Anyway you've only posted 7 times!!

you must have a lot of influence!!

On what info are you basing that opinion? just curious.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 24 Oct 2007, 20:05

cfps wrote:
Scottishlass wrote:How about this scenario then. I replied to a post on another thread on Friday. Someone who replied to my post then sent me a PM with my own name and a question mark. I just replied by asking " Who are you". That night at work , my line manager asked me if I use this site as ***** ***** ( manager's name) asked him to find out. At no time have I told anyone my username and the post mentioned above was only my 4th on here. Ok , so a manager has sussed out who I am. Not only that , he has told other managers on my shift. Through asking my line manager , I now know that he also lurks on here , and so does one of our acting managers. So , I now feel that every time I come on here , there are at least 3 managers possibly checking to see if I post or what I post. If I ever said something they don't like , in these circumstances wouldn't that be entrapment ? Even the police don't get away with that one !
Scottishlass, i PM'd you because you "waved" to the warehouse manager in your posting.. nice to be nice and all that... I asked your manager to find out if you were scottishlass as we had talked about this site and others like it and i knew i would not get a chance to speak to you that night... nothing cloak and dagger about it. sorry if you feel there was.

Feel free to post what you like in here, but stick to the guidelines set out by POSTMAN the Moderator as libelous posts... which i am sure you would not do.. could land people in trouble. If anybody wants to have a pop at me then that is fine, but dont use my name or give out my details... which i am sure you wouldn't anyway, you can use "my manager" and i would probably reply giving my side of the story
You should remember that not all managers may have this attitude though!!

Entrapment? Not a lawyer, but don't think so.

Right gotta go get ready for work.. c u later.

We all have opinions

Its a pity not more managers could be this magnanimous. From this post I believe cfps understands that people have to let off steam occasionally and this site is good for that.

Also, he does also flag up a point everyone should take on board. Any post you submit on here is still liable under the laws of the land and if it can be found to be libellous or defamatory you can be sued in court proceedings and made liable for the costs incurred to the other side.

It has recently been set by precedent in a court case to do with Sheffield United football club and one of its unofficial forums, that commenting on a public forum falls under the same laws and restrictions as writing or presenting an article in any printed matter such as newspapers.

Therefore everyone should consider before pressing the submit button whether or not they can be sued for defamation of character or whether the post is libellous.

Post by **Sparrowhawk** » 24 Oct 2007, 20:50

. He's not a bad guy really (cfps).

. I'm just a bit cautious as whatever I've posted since Friday seems to be getting repeated to the other managers. It's certainly not coming from me. Maybe I'm wrong there and the other managers are lurking here too, but when my line manager comes out of the managers meeting and makes reference to something I've posted, I wonder where he got that info. Anyway , on a different note , you won't see me tonight , it's my night off

.

axeman · Post by **axeman** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:27

Can you belive it a life plan in royal mail what a loser this guy must be wake up sonny there are more things to life than work ......promise

axeman · Post by **axeman** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:30

and wheres the other idiot brynau ? chasing sheep i dare say careful of the fog in them welsh valleys boyo might get lost with luck

Post by **Sparrowhawk** » 24 Oct 2007, 21:46

axeman wrote:Can you belive it a life plan in royal mail what a loser this guy must be wake up sonny there are more things to life than work ......promise

We all know that but this guy LUUUURRRRRRVVVES his job , a real company man . Isn't that right Nanook

Sandyman · Post by **Sandyman** » 24 Oct 2007, 22:02

TrueBlueTerrier wrote: whether or not they can be sued for deformation of character or whether the post is libellous.

Is that a typo or a wise observation of what happens to a postman's back, knees etc

Budfrog · Post by **Budfrog** » 25 Oct 2007, 00:20

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:It has recently been set by precedent in a court case to do with Sheffield United football club and one of its unofficial forums, that commenting on a public forum falls under the same laws and restrictions as writing or presenting an article in any printed matter such as newspapers.

It was actually Wednesday:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7056659.stm

I have used a football MB that was closed down for fear of legal action the contents of which were nothing compared to some of the posts that have appeared on this site. It is only fair to the Admin to strictly adhere to the guidelines and there is no reason why healthy debate can continue on that basis.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 25 Oct 2007, 05:26

Sandyman wrote:
TrueBlueTerrier wrote: whether or not they can be sued for deformation of character or whether the post is libellous.
Is that a typo or a wise observation of what happens to a postman's back, knees etc

Typo

should be defamation

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 25 Oct 2007, 05:42

So everyone is aware here are the definitions of defamation, libel and slander - this so you can be fully aware and therefore held responsible for any comments you may make. Please also be aware that such comments could ultimately result in this message board being shut down and this is why I seem to continually ask members not to be abusive in any form to others that hold different views.

The accepted legal definition of defamation is "the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally." The "statement" can be words, visual images or some other method of signifying meaning. Defamation takes two forms, libel and slander. Libel involves (amongst other things) writing or printing a defamatory statement. Slander is speech or gestures of a defamatory nature.

Source: http://www.weblaw.co.uk/art190499.php

The following are American definitions but the general rules outlined would still apply within UK law.

defamation
n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates, have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment. Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, having a feared disease or being unable to perform one's occupation are called libel per se or slander per se and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.

libel
1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libellous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for general damages for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called special damages. Libel per se involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune to actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct.

slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (pay-off for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

Sandyman · Post by **Sandyman** » 25 Oct 2007, 05:53

Very useful information, especially about libel/slander. I will now consider sueing :cfo - I work my hours every day, I don't knock off 2 hours early and I feel damaged by his public remarks in this respect...

oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (pay-off for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.