Free Speech is dead....no right to your own view

Mr Davidson · Post by **Mr Davidson** » Sun 20 May 2018 5:03 pm

'Six years in prison for posting on social media'........ George Orwell (aka Eric Blair) was watching.....

No opportunity to share views no matter how unpalatable in a debating forum.... in case someone is 'harmed' simply because they dislike someone's view or because they are 'offended'. Life is about being offended and of course a learning opportunity is presented from the consequences of the latter...we are going to be governed in the future if we are not careful by 'snowflakes' who have no back bone and cannot tolerate or allow anyone to think/act/disagree with their unipolar and potentially fascistic view. Rotted in political ly correct mission creep as a form of controlling free speech and the mainstream 'on message' narrative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=somLOE-Z7QI

Ragged Robin · Post by **Ragged Robin** » Tue 22 May 2018 1:01 pm

Rather ironic is it not, that there are no replies to a post headed "Free speech is dead - no right to your own view" on a forum where several people have now explained they do not post for fear of personal verbal attack, many have left and is now becoming what I warned - an electronc exchange and mart!

Iam among those who no longer can afford to waste time and becoming depressed by attacks on my every suggestion.

However as far as the above is concerned if this were not the case, I would need to know a lot more about "The sentencing council" before commenting. The print was too blurred to read much, but I could see nothing to indicate that it is an official document which the Judiciary are obliged to take notice of??? and may itself be propaganda?

tutor4u · Post by **tutor4u** » Tue 22 May 2018 3:32 pm

The Public Order Guidelines are for consultation only, but judging from our PC society its too vague and open too many interpretations. Full document link below, very worrying proposal. But only my point of view !!!

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp ... on_web.pdf

PoshinDevon · Post by **PoshinDevon** » Tue 22 May 2018 6:49 pm

Ragged Robin wrote:Rather ironic is it not, that there are no replies to a post headed "Free speech is dead - no right to your own view" on a forum where several people have now explained they do not post for fear of personal verbal attack, many have left and is now becoming what I warned - an electronc exchange and mart!

Iam among those who no longer can afford to waste time and becoming depressed by attacks on my every suggestion.

However as far as the above is concerned if this were not the case, I would need to know a lot more about "The sentencing council" before commenting. The print was too blurred to read much, but I could see nothing to indicate that it is an official document which the Judiciary are obliged to take notice of??? and may itself be propaganda?

Soner, the forum owner has already posted on another thread that if any member feels that they have been verbally attacked on the forum that it should be reported to any moderator. The forum rules are very clear on this.

As far as the forum being an electronic Exchange and Mart, that is just one very useful function of a forum. In order to keep this forum running for the benefit of others the revenue obtained from those advertising or buying is vital. The forum is for many in North Cyprus the first place they look for advice, items wanted, for sale etc and often members do say how useful, friendly and helpful the forum is.

Of course the forum can be used as a platform for debate and discussion and often has been. Not everyone agrees with a members point of view but providing the posts are within the forum rules the discussion will be allowed to continue. If the topic is of little interest then it will naturally drop down the board.

I sometimes think that as the weather gets warmer and people are out socialising more they tend to not visit the forum as regularly as they might. However, once the weather gets cooler and the nights draw in people often find more time for discussion and debate. Just my thoughts.

jofra · Post by **jofra** » Tue 22 May 2018 7:39 pm

PoshinDevon wrote: As far as the forum being an electronic Exchange and Mart, that is just one very useful function of a forum.....

But surely this aspect is generally confined to those appropriate sections that were demanded by various sources... ?

I sometimes think that as the weather gets warmer and people are out socialising more they tend to not visit the forum as regularly as they might.

As for us swallows - this one (at least) visits every day when back in the UK, just to keep a "feel of what's going on" and not necessarily contribute - it's like sitting in a cafe or in the park, just watching and listening to life around you....
Here, there, everywhere there are those who insist on making their views known and disappointed if/when they think no-one is there - just because there may at times be more listeners than talkers does not mean the forum is dying...
Thanks Soner and Co. - long may it flourish!

Ragged Robin · Post by **Ragged Robin** » Tue 22 May 2018 9:28 pm

Forget it - I already made my decision to no longer partake after a post which upset me so much I decided I did not wish to be connected any more and I should have stuck to it : it was just that the irony of this particular subject struck me, and still does. No one replied to the original post about freedom of speach., but rushed to the support of the forum . I have already explained at length several times why I am not happy about moderation here and have no intention , even if I had the time, to repeat it

Enjoy your electronic Exchange and Mart.

mrsgee · Post by **mrsgee** » Tue 22 May 2018 9:59 pm

RR, with respect I think you need to stop feeling like a victim... this thread, yes, started about freedom of speech which works both ways, people can say what they think, and if you feel that is attacking you that is very sad. I think that the majority of people who use this site are happy for what you term 'exchange and mart', because essentially that is what people overall want, some help, advice, pointing in the right direction. Maybe, and please do not take this the wrong way, you, or someone else might like to create your own forum to discuss issues that are important to you. A debate forum maybe... just a thought.

PoshinDevon · Post by **PoshinDevon** » Tue 22 May 2018 10:20 pm

jofra wrote:
PoshinDevon wrote: As far as the forum being an electronic Exchange and Mart, that is just one very useful function of a forum.....
But surely this aspect is generally confined to those appropriate sections that were demanded by various sources... ?

Agree. The various sections on the forum have been discussed in the past and questions have been asked as to whether they are necessary. On balance we believe that having the different sections does help.

I sometimes think that as the weather gets warmer and people are out socialising more they tend to not visit the forum as regularly as they might.
As for us swallows - this one (at least) visits every day when back in the UK, just to keep a "feel of what's going on" and not necessarily contribute - it's like sitting in a cafe or in the park, just watching and listening to life around you....
Here, there, everywhere there are those who insist on making their views known and disappointed if/when they think no-one is there - just because there may at times be more listeners than talkers does not mean the forum is dying...
Thanks Soner and Co. - long may it flourish!

We are also swallows, spending about 6-8 mths on island. The forum along with other sources of news about North Cyprus posted in the weekly news update keeps us up to speed with what’s happening on island whilst we are away and is very useful.

jofra · Post by **jofra** » Tue 22 May 2018 10:39 pm

Ragged Robin wrote: ...Enjoy your electronic Exchange and Mart.

Thank you, I do and will - as (I assume) do the fifty-three registered users shown as online as I write at 22:35 UK time/00:35 TRNC time....
PID - re local news; I assume you know Cyprus Today is now available online in PressDisplay?

PoshinDevon · Post by **PoshinDevon** » Tue 22 May 2018 10:59 pm

Jofra- thanks for link.

We try and follow the news both north and south via the internet. This makes sure we get a “balanced’ view .......or as balanced as it can be in Cyprus! More news and information with useful links posted by forum members is a great help also.

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Wed 23 May 2018 9:48 am

I'm a great believer of the Evelyn Beatrice Hall quote that is often misattributed to Voltaire; "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

It does seem though for many, the idea of free speech is for them to say what they like with no-one allowed to challenge their view.
Challenging an opinion is not closing down a debate it is starting one.
It's not much of a game of tennis if no-one is allowed to return a serve.

erol · Post by **erol** » Wed 23 May 2018 10:25 am

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:It does seem though for many, the idea of free speech is for them to say what they like with no-one allowed to challenge their view. Challenging an opinion is not closing down a debate it is starting one.It's not much of a game of tennis if no-one is allowed to return a serve.

It has been my experience that the phenomenon of some one seeing / interpreting something said to them as a being a 'personal attack' whilst being oblivious to appreciating that the things they say to others could also be seen as such, is not uncommon.

On the issue of the right to free speech, this right not does give me the right to enter some one's house and start regaling them with my views on any given subject. As far as I am concerned this forum is 'Soner's house' and we chose to participate here or not as guests at his invitation. Thus I do not believe I or anyone else has a right to free speech here in this forum. I would defend anyone's right to set up their own forum or website in order to exercise their right to free speech and oppose efforts to stop them doing so. I would not defend some one's right to free speech here on this forum because I do not believe anyone but Soner actually has such a right, here in this specific forum. In reality I think Soner runs a 'house' that is very tolerant and supportive of 'free speech' generally but for me the dgree to which he does or does not do this is his choice to make and I have no right to demand he run's his house any way than other than he himself wants to.

Mr Chinnery · Post by **Mr Chinnery** » Wed 23 May 2018 12:00 pm

Errol, just so I am clear on this.
If you invited someone into your house you would not want that person to engage in conversation in a subject you don’t approve of . Is that what you are saying?
Also you say Soner runs a house that is very tolerant of Free Speech, but that cannot be right because you said you or anyone else does not have a right to free speech on this forum.
I am just a little confused with you comments.

erol · Post by **erol** » Wed 23 May 2018 12:28 pm

Mr Chinnery wrote:Errol, just so I am clear on this.
If you invited someone into your house you would not want that person to engage in conversation in a subject you don’t approve of . Is that what you are saying?

No I am saying that the person invited does not have a right (legal or moral entitlement) to say anything they want whilst a guest in my house and that if I were to ask them to stop or leave this would not be an infringement of their right (legal or moral entitlement) to free speech. I believe they have a right to 'free speech' but that does not mean a right to say anything they want any where they want without any restriction (imo).

Mr Chinnery wrote:Also you say Soner runs a house that is very tolerant of Free Speech, but that cannot be right because you said you or anyone else does not have a right to free speech on this forum. I am just a little confused with you comments.

I indeed do think Soner runs a forum (house) that is very tolerant in regards of what can be said or not said but I believe that here, in this place, in his 'house' so to speak, the decision as to what he decides to allow or not allow is by rights his and as far as he does or might decide to limits what a given person is allowed to say here, in this place, such would is not an infringement of that person's right to free speech. Sure it is a limitation on their free speech, here and in this place, but it is not an infringement of their right to free speech. Any attempt by Soner to limit what they can say in a place or house that he does not own or in a suitable public space would be an infringement of that right imo. Stopping someone from saying (loudly) anything they like in say a public library is not imo infringing their right to free speech. Stopping someone from saying what they like in a cinema whilst a film is playing is not infringing their right to free speech imo. Where someone wants and tries to exercise their free speech is imo a relevant element in determining if that persons rights are being infringed or not. So for me there is no contradiction in claiming I absolutely support the notion that people have a right, an entitlement, to free speech and also claiming that Soner has every right to decide what he allows people to say or not say here on this forum.

Do you get me now ?

Mr Chinnery · Post by **Mr Chinnery** » Wed 23 May 2018 3:14 pm

Gosh Erol, were you a MP in a previous life !
Free Speech is exactly that Free Speech. A person cannot say they believe in Free Speech and then say ‘ but’ you have to put restrictions on it, its not then Free Speech, Its a bit like saying’ i believe in women's rights ‘but’ giving them equal pay is a bit much.
However, restrictions are put on what people say subject to the law. Although the law with regard to free speech seems to be being watered down by the easily offended contacting the police over a few daft comments they read on social
media.
I just hope that in the future we don't all go down the road of some countries where persons are thrown in jail or fined
because they say something someone else doesn't like. But i do fear that is what is going to happen if people don't stand up for Free Speech.
If you invited the person into your house and a conversation took place which you didn't like surely you debate the subject not ask them to leave ( as is your right ) this is whats happening in Universities persons are being ‘ No Platformed’ because others don't agree with them.
Dinner parties are very boring if everybody agrees with everyone else throughout the evening.

erol · Post by **erol** » Wed 23 May 2018 4:35 pm

Mr Chinnery wrote:Gosh Erol, were you a MP in a previous life !

Is that a personal attack ?

Mr Chinnery wrote:Free Speech is exactly that Free Speech. A person cannot say they believe in Free Speech and then say ‘ but’ you have to put restrictions on it, its not then Free Speech, Its a bit like saying’ i believe in women's rights ‘but’ giving them equal pay is a bit much.

No it is about distinguishing from the act (speaking) and the 'right'. So if I stand up in a cinema whilst a film is playing and start exercising 'free speech' and get ejected from the cinema for doing so, would my right to free speech have been denied ? Or if I come round to your house and start telling you that Brexit is a bad idea or that God is the only way to salvation and you shut the door in my face , would that be you denying me my right to free speech ?

Mr Chinnery wrote:However, restrictions are put on what people say subject to the law.

Exactly

Mr Chinnery wrote: I just hope that in the future we don't all go down the road of some countries where persons are thrown in jail or fined
because they say something someone else doesn't like.

Soner deciding here in this place and only this place what is allowed and not allowed is to my mind in no way comparable to a law being passed that prohibits free speech. They are entirely different things and for me to confuse one with the other does not help us protect against the dangers of the later at all.

Mr Chinnery wrote: But i do fear that is what is going to happen if people don't stand up for Free Speech.
If you invited the person into your house and a conversation took place which you didn't like surely you debate the subject not ask them to leave ( as is your right ) this is whats happening in Universities persons are being ‘ No Platformed’ because others don't agree with them.
Dinner parties are very boring if everybody agrees with everyone else throughout the evening.

Again you are imo confusing the act of speaking with the right to free speach. I have very lively dinner parties thank you very much and I welcome debate and differing opinions and view points. But that is, in my house, my choice. The idea that someone has the RIGHT to say anything they want in my house no matter how offensive to me personally (like say calling my mother bad names) and I have to allow them to do so, can not ask them to stop saying such things or to leave because if I did I am infringing their right to free speech is to meme utter nonsense. It is a demand for right without responsibility in effect.

Is me saying I find that idea of yours 'utter nonsense' a 'personal attack' ?

erol · Post by **erol** » Wed 23 May 2018 4:50 pm

Or to put it another way

Would I support a law that said if someone comes to my house and I open the door to them and they start telling me that God is the only way to salvation, I have to by law listen to what they say and can not legally close the door on them until they have finished 'speaking freely' ? No I would not.

Would I support a law that said no one is allow to say God is the only way to salvation anywhere, not in speakers corner, not on their own website or facebook or twitter page or in their own house ? No I would not,

The idea that anything that prevents people from the act of speaking (to others) regardless of place or situation is by definition an infringement of that's persons right to free speech is to me to just fundamentally misunderstand what the right is and is not.

Just my own personal opinion of curse.

Mr Chinnery · Post by **Mr Chinnery** » Wed 23 May 2018 5:18 pm

Erol,
just to comment on your last comment re calling names. If some one bad mouthed you or your relatives of course
they would be shown the door I am not suggesting otherwise, but they should not be prevented from saying it in the first place, yes they are rude and most persons would not associate with people like that.
My concern would be that you ended up calling the Police because someone insulted a relative and the person saying the unpleasant things was taken to jail.
As for the forum yes Soner has every right to ban people for making comments that are judged illegal by law, not because a person is offended by say a joke. That to me is stifling Free Speech.

And on a lighter note, if you think what i have previously said is a ‘personal attack’ - I rest my case- although being accused of being an ex MP ? even i could wince at that one.
And to end -
You saying my idea is ‘utter nonsense’ and ‘do i find that a personal attack’ , Of course not its what debate is about.

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Wed 23 May 2018 5:32 pm

Does anyone remember the then BNP leader Nick Griffin's appearance on Question Time a few years back?
Many wanted him banned from the programme but he appeared, the viewing figures trebled and showed himself to be an odious, shifty, incoherent, muttering little weasel.
I'm sure anyone who might have been thinking he had any point to make must have realised he didn't.
Or the snowflakes could have censored him and made him a far more important figure than he was.

mrsgee · Post by **mrsgee** » Wed 23 May 2018 5:37 pm

Just to add a bit of fun..... I actually find the term 'snowflakes' derogatory and quite possibly not politically correct, and maybe even racist..... although snow is obviously white. so yes, racist...... can someone get a grip here.....

erol · Post by **erol** » Wed 23 May 2018 5:39 pm

Mr Chinnery wrote:As for the forum yes Soner has every right to ban people for making comments that are judged illegal by law, not because a person is offended by say a joke. That to me is stifling Free Speech.

I think he has every right to ban people from here for any reason he wants because here is 'his house'. The idea that this is some kind of 'public space' is to me not the case. It may appear that way and people may believe it to be but it is not. It exists only because Soner alone decides to make it exist. If he were to close the forum entirely, would that be denying people their right to free speech ? I do not think so. As long as they can go and create their OWN site and say what they want there, then they have their right to free speech.

Mr Chinnery wrote:And on a lighter note, if you think what i have previously said is a ‘personal attack’ - I rest my case- although being accused of being an ex MP ? even i could wince at that one.
And to end -
You saying my idea is ‘utter nonsense’ and ‘do i find that a personal attack’ , Of course not its what debate is about.

I personally do not think either is a personal attack or not ones that warrant censure under the forum's rules of 'no personal attacks' but my experience tells me that some people can and would consider such 'personal attacks' and that some consider such personal attacks when against them but not when they use them against others. In this place though I think Soner has every right to both set the rule 'no personal attacks' and to be the judge as to if something is a 'personal attack' or not. I also think he does where necessary make such judgements in a remarkable balanced and fair way but he is not obliged to do thus. Here in the house he built , created and maintains he can make such judgements as arbitrarily as he likes and the only right we have as guests in his house is to either participate here or not, as we like.

PoshinDevon · Post by **PoshinDevon** » Wed 23 May 2018 6:10 pm

erol wrote:
Mr Chinnery wrote:As for the forum yes Soner has every right to ban people for making comments that are judged illegal by law, not because a person is offended by say a joke. That to me is stifling Free Speech.
I think he has every right to ban people from here for any reason he wants because here is 'his house'. The idea that this is some kind of 'public space' is to me not the case. It may appear that way and people may believe it to be but it is not. It exists only because Soner alone decides to make it exist. If he were to close the forum entirely, would that be denying people their right to free speech ? I do not think so. As long as they can go and create their OWN site and say what they want there, then they have their right to free speech.

Mr Chinnery wrote:And on a lighter note, if you think what i have previously said is a ‘personal attack’ - I rest my case- although being accused of being an ex MP ? even i could wince at that one.
And to end -
You saying my idea is ‘utter nonsense’ and ‘do i find that a personal attack’ , Of course not its what debate is about.
I personally do not think either is a personal attack or not ones that warrant censure under the forum's rules of 'no personal attacks' but my experience tells me that some people can and would consider such 'personal attacks' and that some consider such personal attacks when against them but not when they use them against others. In this place though I think Soner has every right to both set the rule 'no personal attacks' and to be the judge as to if something is a 'personal attack' or not. I also think he does where necessary make such judgements in a remarkable balanced and fair way but he is not obliged to do thus. Here in the house he built , created and maintains he can make such judgements as arbitrarily as he likes and the only right we have as guests in his house is to either participate here or not, as we like.

Soner created this forum at his expense, effort and huge amount of time, therefore it is only right that he has the final say on who and what is posted on his forum. As moderators we try to support him in his efforts to keep the forum on an even keel so to speak. Whilst moderators can and do make decisions regarding posts/members on the forum, it is rightly Soners’ decision to override or reverse any decisions that we may make, it has happened. Also more often than not there Is discussion on what course of action should be taken and we are all free to express our opinion - we do not always agree but the casting vote is rightly with Soner.

It is a personal choice whether or not to sign up to the forum and no one is forced to join. You do not even have post or take part in discussion. Indeed I know of a few members who just use the forum to search for information, advice, keep up to speed with what is happening on island or recommendations of tradespeople. Those that find the forum restrictive; not to their liking or is not the debating platform they thought it was don’t have to read the posts and have the choice to leave if they so wish. As far as debating is concerned just because someone disagrees with a point of view does not mean it is a personal attack. Of course we all believe that our point of view is the correct one and can be a little put out if someone disagrees, however that does not constitute a personal attack. If anyone starts off a debate they should expect a response from those that disagree, they may also get a reply from those who support their train of thought. If you are a sensitive person then engaging in debate where your views will be examined, picked apart and challenged is probably not for you. It’s called debating and providing the comments are kept within the forum rules then the debate will be allowed to run.

At the end of the day anyone is free to set up their own forum which will take up their time, effort, expense and no doubt a lot of worry and headaches. I maintain that on the whole this forum well run and is a providing a great, varied service to anyone with an interest in North Cyprus.

Mr Chinnery · Post by **Mr Chinnery** » Wed 23 May 2018 6:16 pm

Erol,
My comments are aimed at the wider world not just this Forum. Its a debate that affects a lot of people in the world
particularly those that don't have a voice or do but cannot say anything for fear of reprisals.

Once the right to say what you want gets taken away from everyone as some people would wish it will be a sad day.

But the occasional debate with a difference on a ‘Forum’ can only be a good thing, I hope so anyway.

Ragged Robin · Post by **Ragged Robin** » Wed 23 May 2018 6:52 pm

So what would you do if you were in someone else's house - on invitation actually - and someone said something that you so wholeheartedly disagreed with, was against your priciples and disapproved of that you did not want to be associated with a person holding those views? Furthermore that person had been invited by the host to lead the debate . Any option other than leaving the house? So its goodbye from me.

By the way , I have no objection to exchange and mart per se. But I was persuaded to join because it was a sort of debating society on subjects of interest to me. Now the for sale and wanted are the main focus of the forum and debates rare and prejudiced.

Post by **Soner** » Wed 23 May 2018 7:08 pm

The forum had been set up to be used by members of all interests. Be it buying and selling, be it debating, be it interest in IT, Satelite, internet, pool maintenance, holidays, animal welfare.... the list goes on. No body has been forced to read or enter a category that they have no interest in. Your finger controls the mouse that you click.

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Wed 23 May 2018 7:57 pm

Ragged Robin wrote:
debates rare and prejudiced.

So if an opinion differs to yours it is prejudiced?

If we all had the same opinion it wouldn’t be much of a debate.

erol · Post by **erol** » Wed 23 May 2018 8:53 pm

Mr Chinnery wrote:Erol,
My comments are aimed at the wider world not just this Forum. Its a debate that affects a lot of people in the world
particularly those that don't have a voice or do but cannot say anything for fear of reprisals.

Once the right to say what you want gets taken away from everyone as some people would wish it will be a sad day.

But the occasional debate with a difference on a ‘Forum’ can only be a good thing, I hope so anyway.

I agree the issue of a right to free speech in the wider context than specifically here on this forum is indeed a very important issue and something to be valued and protected. For me conflating this wider issue with what I consider to be the mistaken belief that individuals here on this forum do have and should have a right , an entitlement, to say what ever they want, here specifically, actually does nothing that helps the protection of the right to free speech in the widest sense and in some ways detracts from that defence. For me to be best able to defend the right to free speech you need to understand and be very clear about what the right is and means and should mean and what it is not and does not mean. That is just my own personal opinion and view.

jofra · Post by **jofra** » Wed 23 May 2018 10:39 pm

Just to muddy the waters/clarify the issue/stir up the controversy/promote discussion -

"Rights"?
there is no such thing; only (in different countries/cultures) legally authorised "concessions", which can and are changed at a government's/ruler's will...

A fictional character said -
"....'unalienable rights.' Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die if he is to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'?
As to liberty, the heroes who signed that great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is always unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it is always vanquished. Of all the so-called 'natural human rights' that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost."

Perhaps a fictional character, but...
A drunk driver on the same road as you; a "high" mugger/burglar with a knife; leaking gas; faulty/failed electric wiring... Tell them about your "rights"...
On non-lethal subjects, I will not even bother to regale to you the "rights" that my local council say I have, but have been overridden many times over the years by that same council because an international company have "contributed" to that council's facilities and budget....
I was first taught over forty years ago that I have no "rights"....

"...words are cheap..."

tutor4u · Post by **tutor4u** » Fri 25 May 2018 5:13 pm

The Public Order Guidelines for magistrates in the UK, how does that fit in with your perception of what is defined as Free Speech, in today's modern society when using social media? mmmm We are watching you !!!!

tomsteel · Post by **tomsteel** » Fri 25 May 2018 6:00 pm

Just a thought. 'Free speech.' You are at liberty to say/write what you like, when you like, where you like, why you like and how you like. However, YOU are responsible for your actions and if this constitutes libel/defamation or is against the law of that nation, expect repercussions to ensue. Responsibility is attached to this supposed 'right.' Back to the naughty step.

turtle · Post by **turtle** » Fri 25 May 2018 9:49 pm

If you want to talk about the death of free speech in the UK then just read about the total media ban on the Tommy Robinson incident earlier today...the UK has today become a police state.....sad day for the free press today in the UK.

SatelliteCyprus · Post by **SatelliteCyprus** » Sat 26 May 2018 6:33 am

Members of forums such as this who want to be able to speak freely should publish their names and addresses and declare that 'they' are the publisher of their comments. They will soon find out that they have to think twice before speaking freely (publishing comments).

This, however, 'still' does not protect the owner of a forum such as this, from liability in the event that one of their Members says something that they shouldn't.

Secondly, you cannot run a forum such as this, which allows Members to post anonymously and then, allow those Members to post comments (published by the owner of the forum) which are defamatory, libelous, or 'malicious' - well you can, if you don't mind suffering the consequences.

This problem is easily sorted out - don't allow Members to register anonymously BUT the owner of such forums know that this stops potential Members from registering which reduces traffic and advertising revenue. In allowing Members to register anonymously they are being complicit.

The problem is that a few Members with hidden ulterior motives use platforms such as this to anonymously (but not necessarily) attack other Members against whom they hold a grudge (for whatever reason) AND that a few 'drunk' Members with temporarily impaired judgement periodically pop their head up from behind their glass of Gin to splurge some sort of 'nonsense'

Lastly, if the owner of a forum such as this doesn't 'equally' and fairly' apply their rules to 'all' members and further, blatantly allows certain 'favoured' Members more leeway than others, then they deserve (imo) as much hassle as this causes them and quite honestly, it amuses me to see them squirm as they 'try' to maintain the service and the few bob that they receive in advertising revenue - if this was me, I'd have to ask myself if it is really worth it and if it is, then, I would employ and pay someone to 'properly' moderate.

No further comment , or discussion from me on this subject

Keithcaley · Post by **Keithcaley** » Sat 26 May 2018 7:48 am

I think that most of what Satellite Cyprus said about anonymity and accountability in post no. 32 applies to all Social Media, including Facebook, Twitter etc.

How much effort should the 'Platform Owner' invest in verifying the identity of applicants who wish to register?

Is an easily acquired Gmail address sufficient?

A 'made up' name?

A 'photo lifted from the Internet?

Should users be allowed to hide their real name from the rest of the membership?

Or, to satisfy the accountability and responsibility that goes with the 'right' of 'Freedom to say what you think', should the Platform Owner exercise the same level of diligence as a Bank, and demand Passport, Utility bill with an actual street address etc., and insist that all users display their real names and an actual 'photo? - and possibly cross-check I.P. addresses for duplicate accounts, and check for anonymising 'tricks' such as using VPNs and other technical subterfuge?

Don't ask me, 'cos I'm only asking the question - I have no idea what the answer is!

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Sat 26 May 2018 7:57 am

SatelliteCyprus wrote:
allow those Members to post comments (published by the owner of the forum) which are defamatory, libelous, or 'malicious' - well you can, if you don't mind suffering the consequences.

I've not been on here long but i've not seen any comments that I would call insulting and certainly not libelous.
I have seen a few people who I would call passive aggressive. Quite happy to aggressively make a point but cower if someone disagrees and makes a better argument.

Defamation is a misunderstood concept and used to be a very popular way of stopping uncomfortable but often true stories being published. Robert Maxwell was known to be very litigious.

I would be surprised that anyone on here has the resources to bring a libel suit and if they did their very capable and expensive lawyer would advise them not to.

For one thing a defamatory statement must be false -- otherwise it's not considered damaging.
Most opinions don't count as defamation because they can't be proved to be objectively false.
If somebody wrote that this post was the most idiotic they had read read this year they are not defaming me, because I can't prove their statement is false.

Also the statement must be "injurious." Since the whole point of defamation law is to take care of injuries to reputation, those suing for defamation must show how their reputations were hurt by the false statement -- for example, the person lost work; was shunned by neighbours, friends, or family members; or was harassed by the press. Someone who already had a terrible reputation most likely won't collect much in a defamation suit.

Also the burden of proof is reversed in a libel case, the other side doesn't have to prove you guilty as such you have to prove yourself innocent.
Not as easy as it sounds actually.

And then there is the matter of damages. Some have won the case, won a nominal amount of damages and got caught for both sides costs which has cost them a small fortune. William Roache being a good example.

So if you are a snowflake I'd suggest not using defamation as a tool to close down a reasonable debate. Very expensive and super injunctions are more fashionable. Or run off to your safe space

Post by **Soner** » Sat 26 May 2018 8:07 am

The forum has a "Report this post" link for a good reason. When members report a serious problem with a posting, that post is temporarily removed, discussed between moderators and myself as to what action should be taken before deleting, re-instating and/or banning member.

I have several times been contacted by lawyers asking to remove content, and I have always obliged with immediate affect.

As for hidden identities, we all access the forum with an IP address, and if there was a serious mis-use of the forum, the IP could be traced back to the person that posted. Even if they used an app to hide/change their IP, if needed it could still be traced back.

We try to keep the forum running as smoothly as possible and all new member posts go through a moderation queue to ensure that no unwanted posts get through. As for members that may have had a few tipples, rather than ban, I would normally add their profile to go through the moderation queue until such time I see fit to re-instate full permissions.

The Kibkom Forum has been set up in a way that the back-end has been extended by adding several processes for reducing unwanted members and spammers. This means more work in applying full permissions to new members which is very time consuming but seems to be working quite well.

It really is not easy running a forum, but we do try our best. With the help of members and moderators, there should be no problems.

Keithcaley · Post by **Keithcaley** » Sat 26 May 2018 8:18 am

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:..I would be surprised that anyone on here has the resources to bring a libel suit and if they did their very capable and expensive lawyer would advise them not to...

Many TC companies are very protective of their 'good' Name, and are quick to threaten litigation (this is at the cost of a 'Solicitor's Letter' - which may be 'free' if the solicitor is a Family member or friend) regardless of whether the allegation is true or not, and regardless of whether they can demonstrate actual loss - this is something that the Forum Owner would not wish to get involved in, e.g. trying to defend an unguarded comment by a forum member about poor service or quality of goods supplied by a TRNC Company...

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Sat 26 May 2018 8:20 am

Keithcaley wrote:
Should users be allowed to hide their real name from the rest of the membership?

Or, to satisfy the accountability and responsibility that goes with the 'right' of 'Freedom to say what you think', should the Platform Owner exercise the same level of diligence as a Bank, and demand Passport, Utility bill with an actual street address etc., and insist that all users display their real names and an actual 'photo? - and possibly cross-check I.P. addresses for duplicate accounts, and check for anonymising 'tricks' such as using VPNs and other technical subterfuge?

The internet by being anonymous certainly does give licence to some to be far more aggressive and insulting than they would be in real life.
You can say things to people that you would never say to them in a pub. Also if you make a fool of yourself in a debate I guess you can disappear, invent another identity and start again.
I have noticed even in this thread that those who wish to censor the forum give a clue to how they ideally want a debate to run. The clue is they often sign off with a comment that can only be interpreted as ‘I have spoken and this discussion is now closed or if anyone disagrees with me I will call that a personal attack on me.’

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Sat 26 May 2018 8:26 am

Keithcaley wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:..I would be surprised that anyone on here has the resources to bring a libel suit and if they did their very capable and expensive lawyer would advise them not to...
Many TC companies are very protective of their 'good' Name, and are quick to threaten litigation (this is at the cost of a 'Solicitor's Letter' - which may be 'free' if the solicitor is a Family member or friend) regardless of whether the allegation is true or not, and regardless of whether they can demonstrate actual loss - this is something that the Forum Owner would not wish to get involved in, e.g. trying to defend an unguarded comment by a forum member about poor service or quality of goods supplied by a TRNC Company...

I don't doubt it. As I said Robert Maxwell's lawyer was very busy protecting his good name. I did qualify my statement by saying capable not my cousin who owns a box set of Perry Mason.
Defamation suits are often used by bullys with resources unfortunately, when the chip leader going all in with 7-2 in poker often wins you the pot.

erol · Post by **erol** » Sat 26 May 2018 9:18 am

In my opinion

Someone setting up a site and deciding what they will or will not allow to be said on that site and deleting posts as per their whims on their own site, is not an assault on freedom of speech.

Someone threatening to pursue legal action for defamation against a poster, or web site owner or the web site hoster's of something that is not defamation but is something they do not like is an assault on freedom of speech.

I set up, ran and owned a forum for a while. I received a threatening letter from a firm of lawyers claiming that something posted on the website was defamatory of their clients (also a firm of lawyers in south cyprus) and requesting that I remove the post and threatening if I did not that they would have to consider pursuing legal action against me personally as the 'publishers' of the alleged defamatory post. I did not know the poster. I did not know the law firm that was claiming to be defamed by the poster.

I declined their 'request' and my reply to them can be seen here http://visionmatters.co.uk/cyprus/defamreply.htm . I never heard from them again. Some time later(multiple months) the poster themselves decided to remove his posts. I do not know why but assume he came to some sort of settlement with the plantif.

The forum I set up and ran did have rules. People who posted in breach of these rules, as determined ultimately by me, were sanctioned for doing so up to and including removing their posts and suspending their ability to post at all for periods of time. People so sanctioned would always claim their right to free speech was being violated. In my view it was not. The attempt to force me to remove a post that was not in breach off the forum's rules and was not in my view defamatory by someone who did not like the post, under threat of legal action against myself, was imo an assault against the right to free speech of the original poster and I resisted such attempts on that basis.

Keithcaley · Post by **Keithcaley** » Sat 26 May 2018 9:38 am

Everyone should read the email which the 'link ' in Erol's post points to - it's a classic!

erol · Post by **erol** » Sat 26 May 2018 9:50 am

For what it is worth I did in the past once seek legal advice on myself pursuing an action for defamation here in north cyprus against a person (who as it happens has also contributed on this very thread) for a post they had made about me on the Cyprus44 forum that I considered was defamatory of me. The advise I got was 'forget it'. I took the advice given.

kibsolar1999 · Post by **kibsolar1999** » Sat 26 May 2018 11:21 am

you all have been mousetrapped by "Mr Davidson"

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Sat 26 May 2018 11:39 am

kibsolar1999 wrote:you all have been mousetrapped by "Mr Davidson"

You might have a point it is difficult to reconcile these two opinions

Mr Davidson wrote: if you are asking me what my take is on this I have learned not to offer it now... I simply offer information and people make up their own minds. The usual route when I post is attacks on me as a person, how I spend my time, or that I am out of my mind etc.

Mr Davidson wrote: Life is about being offended and of course a learning opportunity is presented from the consequences of the latter...we are going to be governed in the future if we are not careful by 'snowflakes' who have no back bone and cannot tolerate or allow anyone to think/act/disagree with their unipolar and potentially fascistic view.

PoshinDevon · Post by **PoshinDevon** » Mon 04 Jun 2018 5:27 pm

Taken from Hansard

“Everyone is in favour of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people’s idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage.”

WINSTON CHURCHILL Oct. 13. 1943

A very good analogy I think. Thank you Sir Winston Churchill.

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Tue 05 Jun 2018 8:13 am

PoshinDevon wrote:Taken from Hansard

“Everyone is in favour of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people’s idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage.”

WINSTON CHURCHILL Oct. 13. 1943

A very good analogy I think. Thank you Sir Winston Churchill.

Thought I'd hear pretty much every Churchill quote there was.

On the same subject and maybe more aptly is this from Brian Cox;

“The problem with today’s world is that everyone believes they have the right to express their opinion AND have others listen to it.

The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!”

johnerebus · Post by **johnerebus** » Wed 06 Jun 2018 1:00 pm

Having been around the block many times and knocked on the Door of Death but refused entry many times I have a Tee shirt printed with the warning front and back, "I don't want to hear your opinion"

But here's my opinion.

Brexit!
Let's exit
The debate
Cos everyone knows
Nothing
Only opinion
Like raw onion
Keeps me weeping
And pains me
like a huge bunion

JR Esentepe2018

elizabeth · Post by **elizabeth** » Wed 06 Jun 2018 3:34 pm

As the late Nigel Watson once said, opinions are like backsides, everyone has one but you don't want someone else's shoved in your face .

EnjoyingTheSun · Post by **EnjoyingTheSun** » Wed 06 Jun 2018 4:30 pm

elizabeth wrote:As the late Nigel Watson once said, opinions are like backsides, everyone has one but you don't want someone else's shoved in your face .

Love that.
It's similar to the quote on guitar solos. They are like farts everyone enjoys their own but hates anybody elses.
Can't remember the source of that or another favourite;
A dictator was asked if his people had freedom of speech. He replied they are free to say whatever they like and I am free to shoot them if I don't like it.

turtle · Post by **turtle** » Wed 06 Jun 2018 5:12 pm

elizabeth wrote:As the late Nigel Watson once said, opinions are like backsides, everyone has one but you don't want someone else's shoved in your face .

Haha good old Nige!
Unfortunately on here you are not allowed an opinion before the unofficial forum police are on your back.

PoshinDevon · Post by **PoshinDevon** » Wed 06 Jun 2018 7:06 pm

Providing the forum rules are followed then threads are left to run. Sometimes a topic is reported to the moderators by a Kibkom member and as such we do take time to read carefully what has been posted.

If it is obvious that the topic has fallen outside the forum rules then it is removed.

Interpreting and enforcing the rules isn't always easy so if there is any doubt as to whether a topic should be left on the forum then moderators discuss further. Sometimes a moderator may temporarily remove a topic. A decision can then be taken as to whether the topic should be re-instated and allowed to continue, re-instated and locked or permanently removed.

In the majority of cases moderators will agree on what action is to be taken, however there is the odd occasion when we don’t and it is then the forum owners decision.

Kibkom North Cyprus Forum

Join us