Job Discussion Forums

[veiledsentiments]

I shouldn't laugh... it's too close to reality.

VS

[globalnomad2]

Woohoo! Donuts! Arrgghh arrgghh arrgghh arrgghh glug. I love donuts but cannot eat more than a fifth of one.

Woolongong offers instant gratification with their upsizd easy bachelor's, I hear.

[eha]

"Would you like super sized fries with that inflated grade? Pull your car to the next window to pick up your diploma."

"Woolongong offers instant gratification with their upsizd easy bachelor's, I hear."

Do such comments constitute libel? How come comments like this aren't censored, while some perfectly legitimate threads, carried on in less offensive tones, are?

[globalnomad2]

Well..all I know is (and I'm not sure how relevant this is to your question), this is a US-based web site, and in the US it is quite difficult for a public figure or a well-known corporation/entity to sue an individual for libel...at least, very difficult to win such a lawsuit. Complainants must prove several things, including (a) the offending comments are completely untrue, since even a little truth is the best defense; (b) the defendant had shown reckless disregard for the truth (basically an intent to lie, which is hard to prove), and (c) damage has occurred because of the defendant's comments (also hard to prove, especially when the defendant is an ordinary consumer).

I think Dave's tries to deter personal attacks, not so much for litigious reasons as to maintain some kind of collegial format here. Obviously a lot of ad hominem posts occur here anyway, but the moderators try to filter out the egregious ones, and besides, most of us are using pseudonyms. Sometimes they get trigger-happy with their censorship, but nobody's perfect.

Looking again at my Woolongong comment, I suppose some might construe some sexual innuendo or double meaning there, but none was meant. My point was I have heard from an ex-lecturer that there are certain easy routes to a bachelor's at that institution.[/i]

[eha]

I know what you meant! And I'm not disputing it--- don't know anything abt Wlngng--- but do know lots of other institutions in region. I meant: isn't there a danger that some touchy administrator would think you intended a slur against his institution? And get litigious about it? I thought that was why threads got barred, etc.

[trapezius]

[veiledsentiments]

[eha]

"Most are locked because they have gone into off-topic bickering and/or dead horse kicking."

... because someone with the power to decide, THINKS that they've gone off into.... etc, don't you mean? After all, one person's 'bickering' may be another person's 'meaningful exchange of ideas'. Actually, my impression is that 'bickering' is actually preferred; rational debate seems to bore people. And not only on this forum.

[globalnomad2]

Agreed, eha. And I'll be the first to admit, sometimes I'm guilty of less-than-collegial remarks myself. I get impatient sometimes....

[eha]

'I get impatient sometimes....'
Would this qualify as 'euphemism of the year'? Certainly would in my case!