US website sued over cheat 'slur'

Started by Julian, Jul 01, 2006, 01:04 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Quentin0352

If you look at their policies, it pretty much shows their goal. My personal comments are itallic.

Quote
Do not post the names of alleged cheating women on this website! In other words, we don't want equality in the area of cheating to be exposed The names will automatically be deleted! www.DontDateHimGirl.com is for women to post the pictures and profiles of men who have allegedly cheated on them, NOT vice versa.
Do not post comments! If you have comments, please post them in our DDHG member forum or on our blog.
Keep it clean and respectful! No profanity! It will be deleted from the profile!  Yeah, we want to destroy lives in a RESPECTFUL way so it is harder to be challenged for what is said. Our lawyers pointed this out to us.
We do not remove profiles of the men in our database! We don't care if it is slander or lies, if we can screw up another man one way or another then it is good! If you have been posted to the site, you are entitled to e-mail a rebuttal to your profile by sending an e-mail request  to [email protected] !  Now we may or may not post the rebuttal at our discretion and if you don't like being slandered because you dumped her when she demanded more than you can afford, too bad, your male so suck it up! After all, we are just trying to help protect our sisters from you evil men.
DontDateHimGirl.com Content Monitors reserve the right to remove postings that violate these rules. DontDateHimGirl.com is monitored for content 24 hours a day. Postings deemed to have violated these rules will be removed.

specialopsdude

I am under the impression that the site posts names, faces, and places where the men live. The women posting the charges remain anonymous.

This is the crux of the issue, at least for me.

Claims like this, being very slanderous by nature, must be backed up by fact. The profiles of some men are causing harm to them in real life, creating problems with the ability to work and have a social life in some cases. In others, family members of those profiled are being effected as well. Who can say what is true and what is not?

Women can be very vindictive creatures, and allowing a site like this to slander people is not free speech. Slander is not protected speech, and I hope this group wins the suit against these 2-bit hags

Sir Farts-A-Lot

Quote from: "TheManOnTheStreet"
Other than that though, I don't want to see a regulated internet.  Just use the laws that we have on the books now when stuff like this comes up in other media outlets.  NY Times ring a bell?  Dan Rathers Anyone?

TMOTS


I think it's the location of the server that decides what is allowed to be on the site, for example, Kazaa is located across several countries and continents, and therefore is protected from copywrite laws (although he "The user did it, not me" defense still works good). I also think that we should be able to do whatever we want to take care of an evil internet site. When a website was posting information on the where-abouts of celebrities, random people gave falsified info. Which I think is great. I spam sites I dislike, I occasionally will post 1980x1200 sized pics over and over again in the attempt to crash a server. It's fun!
quote="CaptDMO"]As history has shown us, power is NEVER bestowed, it's taken and defended. "Empowerment" is merely a bone, thrown to appease the rabble. [/quote]

neonsamurai

Quote from: "specialopsdude"
Claims like this, being very slanderous by nature, must be backed up by fact. The profiles of some men are causing harm to them in real life, creating problems with the ability to work and have a social life in some cases. In others, family members of those profiled are being effected as well. Who can say what is true and what is not?

Women can be very vindictive creatures, and allowing a site like this to slander people is not free speech. Slander is not protected speech, and I hope this group wins the suit against these 2-bit hags


I agree. The bottom line for free speech is that you can be called up on what you've just said, so you'd better damn well make sure that you're right.

However what you've got with that website is a one-sided and potentially slanderous tool for spreading vicious rumour. If I decide to make up lies about someone at my work and spread them around the office, I'd better be prepared for the person to find out who started them. Then I'll have to defend what I've said or be made to look like the liar that I am. With the website in question there is no comeback. If a guy complains he can't mention the woman's name who slurred him (sorry fella, sight policy), making it a one-sided argument.

In the time I've been coming to SYG I've never seen anyone post the full names of wives or girlfriends in these threads, unless they're cutting and pasting from another (linked) source on the web. But the website in question possitively encourages it.
Dr. Kathleen Dixon, the Director of Women's Studies: "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech!"

Go Up