User talk:Caius
(→libel & defamation) |
|||
| Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
Just out of idle curiosity, of course, are there circumstances under which calling someone a 'terrorist' might be libel and/or defamation? --<font face="Monaco,Consolas,Courier New,Courier,Fixed">[[User:Jtl|jtl]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:Jtl|talk]]</sup> 01:27, 26 May 2007 (CDT) | Just out of idle curiosity, of course, are there circumstances under which calling someone a 'terrorist' might be libel and/or defamation? --<font face="Monaco,Consolas,Courier New,Courier,Fixed">[[User:Jtl|jtl]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:Jtl|talk]]</sup> 01:27, 26 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
:Probably not... would you believe we didn't cover libel, slander, et al in Torts? I had an awful Torts professor. FAIL, NYU, fail... but I'll look it up. I think my Lexis account is still valid for the summer?-'''Ames[http://www.rationalwiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:AmesG G]''' 01:32, 26 May 2007 (CDT) | :Probably not... would you believe we didn't cover libel, slander, et al in Torts? I had an awful Torts professor. FAIL, NYU, fail... but I'll look it up. I think my Lexis account is still valid for the summer?-'''Ames[http://www.rationalwiki.com/index.php?title=User_talk:AmesG G]''' 01:32, 26 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
| + | :: If I might contribute my two cents. Seriously alleging that someone was a terrorist would almost certainly be regarded as defamatory by any court in the Western world. And I so advise. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 01:37, 26 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 06:37, 26 May 2007
Speak to Me! (haha, get it?)
[[1]]
Contents |
Start!
What do you want me to say? --Kels 19:27, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
Everything is still there, it will all be set right momentarily :). Good to see you on RW 2.0 Tmtoulouse 19:37, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
Check youre email, counsellor.--PalMD-Talk 20:15, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
- Thanks, comrade!-AmesG 00:55, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
law
I'm busy as fuck, you're busy as fuck. We still want to get some top-quality shit on here. What's your vision? --Huey gunna getcha 21:55, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
- As of tomorrow, all I have to do is work 8:30 - 5:30 :-). Then I can contribute!-AmesG 23:16, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
- I too have an interest in the law and would like to contribute. I hereby elect you head of the law category. Could you devise some sort of very clever structure for the category and advise me what I might usefully do by way of contribution. --Horace 21:35, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
Machinations
I have a few ideas up my sleeve for getting people interested in our project. At the moment I am trying to work on getting a solid article about the creation museum to submit to PZ Myers carnival. Myers gets about 20,000-30,000 views a day. Tmtoulouse 21:57, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
- I wouldn't mind helping, but my brain hurts User:PalMD
- I see your sock got canned. :( RAVEN 00:07, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
- Yeah, dude. WEAK. Just for trying to push RationalWiki. I wasn't sure how much they'd read of the old RW, since they hadn't preemptively banned him! So I tried to deny it for a bit... but... I knew it was futile... sigh :-) -AmesG 00:09, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
- FYI...Ames, all of it. Copied ever blessed page of 1.0, and some of them even before you guys had a chance to delete them, wild as the place was then, lol. --TK /MyTalk 02:04, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
Need help already...and from all places
Can we remove information that may identify me? Thanks. HGHeartOfGold talk 02:06, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
- Gosh! Here for a matter of an hour, and already one blaming me for leaving! A new record! --TK /MyTalk 02:08, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
- I am not blaming you. Where did I blame you? I resigned over a quantity v. quality perspective--which is a difference in values, and I am not sure you and I disagree on this. Don't misconstrue my presence here as intentional retaliation. If I wrote anything that appears to blame you, let me know where, and I will clarify it. HGHeartOfGold talk 02:16, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
Hey HoG! Hope you got helped; sorry I can't help now. Off to work. I promise I will try when I get back.-AmesG 08:01, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
your essay
Yo G, I should be working on merging that essay of yours with a copy of Andy's tonight sometime. Sorry I didn't get to it sooner. humanbe in 19:53, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
- Talk to me. I have been working with a "current" version of ashfly's essay, and he not only has added some new gripes, but the order has changed (he put new ones at the top). I'll have all the "text" available to me at user:human/sandbox2 by the time you read this, but you should guide me how to move it around (I have an easier to work on text version on my desktop) and add some new comments after that. OR, if you have the version you were mirroring bookmarked somewhere I can use his text from that (never mind, yours was dated 4/9 or so, he moved the file around 5/1 so history is probably lost). I think it would be cooler if you update it, of course. But you might also have a life, eh? humanbe in 21:17, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
Human rocks. That setup is real sexy.-AmesG 23:39, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
gay is ok template
Hey, some of us were using that the way it was! Can you make another one? like gay-lawrence or something? Change the colors too, so we can stack 'em and have it be purdy! humanbe in 23:36, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
- Yeah, sorry man, now I feel badly :-( :-( :-(. I'll change it posthaste!-AmesG 23:37, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
CWV
If you have some time, and wnat to offer constructive advice, please see User:HeartOfGold/ChristianWorldViewEncyclopedia. Thanks. HGHeartOfGold talk 01:06, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Physics
yo, i've done a postgrad work on theoretical physics. if you want a proper article on QM and ramifications of altering constants i'll break out my books in a few days time (tues) and we can get down to business... Airdish 02:34, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
- That would be great Airdish! Try and get in a bit about how physics goes a bit of the way towards disproving God as well. -Icewedge 02:36, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Airdish, I would LOVE that. Please let me help you but I don't know much :-( .-AmesG 07:57, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
- I think "disproving God" is probably not a reachable goal. Showing him as "improbable" is easier.DocSock 07:59, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Agreed. I do want to see the physical constant page though-AmesG 08:01, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
I lost my PW
I lost my password for HG (HeartOfGold). I changed it and forgot to save my password file. How do I reset it? I do have an email set up on my other account. Thanks. HG2 11:04, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Sock oooooh, ban him!!!--CatWatcher 11:06, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
faulty research
Ames G, In your zeal to slander, you erred with this insinuation,
- Many creationists are in favor of the suppression of all dissident thought. Otherwise, the obvious flaws in their "logic" might be revealed. They also fear dissident thought, and in fact any difference whatsoever, and applaud cp:user:RobS|those who censor dissent. [2]
Please produce one singular edit Rob Smith ever made to any Creationist, or Evolution article. And note, I am a public person whose real identity is known, as yours is, hence Ames can not claim immunity under to Sec. 230 of the Internet Decency Act. Thank you. RobS 11:48, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
- Linking to my user/sandbox seems odd, why didn't you link to the older live version? Anyway (dunks my head in a nice cold bucket of water), I checked out your edit (removing the ref to you) and even on my power trip I saw no reason to argue with it. It still says what it meant, without the unsourced naming. Has someone reverted it? If so, I would expect a ref link to a diff at CP. If not, well, you fixed it and made it better. I came off my power trip and liked what you did. Just my .02, is all. humanbe in 16:28, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
- If we're going to get all legal-like, "Many creationists are in favor of the suppression of all dissident thought." He doesn't mention Creation/Evolution directly. "But it can be assumed from context!" one might reply. Later in the article he makes the point that "conservative" and "creationist" are conflated. Whether that's true or not, he certainly seems to believe it. So, RobS doesn't need to be shown making an edit to a Creationist or Evolution article, but to a conservative or liberal article.
- I have no dog in this fight, so I'm not going to go do the research, but if he's edited at CP much at all the odds are good that this has occurred. Were they censoring? I also don't know that.
- AndyS has done these conversations no favors by pushing rules of trial law into conversations between "civilians," but if them's the rules then let's play, I guess. Aziraphale 17:06, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
RobS, you're right. I'll remove the reference, and I sincerely apologize. However, I take your language as doubly threatening - first, threatening me with my "real name," and second, by threatening legal action (?). Repeated legal threats will not be tolerated on RW. Be advised. But, still, I apologize sincerely.-AmesG 21:44, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
- I notice CP Sysops are being politically profiled in the fascism article. It may be helpful to advise your contributors on Sec. 230. The Wikimmunity article is available on my userpage. It only applies to the hosting service, not a person who can be identified as posting libelous and defamatory content in an open forum. RobS 10:37, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
RobS, I see you have retired from RW. That's probably for the better. You seem to have some... err... issues, and perhaps I didn't make myself clear, but legal threats are not to be tolerated here. I'll pull the "Act" you cite tomorrow and do a bit of research on it, but I pulled the law review article you cite. Did you... read it? Did you know that law reviews are not authoritative, or binding law, but mere suggestions? I don't think you knew any of this...-AmesG 01:22, 26 May 2007 (CDT)
Temptation
It was too great--had to block you. I know you'd do the same for me ;) Flippin;-) 15:26, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
HEY!
You may not have noticed my comment under the heading "law" above. --Horace 23:32, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
HAHAHAH!!!!! SO SORRY HORACE. My time here has been short lately, will you forgive me? As of right now I have no clue where TK and RobS are... could you fill me in on some exciting stuff that's happened here recently? I dunno what might be useful... but I'll fill in the page Law and let's use its talk page as a planning page for what articles are needed.-AmesG 23:40, 25 May 2007 (CDT) WTF was that weird-ass discussion about above?--PalMD-Talk 23:53, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
libel & defamation
Just out of idle curiosity, of course, are there circumstances under which calling someone a 'terrorist' might be libel and/or defamation? --jtltalk 01:27, 26 May 2007 (CDT)
- Probably not... would you believe we didn't cover libel, slander, et al in Torts? I had an awful Torts professor. FAIL, NYU, fail... but I'll look it up. I think my Lexis account is still valid for the summer?-AmesG 01:32, 26 May 2007 (CDT)
- If I might contribute my two cents. Seriously alleging that someone was a terrorist would almost certainly be regarded as defamatory by any court in the Western world. And I so advise. --Horace 01:37, 26 May 2007 (CDT)