Golden Retriever Dog Forums banner

61 - 65 of 65 Posts

·
Kate
Joined
·
20,442 Posts
I'm just going to pop on here to basically say what was posted above is correct. Anyt topic, other than the ones mentioned above or listed also in board rules , are open for discussion. Just remember to not make statements that maybe are only speculative on anything. Not only could it get someone in trouble with board rules but it could also cause further problems for them beyond this board. So it's okay to question or have a matter cleared up but it's not okay to come out and state something that you yourself are not 100 percent sure of. So basically if you're not sure of something think it out before you type it out, because is it something you want to get out with your name attached to it.
Rob.... this is something I've been curious about, because it seemed like there was a rather noticable change since mid-last year w/regard commentary on breeders or other touchy subjects. Was there a lawsuit threatened beyond talk on the website?

I know there was a breeder (not the one discussed here) who openly took down names of people on the forum and intended to involve everyone in a defamation lawsuit. I don't remember much beyond that - and I saw less mentioned of that breeder, though prior to that point they had been discussed frequently and referred to as a puppy mill by several members, likely even including those rebuking me on this thread.

Is that the reason for the change? Or has this been a steadily evolving change based on who moderates, etc?

I have no interest in ruining anyone's reputation. If their reputation is ruined by me commenting they and others could become more active in discussing issues that involve our breed with petowners - it's well, their business.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,441 Posts
It has nothing to do with who moderates, and never has. If there are/were legal issues going on I am not posting them out here, nor would I discuss them at all. No need for me to get involved amongst a dispute. As the internet keeps growing and more and more people have a greater access to it, things can be more easily seen and reviewed by anyone. So with the world as it is people need to becareful what they make statements about no matter what the topic.
 

·
Kate
Joined
·
20,442 Posts
If there are/were legal issues going on I am not posting them out here, nor would I discuss them at all. No need for me to get involved amongst a dispute. As the internet keeps growing and more and more people have a greater access to it, things can be more easily seen and reviewed by anyone. So with the world as it is people need to becareful what they make statements about no matter what the topic.
The reason why I asked was it would have at least explained some of the changes that I've seen in how the forum is run, how people moderate, etc....

I wouldn't have asked for specifics. I was just curious if lawsuits HAVE happened or if that is a possible reason for the changes that I've seen.

Based on the statements made on that thread I read back whenever that was, it seemed very likely they were going to go through with their threat.

To put it one way - you remember your thread (I think it was you?) on how or why people found GRF? To tell you the truth, I found GRF because of something negative somebody posted on Jacks' breeder. Of course everyone googles their own breeders to see if they've been mentioned positively or negatively online. What was said about Jacks' breeder was mild compared to some of the other items on other breeders I've read since becoming a member.

And those are just people.

Imagine if Blue Buffalo or Nutro or some of the other big dog food companies got it into their heads to go after online forums for slander. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,391 Posts
I do not see how discussing K9data, OFA info and breeder website info can be a lawsuit situation. The breeders themselves are the ones putting this info there.
You are completely right. That is all fine.

The only thing that is risky is stating a blatant untruth that a reasonable person would find gratutitous, irresponsible, or malicious. We have only had that happen a very few times, one of them recently.
 

·
Kate
Joined
·
20,442 Posts
You are completely right. That is all fine.

The only thing that is risky is stating a blatant untruth that a reasonable person would find gratutitous, irresponsible, or malicious. We have only had that happen a very few times, one of them recently.
Surely people haven't done that on this thread? Even the referance made last year that everyone was responding to - that was not directly stating something specific that people have not said about other lines (Ann Johnson, Gold Rush, etc). I'm not saying it is "ok" to suggest anything that cannot be proven or discussed without people flying off the handle and getting upset. I'm just thinking that the matter in this thread is quite different from the examples that I can think of where a member directly accused a non-member of wrong-doing and denigrated that non-member's operation. I have seen that happen - definitely. o_O The one case I can think of, someone signed up with GRF specifically to slander a breeder w/regards to an issue that the breeder had already given their side of the story elsewhere. When this person posted here, I immediately recognized the story based on what the breeder had already disclosed elsewhere. This person was threatening to sue this breeder and wanted to destroy the breeder - and I believe was going around posting outright lies about the breeder. The breeder was alerted immediately (I wasn't the only one who reacted by contacting her) and came on here to provide her side of the story or more details. That put a complete end to the entire issue. I'm probably a little too simplistic in my thinking that everything could be resolved by getting absent people to open up and present themselves when you have things posted about them, their operation, their dogs, etc.... what I suggested yesterday. o_O
 
61 - 65 of 65 Posts
Top