Eh, no. You're not allowing any comments at all on this forum. If anything, showing the link to pwo is justifying the original decision, because people can see what would have happened if you had allowed the thread to continue here.It wasn't done out of pettiness. I don't mind reprinting exactly what my concern was when I raised it in the mod discussion:
But, but... a discussion doesn't infer anything, surely? The problem is individual posts, and individual P.ie users, isn't it? And you reminded us, Dave, that users are responsible for what they post.If the discussion infers that Nama debtors somehow have done something wrong or in some way should be considered in a negative way, that's likely to result in said developer trying to march me into the courts to sue and the user who posted the remarks. I have NEVER had an issue with the discussion of factual information. But...
Mostly posters questioning people in it - without realising there was actually no relationship to them in NAMA. Just people calling it wrong including me -To which Sync infracted me the (insert your own word here)Now I didn't read the thread that was pulled, but I gather that there were several posts there that were potentially defamatory. .
I understand completely, and I'd be very nervous if likely to be held legally responsible for the ignorant and possibly malicious ramblings of posters mouthing off about wealthy men who have eager solicitors on speed-dial.If the discussion infers that Nama debtors somehow have done something wrong or in some way should be considered in a negative way, that's likely to result in said developer trying to march me into the courts to sue and the user who posted the remarks. I have NEVER had an issue with the discussion of factual information. But I know too well the damage that uninformed "anonymous" remarks can make.
I'd like Politics.ie to encourage open and genuine debate, but I'm not here to defend users who don't understand what being in NAMA actually means. There are individuals objecting to being in Nama on the basis of their reputation, and there are developers in Nama taking members of our national parliament to the High Court for defamation proceedings along side this.
I'm going to apply my own rule from earlier and not discuss the spreadsheet in question here, I'm asking that users accept my bona fides from the OP and respect that.
Did you know it can be defamatory to falsely accuse someone of defamation?odie1kanobie said:I can see some people consulting lawyers and going after the publishers and anybody else who defames them.
Indeed.If you show weakness on this front, they'll use it against you, and use you as an example to others.
I've made the decision to pull a thread about the NamaWineLake list from the site.
There are a few concerns, which primarily center around the likelyhood of comments being made by users on the site that may impugn or defame members of the public who have done nothing wrong in any way.
The NamaWineLake list is a fine piece of work I'm sure, however, the "associations" column invites suspicion and commentary about people who may have no relationship with Nama. It could therefore lead members of this website to make defamatory remarks about those people "associated".
Secondly, having loans moved to Nama does not in any way suggest a developer or any other bank debtor has assets that are not performing.
As we have seen today, even elected members of parliament are being pursued for remarks they've made about developers (who through no fault of their own) have found their loans in Nama.
We want Politics.ie to be a place for quality, responsible and open debate, however the concern is that users of the site may accidentally be misled by this data, and posting remarks here that contain errors (and it's happened three times in a thread in question) leaves users here wide-open to potential defamatory proceedings.
The Terms and Conditions that users agree to by their use of Politics.ie are clear, that users are responsible for what they post on Politics.ie. But we need to be responsible here too.
To that end, whilst we're happy to encourage people to read the blog in question (we're hugely in favor of sources for users to read on) in this situation we have to ask that commentary on the document (including the "associations" or anything else) not be done on Politics.ie.
It's unfortunate, and it's not something I'm particularly happy with, but we must ensure responsible and open discussion, but also we all as users have obligations surrounding the absolute accuracy of the remarks we make here on Pie.
That's a brilliant start!I would like to see a thread where the fictinal baNAMArama is discussed in some country called The Republic of Biroland...
my muse seems to have eloped with a great fiction writer called ivor callously