Rant: Websites scared to speak truth?

Joe · 10-07-2005, 07:49 PM

So today I was reading some members guidelines for another forum I participate in. In it was a weird paragraph:

Quote:

Please use extreme caution in expressing negative opinions. Limit remarks about "bad" products or services to verifiable FACTS. Label your opinions as opinions. Sites like this have been sued by jilted manufacturers, dealers, and others, and, whether right or wrong, it is always at huge legal expense.

WTF?

So just stating facts about a product you use, can cause some lame ****er business to threaten to sue? (or as a friend said... only people who threaten to sue are the small dogs that just bark. the big dogs just take you to court without notice) . So what does this mean? If it affects users on a forum is HAS to impact review sites. So does this mean you cant review shit unless its good? Hmmmm that explains a current trend I have seen on the web with NO reviews of a product that all out sucked. Before there have been some sprinkled in at about a 1000:1 ratio of reviews good:bad.

Are cooling hardware in general getting that good? No turds out there? Is the industry just that flawless that there is no dirt under a rug some where?

I call bullshit on any review site that considers for an INSTANT the "hmm I cant review this because if I do say the truth, I could be sued."

In an example of how ****ing insane this country is:
At the SCCA runoffs (amature series close for SCCA racing competition), one tard crashed on the fist lap because he was a total ****ing dolt, he took another guy out with him. Well in the forums for this, everyone called the kid who did it a ****ing dumb shit, and a retard (which he was). Well... the kids dad whos nic appropriately is "racinglawyer" and is as bad of a driver as his son... threatens to sue the entire ****ing forum. Now he was one of those lil dogs who just bark this time, but in the past hes won DAMAGES for people making fun of his sons BAD driving. I mean holy shit people....

With heat like that for what you say online, I can see why some people are dead scared to say anything bad about anything. But to that end... I am not. I have no self preservation code in my head.

**** mfg's who make bad products yet only send out review items to get good reivews and not true honest results, **** lawyers who prosecute people speaking their mind, **** those who are too scared to speak the truth, and **** any forum who puts a disclaimer telling its user base to watch its mouth.

I dunno this was just my lil rant/Editorial/ etc...

Cathar · 10-07-2005, 08:09 PM

I think it boils down to one of two basic legal issues.

The matter of freedom of speech which is effectively an empty dream in the USA nowadays what with the DMCA and more recent legislative changes.

The second would be whether or not published web site content is protected under "Freedom Of Press" legislature. This is a gnarly issue, and for sure it is coming to a head. Unfortunately in a world where "Freedom of Speech" gets trampled on by all and sundry, I do not hold out a lot of faith that people will continue to be able to express their view openly on the web for much longer without fear of legal reprisal.

jaydee · 10-07-2005, 08:13 PM

Indeed. We had a similar discussion about OCAU. IMO objectivity is completely thrown out the window if reviewers have to post nothing but positive stuff. **** that! If the products sucks then the product sucks. This is one of the reasons I am setting up my own test bench. If something sucks I will tell you it sucks and back it up with data. I am not afraid to test bad products although I don't expect to be given them. That is another thing, if the review site posts a bad review they may not get another review sample from that company. Being the site depends on reviews for the majority of it's traffic that would be bad. The trick is finding sources to buy retail versions of the product and not worry about the manufacture.

This is why I stay here at ProCooling.

bigben2k · 10-07-2005, 08:17 PM

If you don't care, you should start a "black list" of site that have provided a review with false information (i.e. those that were "bought off", as far as one can tell).

Then you can put up a grey list for reviews (linked) that are just done poorly (i.e. inaccurately).

THAT would be useful to the cooling community.

Monnie Rock · 10-08-2005, 12:05 AM

Hello Gentlemen,

Without getting into politics or vaules of the current society too much but, this is a trend I see moving on a fast pace. Seems that "Take responsibility for your actions" is now interpreted as " Who else can I blame to make myself look good because it was not my fault". This mentality will be the fall of our government, society, and any business model one tries to pursue.

Not to sound like I am an old man, well maybe to the younger crowd I am, I am 38. Anyway, my Father stopped this type of behavior before it even started within our family. God rest his soul, I can remember him looking at me and saying "Son, you made a mistake, first correct the problem, then learn what you did so as to not do it again" followed by "Be a man and take it".

Now what I do not understand is, history is one of the best aides in learning what to do as well as what not to do. Self-analysis is a great tool for making yourself or a business better. Wow, who or what is perfect? Not me but, I can want to improve myself . Seems like these business models would take all the intelligence from I say "Free" reviews as constructive as possible and use that to only help improve their product. It is like "Free" reseach and development. Who wins in the long run? The business! Guess their little feelings get hurt and constructive crtiticism is too much for them to handle. Poor Baby.

This is why I joined this site. I saw many posts by the senior memebers that took time,skill,patience, and tactfully supported their facts. Even when a member would question them, they took the time to return with the facts. If their data needed correction, they said so and moved on. Not get their lynch mob and come after a member that was maybe just trying to learn. If I may, I will use Cathar as an example. I resepct you.

Anyway enough rant here. Hopefully we will all grow up and face the seeds we sow.

Thank you
Monnie

Brians256 · 10-08-2005, 01:37 AM

Well, this is one of the exact reasons that I take a very light hand moderating the forum and I believe that Joe and pH have the same philosophy.

Sometimes, a caustic statement is the goshdarned truth. And if it isn't.... then I ignore it. When the SNR gets too low, we tend to just ban the noisemakers if locking a thread or two or deleting a few posts can't fix it.

It takes a thick skin to enjoy these forums. Just like real life.

jaydee · 10-08-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigben2k

If you don't care, you should start a "black list" of site that have provided a review with false information (i.e. those that were "bought off", as far as one can tell).

Then you can put up a grey list for reviews (linked) that are just done poorly (i.e. inaccurately).

THAT would be useful to the cooling community.

Better to teach people why other reviews are half assed or paid off so they can judge for themselfs?

HammerSandwich · 10-08-2005, 10:43 AM

Seems that a review site easily could handle this problem with a list of "products we've chosen not to review."

TerraMex · 10-08-2005, 11:23 AM

... and some "review sites" can't tell the difference between a good and a bad product as lack of capability to do so.

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/decla...revocation.htm
j/k, but only a little

jaydee · 10-08-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerraMex

... and some "review sites" can't tell the difference between a good and a bad product as lack of capability to do so.

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/decla...revocation.htm
j/k, but only a little

Or they simply don't care and just want hits...

ricecrispi · 10-08-2005, 05:44 PM

They can take you to court and file suit but they can't win unless you are using excessive libel against the product and company when there isn't basis for it. So one, you must being doing doing it knowingly defaming the company or product when the opposite is obvious. It can also be to intentional harm the company or the products standing.

They are right about using data to make you point and stating one's opinion. All you have to do is say "my opinion of the X company and X product is sheer X amounf of crap. Retractions can also be used to avoid making an appearance in court.

If you do win or suit lacks merit you can ask for court fees to be covered. This makes this a waste of the product manufacturers time and money. Business lawyers are paid for major contract disputes and other business law stuff. Not
to sue some person who reviews some product.

Tell the PR person to get the laywer on the phone you so you talk and see who's playing for real or just all bark.

deathBOB · 10-08-2005, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe

In an example of how ****ing insane this country is:
At the SCCA runoffs (amature series close for SCCA racing competition), one tard crashed on the fist lap because he was a total ****ing dolt, he took another guy out with him. Well in the forums for this, everyone called the kid who did it a ****ing dumb shit, and a retard (which he was). Well... the kids dad whos nic appropriately is "racinglawyer" and is as bad of a driver as his son... threatens to sue the entire ****ing forum. Now he was one of those lil dogs who just bark this time, but in the past hes won DAMAGES for people making fun of his sons BAD driving. I mean holy shit people....

I know this is a little OT, but I am curious about this: Was the kid you refer to driving a neon? Was the person he hit in a CTS? I just remember an accident I saw a while ago on Speed that is very similar to what you describe.

TerraMex · 10-09-2005, 10:05 AM

... land of the frivolous lawsuits.
my personal favourites are,
the cat in the microwave and,
the guy who tried to rob some house and got trapped in the garage.

Quote:

Or they simply don't care and just want hits...

that too.
can't complaint that much, i give them hits
but I only look at the pretty pictures.

ricecrispi · 10-09-2005, 03:21 PM

USA is definitely land of wars, hypocrites, and frivilous alright.

USA is land of the free but there are so many rules it is getting ridicilous. I got a ticket speeding in a parking lot going 10mph when speedlimit is 5mph and going around a speedbump. Cop said he got me on radar and claimed I made a dangerous turn. I was going about 7-10mph but I bet he was munching a burrito that requires him two hands to hold.

Like Cathar said, we have the right to freedom of speech but that shit is so limited over here. Cant threaten the president. Can't even hear a cuss word on the radio because people are so uptight, not even shit or ass. To all SKEET SKEET mofos is all i got to say

Lawyers exist because if they weren't around people in the US would be settling arguements with guns like the wild west days. LA freeways are definitely going back to that and I like it. Better watch how you drive or you going to get popped

tong · 10-09-2005, 03:54 PM

Hey if they decide to sue you because they don;t like your review, counter sue them for the price of the review. I mean it costs money for the setup, the hosting, the pictures, the bandwidth, the people testing, the authors, i could go on and on. They sue you because they didn't liek youre review, coiunter sue and make shure it's for more.

Oh speaking of frivilous lawsuits: The Stella Awards

Cathar · 10-09-2005, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricecrispi

Like Cathar said, we have the right to freedom of speech but that shit is so limited over here. Cant threaten the president. Can't even hear a cuss word on the radio because people are so uptight, not even shit or ass.

Case in point. Land of free speech - yeah right!

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/...563036552.html

Quote:

AN AMERICAN woman was thrown off a US plane for wearing a T-shirt deemed offensive by fellow passengers.

Lorrie Heasley, 32, boarded a Southwest Airlines flight in Los Angeles wearing a T-shirt bearing the images of President George Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice above an obscene variation on the title of the hit comedy film Meet the Fockers.

When the plane made a stop in Reno, Nevada, passengers joining the flight complained to cabin crew. Ms Heasley, who was accompanied by husband Ron, was asked to wear her top inside-out. She refused and was ejected.

"I just thought it was hilarious," said Ms Heasley. "I have cousins in Iraq and other relatives going to war. Here we are trying to free another country, and I have to get off an airplane — over a T-shirt. That's not freedom."

Ms Heasley, a timber trader from Washington state, said she wore the top as a joke for her Democrat-voting parents, who were waiting to collect her from the airport in Portland, Oregon. She said she planned to file a civil rights complaint against the airline.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Spokeswoman Marilee McInnis of Southwest Airlines said rules allowed the airline to deny boarding to anyone whose clothing was "lewd, obscene or patently offensive".

But Ms Heasley said nobody had complained about her top when she boarded.

The American Civil Liberties Union in Las Vegas said that under the constitution, the T-shirt was protected political speech. Ms Heasley said she had been in touch with the union's lawyers and wants Southwest to reimburse her for the last leg of the trip.

U-S-A! U-S-A!

maxSaleen · 10-09-2005, 05:16 PM

Quote:

When the SNR gets too low, we tend to just ban the noisemakers if locking a thread or two or deleting a few posts can't fix it.

Remember that guy ////Wings\\\ ? lol. That was a lot of fun.

I like the blacklist/greylist idea. That would help the community a lot.
The reason I read MaximumPC is because they don't take sh!t from anyone. I've seen more negative reviews in their magazine than I have anywhere else. They would be a "greylist" reviewer. They try to be objective, it is just that their testing methodology (for anything thermally related) is flawed.

Idea: JD, Joe, or anyone else who has a test bench might consider contacting MaximumPC. How good would it be to have a "Procooling.com" section in there? I've got a couple of other ideas like this if anyone is interested.

In the end, manufacturers will get the reviews they want out of a handful of traffic/product sample desperate websites. Nothing we can do about that except black list them (though doing so could make the site liable). The trick is to find some media channel that has deep enough roots to weather any sort of legal storm a manufacturer could throw at them.

Joe · 10-09-2005, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deathBOB

I know this is a little OT, but I am curious about this: Was the kid you refer to driving a neon? Was the person he hit in a CTS? I just remember an accident I saw a while ago on Speed that is very similar to what you describe.

No the kid was in a miata and took out some older roadster.

Lothar5150 · 10-09-2005, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

Case in point. Land of free speech - yeah right!

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/...563036552.html

U-S-A! U-S-A!

Easy now Cathar political speech is protected but if the shirt was truly obscene then the airline was well within its rights to ask her to turn it inside out. I'm sure you would not want to get on a plane with your daughter and have her looking at some guy wearing a T-Shirt depicting a full color photo of Jena Jamison swallowing a turkey neck.

Cathar · 10-10-2005, 12:08 AM

Uh, we were talking about politically motivated speech being censured. It was pretty obvious from the description in the article that it was merely a picture of the 3 head-shots of Bush, Cheney and Rice with "Meet the Fückers" written underneath.

Who said anything about X-Rated pornography? As if airport security wouldn't have pounced on said person with such a T-shirt long before she even got near the check-in counter, and rightfully so. X-Rated pornography is banned from open public display in most every nation on the planet. What has X-Rated visual pornography got to do with a politically motivated T-shirt?

greenman100 · 10-10-2005, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

Uh, we were talking about politically motivated speech being censured. It was pretty obvious from the description in the article that it was merely a picture of the 3 head-shots of Bush, Cheney and Rice with "Meet the Fückers" written underneath.

Who said anything about X-Rated pornography? As if airport security wouldn't have pounced on said person with such a T-shirt long before she even got near the check-in counter, and rightfully so. X-Rated pornography is banned from open public display in most every nation on the planet. What has X-Rated visual pornography got to do with a politically motivated T-shirt?

But "****" would not be in a G-rated movie, so why have it out in the open?

I am positive they did not ask her to turn the shirt inside out over the politics, but rather, the profanity.

Lothar5150 · 10-10-2005, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

Uh, we were talking about politically motivated speech being censured. It was pretty obvious from the description in the article that it was merely a picture of the 3 head-shots of Bush, Cheney and Rice with "Meet the Fückers" written underneath.

Who said anything about X-Rated pornography? As if airport security wouldn't have pounced on said person with such a T-shirt long before she even got near the check-in counter, and rightfully so. X-Rated pornography is banned from open public display in most every nation on the planet. What has X-Rated visual pornography got to do with a politically motivated T-shirt?

The point is not pornography, it is obscenity in general. I used that example because pornography is protected speech but we have said that there are appropriate places for that type of speech. Clearly public places and venues where children may be exposed to it are not deemed appropriate. I haven't seen the shirt but if it has fu?kers on it. That would certainly make it inappropriate for kids. Further, the aircraft are privet vessels owned by privet companies. Finally, aircraft commanders have the right to kick off any passenger who is disrupting the safe and efficient operation of the aircraft…there is very broad discretion in this matter.

Cathar · 10-10-2005, 12:52 AM

Pfah, name me a single child capable of reading who hasn't already heard the F-word used many times before, and knows full-well that it's a "grown-up" word.

Children are far more adaptable than people give them credit for. By age 6 they pretty much know at least half the full range of profanities commonly used in society, and by age 3 they learned to know not to use such words in ear-shot of authority figures when they innocently repeated such words where their parents could hear them. Our daughter learned the F-word from merely being in society at age 3, and it was at that age that we explained to her that it was not a nice word for little people to repeat.

If we want to bring sex and children into the debate, then ponder why is sexual nudity treated with such "shock and horror" when children see it every single day when they take their own clothes off, yet images of extreme violence are far harder to shield children from, and in my experience as a father, it is far more difficult to explain to a young child about extreme violence, than it is to explain something as obvious to most children that people have bodies much like they do.

I know my children well enough that if I had to choose between exposing them to nudity, as opposed to images of the casualties of US-led wars in foreign countries, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with the nudity as children pretty much think little of it.

Lothar5150 · 10-10-2005, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

Pfah, name me a single child capable of reading who hasn't already heard the F-word used many times before, and knows full-well that it's a "grown-up" word.

Children are far more adaptable than people give them credit for. By age 6 they pretty much know at least half the full range of profanities commonly used in society, and by age 3 they learned to know not to use such words in ear-shot of authority figures when they innocently repeated such words where their parents could hear them. Our daughter learned the F-word from merely being in society at age 3, and it was at that age that we explained to her that it was not a nice word for little people to repeat.

If we want to bring sex and children into the debate, then ponder why is sexual nudity treated with such "shock and horror" when children see it every single day when they take their own clothes off, yet images of extreme violence are far harder to shield children from, and in my experience as a father, it is far more difficult to explain to a young child about extreme violence, than it is to explain something as obvious to most children that people have bodies much like they do.

I know my children well enough that if I had to choose between exposing them to nudity, as opposed to images of the casualties of US-led wars in foreign countries, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with the nudity as children pretty much think little of it.

No doubt that kids pick up a complete vocabulary of profanity very early on in life. However, I believe in polite society and it is important to teach kids when certain behaviors are acceptable and when they are not. Dirty stories, profanity and lured comments about sexual conquests are fine around contemporaries in the appropriate setting. However, that is not appropriate around my parent’s grandparents or nieces and nephews.

I agree that sex in general/reproduction/nudity is fine and understanding how your body works is great. However, do you want to have to explain to a six year old some of the more deviant sexual behaviors? Again there is an appropriate age a maturity level for exposure to these things.

The same is true of violence. I think that graphic violence and violent death is in appropriate young kids. But like sex violence is part of our nature…got boys? “Why did you hit your sister/brother?”…”I don’t know” I mean come on, nothing is more dangerous to lower life forms than a few 13 year old boys with firecrackers.

As to the US-led war comments…first you have to explain that there are fanatical people of a particular religious faith that believe that your kids should be dead simply because they do not subscribe to there particular twisted view of that faith. Explain to them why it is that people believe it is noble to blow up themselves and innocent civilians. Once you make it over that hurdle it’s easy to explain, why we big mean Americans are picking on the poor Fanatical Islamists. lol you slay me Cathar, I know your grandparents did share a similar view about Imperial Japan.

Cathar · 10-10-2005, 03:42 AM

Lothar, your discourse is filled with extravagant tangential hyperbole designed to express unintended meaning in other people's posts, but all it does it expose your own inadequate levels of language comprehension. Either that, or it's trolling for trolling sake. My personal inclination is that it's a mixture of both.

As to wars, the belief structure as illustrated in your post IS the problem. I'm sure most anyone outside of the USA will agree with me on that one. I won't even pretend to think that I could ever convince you otherwise.

You "win". Clap-clap.

10-07-2005, 08:17 PM	#4
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	If you don't care, you should start a "black list" of site that have provided a review with false information (i.e. those that were "bought off", as far as one can tell). Then you can put up a grey list for reviews (linked) that are just done poorly (i.e. inaccurately). THAT would be useful to the cooling community. __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

10-08-2005, 12:05 AM	#5
Monnie Rock Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Jacksonville Beach, Florida Posts: 5	Hello Gentlemen, Without getting into politics or vaules of the current society too much but, this is a trend I see moving on a fast pace. Seems that "Take responsibility for your actions" is now interpreted as " Who else can I blame to make myself look good because it was not my fault". This mentality will be the fall of our government, society, and any business model one tries to pursue. Not to sound like I am an old man, well maybe to the younger crowd I am, I am 38. Anyway, my Father stopped this type of behavior before it even started within our family. God rest his soul, I can remember him looking at me and saying "Son, you made a mistake, first correct the problem, then learn what you did so as to not do it again" followed by "Be a man and take it". Now what I do not understand is, history is one of the best aides in learning what to do as well as what not to do. Self-analysis is a great tool for making yourself or a business better. Wow, who or what is perfect? Not me but, I can want to improve myself . Seems like these business models would take all the intelligence from I say "Free" reviews as constructive as possible and use that to only help improve their product. It is like "Free" reseach and development. Who wins in the long run? The business! Guess their little feelings get hurt and constructive crtiticism is too much for them to handle. Poor Baby. This is why I joined this site. I saw many posts by the senior memebers that took time,skill,patience, and tactfully supported their facts. Even when a member would question them, they took the time to return with the facts. If their data needed correction, they said so and moved on. Not get their lynch mob and come after a member that was maybe just trying to learn. If I may, I will use Cathar as an example. I resepct you. Anyway enough rant here. Hopefully we will all grow up and face the seeds we sow. Thank you Monnie __________________ Thermaltake Tsunami Dream Tower\|Asus A8N-SLI Premium\|AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800\|Corsair TWINX2048-3200C2PRO\|PC Power & Cooling Turbo-Cool® 850 SSI\|Thermalright XP 120 w/ Delta TFB1212GHE 220CFM\|2x SATAII WD Caviar SE 160 GB RAID 0\|2x BFG 7800 GTX SLI w/Zalman VF700cu\|Creative X-fi\|Plextor SATA DVD±RW\|Mitsubishi DP2070SB-SV 21" CRT\|Win XP Pro SP2\|TM Cougar HOTAS NXT Mod\|Simped F-16C Rudder Pedals\|Track IR 3 Pro\|Sennheiser HD650 Last edited by Monnie Rock; 10-08-2005 at 12:15 AM.

10-08-2005, 10:43 AM	#8
HammerSandwich Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: 15143 Posts: 358	Seems that a review site easily could handle this problem with a list of "products we've chosen not to review." __________________ www.procooling.com: It's true we are often a bunch of assholes

10-08-2005, 11:23 AM	#9
TerraMex Cooling Savant Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Portugal, Europe Posts: 870	... and some "review sites" can't tell the difference between a good and a bad product as lack of capability to do so. http://www.stephaniemiller.com/decla...revocation.htm j/k, but only a little __________________ "we need more cowbell."

10-09-2005, 03:54 PM	#15
tong Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ludlow, MA Posts: 89	Hey if they decide to sue you because they don;t like your review, counter sue them for the price of the review. I mean it costs money for the setup, the hosting, the pictures, the bandwidth, the people testing, the authors, i could go on and on. They sue you because they didn't liek youre review, coiunter sue and make shure it's for more. Oh speaking of frivilous lawsuits: The Stella Awards __________________ My Heatware My Ebay

10-07-2005, 08:09 PM	#2
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	I think it boils down to one of two basic legal issues. The matter of freedom of speech which is effectively an empty dream in the USA nowadays what with the DMCA and more recent legislative changes. The second would be whether or not published web site content is protected under "Freedom Of Press" legislature. This is a gnarly issue, and for sure it is coming to a head. Unfortunately in a world where "Freedom of Speech" gets trampled on by all and sundry, I do not hold out a lot of faith that people will continue to be able to express their view openly on the web for much longer without fear of legal reprisal.

10-07-2005, 08:13 PM	#3
jaydee Put up or Shut Up Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Spokane WA Posts: 6,506	Indeed. We had a similar discussion about OCAU. IMO objectivity is completely thrown out the window if reviewers have to post nothing but positive stuff. **** that! If the products sucks then the product sucks. This is one of the reasons I am setting up my own test bench. If something sucks I will tell you it sucks and back it up with data. I am not afraid to test bad products although I don't expect to be given them. That is another thing, if the review site posts a bad review they may not get another review sample from that company. Being the site depends on reviews for the majority of it's traffic that would be bad. The trick is finding sources to buy retail versions of the product and not worry about the manufacture. This is why I stay here at ProCooling.

10-08-2005, 01:37 AM	#6
Brians256 Pro/Staff Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Klamath Falls, OR Posts: 1,439	Well, this is one of the exact reasons that I take a very light hand moderating the forum and I believe that Joe and pH have the same philosophy. Sometimes, a caustic statement is the goshdarned truth. And if it isn't.... then I ignore it. When the SNR gets too low, we tend to just ban the noisemakers if locking a thread or two or deleting a few posts can't fix it. It takes a thick skin to enjoy these forums. Just like real life.

10-08-2005, 05:44 PM	#11
ricecrispi Cooling Savant Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: california Posts: 429	They can take you to court and file suit but they can't win unless you are using excessive libel against the product and company when there isn't basis for it. So one, you must being doing doing it knowingly defaming the company or product when the opposite is obvious. It can also be to intentional harm the company or the products standing. They are right about using data to make you point and stating one's opinion. All you have to do is say "my opinion of the X company and X product is sheer X amounf of crap. Retractions can also be used to avoid making an appearance in court. If you do win or suit lacks merit you can ask for court fees to be covered. This makes this a waste of the product manufacturers time and money. Business lawyers are paid for major contract disputes and other business law stuff. Not to sue some person who reviews some product. Tell the PR person to get the laywer on the phone you so you talk and see who's playing for real or just all bark.

10-09-2005, 03:21 PM	#14
ricecrispi Cooling Savant Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: california Posts: 429	USA is definitely land of wars, hypocrites, and frivilous alright. USA is land of the free but there are so many rules it is getting ridicilous. I got a ticket speeding in a parking lot going 10mph when speedlimit is 5mph and going around a speedbump. Cop said he got me on radar and claimed I made a dangerous turn. I was going about 7-10mph but I bet he was munching a burrito that requires him two hands to hold. Like Cathar said, we have the right to freedom of speech but that shit is so limited over here. Cant threaten the president. Can't even hear a cuss word on the radio because people are so uptight, not even shit or ass. To all SKEET SKEET mofos is all i got to say Lawyers exist because if they weren't around people in the US would be settling arguements with guns like the wild west days. LA freeways are definitely going back to that and I like it. Better watch how you drive or you going to get popped

10-10-2005, 12:08 AM	#20
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Uh, we were talking about politically motivated speech being censured. It was pretty obvious from the description in the article that it was merely a picture of the 3 head-shots of Bush, Cheney and Rice with "Meet the Fückers" written underneath. Who said anything about X-Rated pornography? As if airport security wouldn't have pounced on said person with such a T-shirt long before she even got near the check-in counter, and rightfully so. X-Rated pornography is banned from open public display in most every nation on the planet. What has X-Rated visual pornography got to do with a politically motivated T-shirt?

10-10-2005, 12:52 AM	#23
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Pfah, name me a single child capable of reading who hasn't already heard the F-word used many times before, and knows full-well that it's a "grown-up" word. Children are far more adaptable than people give them credit for. By age 6 they pretty much know at least half the full range of profanities commonly used in society, and by age 3 they learned to know not to use such words in ear-shot of authority figures when they innocently repeated such words where their parents could hear them. Our daughter learned the F-word from merely being in society at age 3, and it was at that age that we explained to her that it was not a nice word for little people to repeat. If we want to bring sex and children into the debate, then ponder why is sexual nudity treated with such "shock and horror" when children see it every single day when they take their own clothes off, yet images of extreme violence are far harder to shield children from, and in my experience as a father, it is far more difficult to explain to a young child about extreme violence, than it is to explain something as obvious to most children that people have bodies much like they do. I know my children well enough that if I had to choose between exposing them to nudity, as opposed to images of the casualties of US-led wars in foreign countries, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with the nudity as children pretty much think little of it.

10-10-2005, 03:42 AM	#25
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Lothar, your discourse is filled with extravagant tangential hyperbole designed to express unintended meaning in other people's posts, but all it does it expose your own inadequate levels of language comprehension. Either that, or it's trolling for trolling sake. My personal inclination is that it's a mixture of both. As to wars, the belief structure as illustrated in your post IS the problem. I'm sure most anyone outside of the USA will agree with me on that one. I won't even pretend to think that I could ever convince you otherwise. You "win". Clap-clap.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)