@vintagecraze50 wrote:
Regarding opinions posted on the blog. Of what significance , helpfulness, to anyone someone blogging ‘DEVIL WENIG”, or many other comments similar to that on there. If I am running my own business on the internet and people put that stuff on there I am going to moderate it. The one who posted that could sue me for taking it off because people can sue you for anything, but may not win.
Anybody can sue anybody but that doesn't mean the court will hear it. The one who posted cannot sue you for removing comment just as they cannot sue Twitter for removing comment or eBay for removing comment or account(s). Can't even be assured this person who apparently attacked Wenig's character or others are not directly associated with the blog or forum, venue etc. itself. Happens ALL THE TIME except in PROFESSIONAL Journalism sites such as The Washington Post. Not real difficult for webmaster to create new accounts and use them as a mechanism of attack anonymously per se, happens all the time, every single day at who know's how many venues? I'm not saying that happened here but hey, anything is in the realms of possibilities.
I noted in prior post blog that was attacking our local schools, superintended, etc and its exactly what they did. The articles produced appeared as news reporting, the comments inflammatory started by accounts the webmasters created! Others of course then jump in. Council for the school district managed a court order against the host provider to get all the sites logs from inception which was then handed over to a digital forensics operation and it was crystal clear how the blog was operated. Say something against the blog owners, that's deleted as shown by SQL requests to the database.
Now all that and done, didn't matter as the bad actors employee's from the school district broke the law terrorizing the family owned the blog. But attempting sue the school district, well, nope, they did, it didn't fly and as a matter of fact as it all broke the community at large attacked the ()rap out of the family to the point they left.
Telltale signs especially in forums of journalistic bias are readily displayed in SQL database queries and posts but again that doesn't matter.
Here we have two business entities one of which is owned by it's principles that administrate it allowing or disallowing user content and creating their own. On the other side is a corporation who's principles are employee's and not owners of the corporation. The corporation is owned by shareholders and administrated by a board of directors.
Now if everyone set their hatred or love of eBay aside and in fact we wont even call it eBay. We'll call it "XYZ" and you the reader of this are a shareholder in the company or we can even make more simple, your the President of the company, you own it and have a handful of investors ok? You may or may not be involved in its daily operations ok?
Now, I run a blog and my blog claims be news albeit I am not a bonified, college educated journalist who never worked a day for an journalistic operation and my blog is a business. I want make money from advertisers or where-ever, donations... Doesnt matter, its a for profit venue.
My blog reports on you're company, sometimes favorable, sometimes not so much and of course then there are the commenters. Why I'm even using you're trademark company logo as well as others on my site without any particular authorization as head images to my blog posts. Now come the day I'm writing posts and some commenters begin attacking you and say you're second in command. Now you have no knowledge of it and quite frankly could care less even if you did. However, you're second in charge is angry and he decides to hatch a plan with other employee's to harass and even perhaps stalk me and mine.
It gets to the point me and mine are living in fear so we call in the authorities. They investigate and take down the perpetrators whom have they're day in court and are successfully prosecuted. You're second in charge claims not be a player in the scheme albeit other involved name him but there is no actual evidence of that and as such authorities do not go after him based on hearsay of the perpetrators. There simply exists no hard evidence and if authorities were to pursue him a judge likely find him not guilty and may well destroy the mans career in the process of the litigation.
You as the company principal entity say, "Welp! No! I'm buying out you're contract. Leave."
Now me and mine who own the blog decide we're suing the perpetrators and you're company for millions of dollars essentially suing you and you're investors for the actions that you knew nothing of. They're doing damage to you're business reputation both with customers (in this case buyers and sellers here at eBay) because me and mine feel as that everyone who owns, invests in you're business should be held accountable to the action of those employee's to the tune of perhaps as much as 60 million dollars.
It's also no secret my blog is one among tens of millions on the Internet some of which are business oriented trying make money and others not so much. Towards the money I've made well, I've no villa in the Caribbean.
Yes, my family suffered aspects of stress, terror, fear and more at the hands of you're employee's but I was never physically harmed short of near falling off my steps when I stepped in a pile of Dog poo left there. My family, well, we underwent this for a short time in scheme of things and yeah, we sought emotional help from the medical community. I've been seeing a therapist (go figure LOL... I'm sure some folks here reading this say, "Well it's about time!") and been on some medications and unfortunately those medications cause me to have sleeping problems and I'm not supposed to drive on them but hey, who listens to that stuff!?
Now being totally arbitrary in the above.... This is you're business and investors I'm suing, "You are the judge."
What are you going to award me if anything? Case law aside since none of us eagle beagle legals. Again its NOT eBay its YOU'RE business and do try put you're bias aside.
Now me... I'd be ABSOLUTELY APPAULED by the actions of you're employee's and in my suing them I'd certainly as "Judge" award damages of medical bills, any property damage and a suffering award commensurate with teaching each principal convicted bad actor a lesson. That award to be based on their income potentials as they existed prior to incarceration. In as far as the lawsuit against you're company I would award no damages to "ME" (Mr. Bloggette) as there is no proven linkage to you the company owner nor that of you're investors. There has already been damage done to those parties in respect to you're business reputation as a result of the actions of you're former employee's in the media. Furthermore as judge I find it distressing that "me" (LOL... Mr. Bloggette) would take this matter of civil suit to the likes of ABC Televisions 60 Minutes a widely viewed news oriented program further damaging you're companies reputation. As judge I could only construe this as an attempt to force you're company "XYZ" to be pressured into a settlement or to try force bias upon "(ME-ME) De' Court" to find "me" (Mr. Bloggette's) favor.
Now that's just me... I'm not a judge, I know not case law nor every parties circumstances but I know anytime there is wrong in any equation it never makes for right.
And as judge presiding over this posting whereby Khoros (God) may well delete it or me (Eeek!) I think everyone should put aside their biases and remember if you leave Corn Flakes in a bowl of milk too long they will indeed get soggy!
albertabrightalberta
mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999
