Was It Defamatory?

[Zulu 10]

The initial message was deleted from this topic on 30 December 2021 at 15:11

[dudleybloke]

Don't be Coy!

[paul.deitch]

Have to admit for TVR I spend more time on FB and for entertainment on Reddit nowadays. So far I haven't met the bitter people on NP&E there! Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

[Doofus]

paul.deitch said:

Have to admit for TVR I spend more time on FB and for entertainment on Reddit nowadays. So far I haven't met the bitter people on NP&E there! Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

It wasn't in NP&E, and it wasn't the usual st-flinging contest.

I wasn't aware that it had been removed until now. I can't imagine why it was.

[320d is all you need]

Doofus said:

paul.deitch said:

Have to admit for TVR I spend more time on FB and for entertainment on Reddit nowadays. So far I haven't met the bitter people on NP&E there! Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

It wasn't in NP&E, and it wasn't the usual st-flinging contest.

I wasn't aware that it had been removed until now. I can't imagine why it was.

From my short time on these forums I have the feeling the moderators certainly pick and choose what they delete usually based on how much they like the poster who has posted it.

No idea what thread was deleted but wouldn't surprise me if it was useful.

[Doofus]

Not only useful, but a genuine public service, IMO.

[austin]

Would be good to know WHY it was removed. The story is all over the internet, and being an interested party in it I didn't see it getting out of hand.

I know PH previous owners Haymarket received ad income from Coys but not so sure about the new owners.

[Doofus]

austin said:

Would be good to know WHY it was removed.

Presumably somebody overstepped the mark, and presumably they received an email. The other contributors didn't.

[anonymous-user]

I have the impression from various threads that the Mods are not very well advised on the subject of libel (a field in which the law has recently been improved and is much less pro claimant and much more pro free speech than it was until a few years ago), and err too far on the side of caution. Pruning a thread of risky content is better than closing it, but there you are.

[ChrisEvoke]

Breadvan72 said:

I have the impression from various threads that the Mods are not very well advised on the subject of libel (a field in which the law has recently been improved and is much less pro claimant and much more pro free speech than it was until a few years ago), and err too far on the side of caution. Pruning a thread of risky content is better than closing it, but there you are.

Well said, sir.

I do agree some of the comments were a trifle ripe. It is entirely right that unreasonable, or potential 'illegal' comments are policed. That has to be balanced with a need to report facts. The historic facts have not changed, nor will they. There is clear agreement, a previous 'Coys' business went bust owing £6m. That is no reflection on an entirely seperate organisation that purchased the assets of the collapsed busines including the brand name.

I suppose new one thread will have to be started?

[Ben Lowden]

The auction company thread was deleted as it was reported by the owner of the brand and was in breach of rule 5 of our rules of posting: Do not name and shame any company or individual, or post content which could cause reputational damage or which could be deemed as libellous or defamatory. To do so puts you at risk of legal action and we may be obliged by law to disclose your personal data.