Can we all agree that slander is wrong

[Jim Kenny]

Patrick Wadden this week asked us to remember that one data point doesn’t justify slandering someone. Patrick asked us to be our best selves when making our case or casting our opinions, because being our best produces what is best for our shared community.

Ironically, many of those who shape the Deck chose a previous post of mine where I used a public record, of what I now fear could have been a difficult period in his life unknown to me, to justify my opinion that a public official was unfit for office. To be honest, in my heart, I knew I was wrong when I posted it. But I allowed my ends to justify my means. I was wrong then and today even more so, as I’m now seeing others embrace my poor choice like some kind of street justice.

Behaving in this way is why I stopped participating in the Deck. I began to feel like the character played by Edward Norton in the movie Fight Club, as I could no longer recognize myself when I entered the no-hold-barred rules of the Deck. I was no longer the gentleman that I’ve asked family, friends and neighbors to expect me to be.

Now time I would have spent on the Deck I’ve invested in trying to be friendlier to strangers I encounter. I smile more and direct it at others, familiar and unfamiliar to me. I’m more inspired to be the gentleman who failed to show up at the Deck. I have many of you to thank for this discovery. Knowing that I’m a stranger to most of you, I’m looking forward to when I show you courtesy I failed to give here.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Patrick Wadden this week asked us to remember that one data point doesn’t justify slandering someone. Patrick asked us to be our best selves when making our case or casting our opinions, because being our best produces what is best for our shared community.

Ironically, many of those who shape the Deck chose a previous post of mine where I used a public record, of what I now fear could have been a difficult period in his life unknown to me, to justify my opinion that a public official was unfit for office. To be honest, in my heart, I knew I was wrong when I posted it. But I allowed my ends to justify my means. I was wrong then and today even more so, as I’m now seeing others embrace my poor choice like some kind of street justice.

Behaving in this way is why I stopped participating in the Deck. I began to feel like the character played by Edward Norton in the movie Fight Club, as I could no longer recognize myself when I entered the no-hold-barred rules of the Deck. I was no longer the gentleman that I’ve asked family, friends and neighbors to expect me to be.

Now time I would have spent on the Deck I’ve invested in trying to be friendlier to strangers I encounter. I smile more and direct it at others, familiar and unfamiliar to me. I’m more inspired to be the gentleman who failed to show up at the Deck. I have many of you to thank for this discovery. Knowing that I’m a stranger to most of you, I’m looking forward to when I show you courtesy I failed to give here.

Jim

As I told you over coffee, it is an amazing device. Far more than just a newspaper. It drills down into the psyche of the soul of a community.


Is the way each session starts. And no one tells you want to draw.

People expose themselves, by their words and actions. In a very controllable, safe environment. Yet, we all get bit sooner or later.

We had hoped that real names would have kicked it up a notch, and it did. Other sites by what I have been told are either HEAVILY moderated, or real fight-club zones. And you have to always remember we are working with humans, and all humans have faults, issues, needs, desires and a survival instinct.

It is one of the reason's back around 2008, I had a series of long conversation with some members of of Dix and Eaton.

The final point, is you can be the change you want to see here right now. Don;t let the bastard win or wear you down. As told you about a year ago, after the election, the entire tone will change, until the next time a polarizing subject, hits the streets.

Slander is wrong.

Now how do you feel about Government Accountability, Transparency and Accountability?

.

.

[Gary Rice]

Jim and Jim,

As you well know, that Great Old Book tells us that there are none good, no not one among us.

That point made, to SEEK to be a better person, to walk and speak kindly in the face of adversity...to acknowledge one's own shortcomings...particularly in a public forum such as this...

Those efforts begin to APPROACH Divinity, and more...invite and HELP the rest of us to approach that Divinity, as well.

When I was a kid, I was teased unmercifully and often mis-understood by a number of adults and students alike, due to my speech, hearing and leg handicaps. My responses at first were natural ones...anger, resentment, low self esteem, and then, even pushing back with a couple of classmates who picked fights with me...

Yet- neither winning, nor losing those fights was satisfactory in the least. Even in those few times that I did fight, (although, I suppose those fights were justifiable from a self-defense standpoint) they still always left me with that unresolved emptiness of the unfinished business of human misery.

Then one day, my dear late mother reminded me that there are NATURAL responses, and then there are SUPERNATURAL responses that one can have to negativity. She suggested that the next time I was teased, to simply respond "May God forgive you, I do."

At first, I thought that she'd lost her mind. She just smiled and said "Try it and see".

I tried it on the biggest bully in Harding.

...and he started crying, right there in the hallway in front of his friends.

He turned out to be one of my best pals too.

Supernatural? Oh yeah.

Now you know why I play that peacemaking banjo.

Better get back to it. I guess.

Blessed indeed are the peacemakers, according to Someone Whose opinion I value a great deal.

Thank you, Jim and Jim too, for your words, thoughts, and opinions.

This all too...shall pass.

[james fitzgibbons]

Patrick Wadden this week asked us to remember that one data point doesn’t justify slandering someone. Patrick asked us to be our best selves when making our case or casting our opinions, because being our best produces what is best for our shared community.

Ironically, many of those who shape the Deck chose a previous post of mine where I used a public record, of what I now fear could have been a difficult period in his life unknown to me, to justify my opinion that a public official was unfit for office. To be honest, in my heart, I knew I was wrong when I posted it. But I allowed my ends to justify my means. I was wrong then and today even more so, as I’m now seeing others embrace my poor choice like some kind of street justice.

Behaving in this way is why I stopped participating in the Deck. I began to feel like the character played by Edward Norton in the movie Fight Club, as I could no longer recognize myself when I entered the no-hold-barred rules of the Deck. I was no longer the gentleman that I’ve asked family, friends and neighbors to expect me to be.

Now time I would have spent on the Deck I’ve invested in trying to be friendlier to strangers I encounter. I smile more and direct it at others, familiar and unfamiliar to me. I’m more inspired to be the gentleman who failed to show up at the Deck. I have many of you to thank for this discovery. Knowing that I’m a stranger to most of you, I’m looking forward to when I show you courtesy I failed to give here.

Jim

As I told you over coffee, it is an amazing device. Far more than just a newspaper. It drills down into the psyche of the soul of a community.


Is the way each session starts. And no one tells you want to draw.

People expose themselves, by their words and actions. In a very controllable, safe environment. Yet, we all get bit sooner or later.

We had hoped that real names would have kicked it up a notch, and it did. Other sites by what I have been told are either HEAVILY moderated, or real fight-club zones. And you have to always remember we are working with humans, and all humans have faults, issues, needs, desires and a survival instinct.

It is one of the reason's back around 2008, I had a series of long conversation with some members of of Dix and Eaton.

The final point, is you can be the change you want to see here right now. Don;t let the bastard win or wear you down. As told you about a year ago, after the election, the entire tone will change, until the next time a polarizing subject, hits the streets.

Slander is wrong.

Now how do you feel about Government Accountability, Transparency and Accountability?

.

.

I agree slander is wrong. I was waiting for Jim Kenny to answer Jim O'bryan about Government Accountability and Transparency. Why do we not have it in Lakewood.

[Dan Alaimo]

To me, it's obvious slander is wrong, and it is also illegal. Now where you draw the line between slander and not slander is another, more difficult matter.
And to point out, slander is different from libel (which is just as wrong and difficult to prove), although both are forms of defamation. Slander pertains to the spoken word, while libel is written. So any perceived defamation here would be libel, not slander.

[Bridget Conant]

Is this yet another attempt to malign the Deck? To make a headline post insinuating that someone has been slandered or libeled here?

Let's discuss.

Libel is "a false statement of fact."

That seems to be very difficult for people to understand, including some lawyers who should know better.

If you say Mr X was arrested for child abuse, and that is an untrue statement, that would be libel. If however, Mr X had been arrested as part of a child abuse investigation, that would NOT be libel.

If you say Mr X has a criminal record, and indeed Mr X does have one, that is NOT libel no matter how much Mr X doesn't like it spoken or written about.

Similarly, any information available as a public record is perfectly legal to discuss. Again, the subject of the public record might not like it, but they can't sue for libel.

Lots of information that people might think is private, is not. You can find out how much your neighbor paid for his house, if he has a mortgage, if he's behind on his taxes. You can also see if someone has been sued or if they filed for divorce. You can check if someone has a criminal record or has been arrested. Again, those are public records and "disclosure" of that information is perfectly legal.

So while Mr Kenny may feel remorse for his posting Mr Skindell's court filings, he HAS NOT slandered or libeled him.

In addition, you can call someone a whacko, lazy scum, gasbag, incompetent idiot, or any number of horribly nasty or descriptive names, and that is NOT libel. That is OPINION, which is not subject to claims of libel.

Libel is a FALSE statement of FACT.

Courts grant great leeway to speech. Even if your facts are a bit wrong, if you're close, you're good. So if you state Mr X robbed 3 banks, and he robbed 2, that's cool.

So let's dispense with the idea people here "slander" one another. It's another false narrative meant to malign the Deck.

What you have here is either verifiable FACT, or OPINION, neither of which is actionable.

[m buckley]

Now time I would have spent on the Deck I’ve invested in trying to be friendlier to strangers I encounter. I smile more and direct it at others, familiar and unfamiliar to me. I’m more inspired to be the gentleman who failed to show up at the Deck. I have many of you to thank for this discovery. Knowing that I’m a stranger to most of you, I’m looking forward to when I show you courtesy I failed to give here.

Jim, I know that I'm not alone when I say that I'll be praying for you while your on that long journey to being the best Jim Kenny you can be.
I'm confident you'll get there.
Sincerely,
Mark Buckley.

[Kate McCarthy]

Ironically, many of those who shape the Deck chose a previous post of mine where I used a public record, of what I now fear could have been a difficult period in his life unknown to me, to justify my opinion that a public official was unfit for office. To be honest, in my heart, I knew I was wrong when I posted it. But I allowed my ends to justify my means. I was wrong then and today even more so, as I’m now seeing others embrace my poor choice like some kind of street justice.

When you posted these public records, you failed to mention that the lawsuits were dismissed, and in both cases the parties that brought the suits were ordered to pay all court costs. The implication you made from these court filings was erroneous, to be kind. There was nothing in these records to imply Senator Skindell was unfit for office.

I cannot imagine a more self-serving mea culpa than this.

[Lori Allen _]

I agree that the whole idea of "slander" and "libel" is likely another intimidation tactic by Summers & Co.

To clear things up, see https://www.ohiobar.org/forpublic/resou ... e-171.aspx

What about me? Can I get in trouble for saying something about someone that isn't true?
A: Yes. Individuals, not just the media, can be held liable for defamation if they either publish (libel) or say (slander) something about someone that isn't true and that person suffers harm as a result. If you defame a private individual, that person would have to be able to prove:
1) that you made a statement, reported as fact, to another person;
2) that the statement was false;
3) that the statement caused damage to that person; and
4) that you were negligent in making that statement.

If you defame a public figure (such as a celebrity or member of government, for example), that person will have to prove:
1) that you made a statement to another person, reported as fact;
2) that the statement was false and caused damage; and
3) that you made the statement with actual malice-that is, with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to whether the statement was false or not.

These are big burdens of proof for anyone to meet. Therefore, I think the idea that Deck members are "slandering" anyone is moot.

This is why news anchors and newspapers use words like "reportedly" and "allegedly".

[Gary Rice]

I would hope that when someone comes along and wants to be a better person, that they would be embraced and supported by our community. In that regard, I very much appreciate Mr. Kenny's words here. If participating on the 'Deck makes anyone reflect and realize that they could have handled something better, then perhaps the 'Deck has served all of us well.

Indeed, I believe that we could all learn from, and appreciate what has been offered here.

One of the biggest dangers that I believe we face, particularly with the internet, is that we can all forget that there are other real people out there with real feelings. I've seen so many posters whom I know personally as otherwise "nice" people who get on the 'net and go way beyond what they might say to someone else in face-to-face conversations.

To me, if there is a particularly problematic curve ball to all of this, it would be "win-at-all cost" people who put their agendas ahead of their normal compassion and feelings towards others. In so doing, some take personal affront to the positions that others hold. That is utterly unnecessary and counterproductive. You can't win an argument without rational informative persuasion. In my honest opinion, personal attacks persuade no one, nor does slander, libel, being a bully, or any other such behaviors, however defined, that may approach the near occasion of those sins.

There is no need to personally attack anyone for their ideas, whether here, or anywhere else. Long after the hospital, or other issues have run their courses, we will all still be Lakewoodites, friends, and neighbors.

Back to the banjo...

[m buckley]

One of the biggest dangers that I believe we face, particularly with the internet, is that we can all forget that there are other real people out there with real feelings....
To me, if there is a particularly problematic curve ball to all of this, it would be "win-at-all cost" people who put their agendas ahead of their normal compassion and feelings towards others....

Ironically, many of those who shape the Deck chose a previous post of mine where I used a public record, of what I now fear could have been a difficult period in his life unknown to me, to justify my opinion that a public official was unfit for office. To be honest, in my heart, I knew I was wrong when I posted it. But I allowed my ends to justify my means. I was wrong then and today even more so, as I’m now seeing others embrace my poor choice like some kind of street justice.

When you posted these public records, you failed to mention that the lawsuits were dismissed, and in both cases the parties that brought the suits were ordered to pay all court costs. The implication you made from these court filings was erroneous, to be kind. There was nothing in these records to imply Senator Skindell was unfit for office.

I cannot imagine a more self-serving mea culpa than this.

Point taken Mr. Rice.

[Bridget Conant]

This article might be difficult for some to read, but it's written by a highly regarded First Amendment attorney. Pay close attention to his discussion of protected speech and the claims of the poorly informed that allege certain speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

In fact, very little falls outside the protection of the Constitution. Hate speech is protected, rudeness is protected, even speech taken as bullying is protected. Witness the Westboro Baptist Church group and their protests - all protected by the Constitution, no matter how offensive to many of us.

That is why it is so terribly difficult to prevail in a defamation case. It's why most lawyers won't take that sort of case. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff and the bar is set very high.

https://popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-s ... roversies/