[OT] Liability of Moderator

[Chris]

On Wednesday, 9 October 2013 at 18:15:37 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 10/9/2013 2:01 AM, Chris wrote:
>> The question always remains what is libelous or abusive?
>
> It's usually pretty obvious if you apply common sense. I also 
> suggest simply googling for the what libel and slander actually 
> are (many people have false assumptions about that).

Yes and no. I know people who have taken or threatened to take 
legal action against others because they said something like "I 
don't think this is the best way to say or do it. I propose ..." 
Of course they will never succeed, but the hassle of having to 
deal with letters from solicitors is just annoying. I've seen the 
most ridiculous cases, things you couldn't make up. The problem 
is that unlike in the U.S. in the Republic of Ireland and GB the 
libel law is ridiculously overprotective. I do wonder how 
journalists cope with it.

Mind you, that you apply common sense does not mean that others 
do so too.


> Lawyers vary enormously in the quality of their advice. They're 
> a lot like programmers in that regard :-)

In fairness, it's not only the lawyers, it's also the legislation 
that is often highly ambiguous. So lawyer A tells you something, 
and lawyer B will tell you something completely different. That's 
why it's best to check out court rulings and the different 
interpretations judges give the law in question. Else you pay 
$500 and all you know is "it might but it might not be the case".

Anyway, it's got nothing to do with D.