Slander - a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report:
"a slander against his good name."

How can stating a mathematical FACT about a product be considered slander when the definition is clearly stated it is only slander if it is a "FALSE" statement?

Prediction: rightly or wrongly, this whole thread gets shut down.

Would it be slanderous to state facts that are true and provable about certain bookies only allowing you to place miniscule bets?

ps, most advertised systems are complete tosh.

How did you conclude that, from what I said?
I made a general comment.

I am guessing most of us punters are not legal experts. So lets leave it as

"The site needs to cover itself because there are idiots out there who sue at the slightest issue they have with content posted regardless of whether it is true or false".

And this is why I can now understand admins response to threads.

Statements of fact are made every second of the day about commercial businesses in news media. For instance, the vision of a particular trucking company's truck being involved in a serious accident. Can the trucking company sue the news media for reporting the event and call it slander???

Criticism of banner bookmaker sponsors in posts on this site like (just look up) happens all the time. It's the ad hoc application of the moderation that seems baffling to me. All right to have rules, but be consistent.

Anyway I'm with Mark on this one, "Prediction: rightly or wrongly, this whole thread gets shut down" :(

I always thought that in these types of cases the entity with the most money and biggest legal team wins.

It would help if our judges understood the Internet and social media.

I have to say I was in the boat of thinking the forum was being over-moderated but given what Management has just posted I'm a lot more understanding now.

I'd like to think that the majority of people can use some common sense when it comes to purchasing any systems etc online. The way I see it is if people are happy to part with dollars in the hope of getting rich quick without kicking the tyres then they kind of deserve it somewhat if they lose that money. The old saying "if it was that easy everyone would do it" should surely ring in the ears of anyone that uses just a bit of common sense to these things.

Thankyou for the clarification management, helps shed some light on things. It would be nice if the forum got back to discussing/helping each other put together their own systems from scratch and talking about filters or methods etc etc. There are a few people here that have been great with regards to that stuff, i don't want to mention names because i'll miss someone. But if we could get back to regular threads regarding ideas and systems created here that would be great.

Cheers

That is true, and hence the reason for not naming and shaming.
The owners are liable for content.

Statements of fact issued by the Police in a media release is not slander.
News organisations have legal teams which monitor the content before it is put to air or print and enough money to fight any action. In fact there have been attempts to sue media organisations, and even they have lost and had to pay out after all that.

It's one thing to say a bookmaker has terrible percentages, or I can't get a bet on, or my account has been closed. But some people unwittingly go too far, and that's the problem, they post something libellous about the company.

For example I was TOU'd for mentioning something that was in the racing news and was fact, but mentioned the actual name of the person.
Once the ramifications were explained to me, I understood.
This is a free forum, and I'm glad to have it, with some great minds and would hate to see it shut down because of another payout.

Sometimes it's frustrating, but it is what it is, and if I'd already been sued over content, I probably would have shut my forum down, because you have to moderate everything that could potentially lead to another law suit.
Sad but true.