No Criticism of Commercial Products Allowed Here
 

A few days ago I started a topic here. I stated that the mathematics showed that a certain commercial product will not make a long term profit. For exercising my freedom of speech, the content was deleted and the topic title changed, and locked. That's disgraceful, yet totally legal, behaviour by this website.

Not realizing this had been done, I later answered a question on another topic from a forum member. In that answer I did not even mention the product's name, and mathematically detailed why the system would not produce a long term profit. For that, the content on my post was deleted, my account was temporarily banned and the thread was locked, preventing people here from exercising their freedom of speech by contributing "their" view.

Obviously, freedom of speech is BANNED on this website, unless your words show support and approval of all racing products.

You are BANNED from criticising any racing product on this website, because that could harm "reputations", "even if justified"..... yes those 4 words are actually used in the forum rules.

Clearly, this website is not the least bit interested in letting people "freely" discuss betting products. This does a disservice to freedom of information, and does a grave disservice to all readers.

Or .... do the readers and forum members here wish to be spoon fed racing propaganda designed to make money from them? Or do you wish to read "facts" from all sides, so you can decide for yourself based on factual information?

Maybe this website should migrate itself it to North Korea, it would be at peace there ..... happy in the knowledge that their Dear Leader Kim would fiercely enforce a strict "anti freedom of racing information" policy.

I will now see if I can delete my account from this "controlling" website, and good b l o o d y riddance. We need decent racing websites, ones that support freedom of information and freedom of speech. I notice the traffic on this forum is VERY low ... no wonder.

Glad I'm not alone on that viewpoint! Well put Baez :)

What is the point of a forum where people can come and discuss systems but then you aren't allowed to discuss the systems?

A Forum: an assembly, meeting place, television program, etc., for the discussion of questions of public interest. (so long as you don't say anything about any product or person).

Not much of a "forum" then is it?

There are terms and conditions that you agree to when signing up.
Obviously people don't actually read those terms and conditions when signing up.
So there are numerous posts, outlining what can and cannot be discussed by management.
The rules are put in place by management, not because they want to be difficult, but because they have been victims of a court ruling (even when the post was justified). The judgement amount was significant.
If the money came out of your own pocket, perhaps you might think differently.

So go elsewhere and post your criticisms, but be very aware, that they can track your IP address, and not only the website owners, but you yourself might find yourself in Court paying out money.

That is the reason for the moderation, and that is the reason that you agree to abide by forum terms and conditions.

Just to add to it, beware! VPN is not a solution if you want to slander someone.
I merely adds few more hours to the discovery of your true IP, that's all.

So is it slander when you point out mathematical facts now?

When you mention the name of a commercial entity - yes.

So then why don't companies just watch the sites that allow people to write feedback on their products and hit them all with slander. Facebook, twitter, product review sites, complaint sites, etc.

The internet has come a long way and I haven't seen a case in court for a long time now over any of this stuff. It is now handled with take down requests and providing the webmasters complies they have nothing to fear.

For example notgoodenough.org is full of complaints.


On the same topic why hasn't the Pinnacle Australia thread been shut down as people are complaining in that thread about them ?

If I remember correctly a few years ago the Moderator informed us that a posting here did not speak well of a certain betting agency and that the criticism was true and justified. The site was consequently sued by the agency who was successful and won the case. It does not seem right in a fair world but if I'm correct in my recollection we can understand the Moderator's harsh rule.

In other words the site said they wouldn't remove the content and got hit by it, Courts are happy if you remove the content when requested and there would no action taken further by the agency. Sites are NOT responsible for what is written/posted providing they respond to take down requests.


UPDATE NOTE: Disregard what I wrote. I was wrong.

http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-shee...rs/#headingh312

Apparently Australian law is stupid and heavy handed so that sites can be liable for posters comments even if they take down the post. At least in the US responding to a take down request means they don't have to worry about being taken to court. That is not the case here.

Im actually surprised there are not more cases against facebook and google considering the rules in this country as everyone and anyone could sue them for anything they link to or their users post.

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.

OK so why don't we do this.

If something that "MAY" lead to legal issues with Pro-Pun,
Can be put this way on the forum.

EG;

I have an issue with a corporate bookmaker (NO-NAME),
Not adhering to the rules re racing N.S.W new betting agreement,
And have had my account closed.

Contact me at (Whatever ) Or I give permission,
For PRO-PUN to forward my email to other forum members.

You can then stipulate who you want to converse with,
If option B is required.

This way anyone who is interested can email you,
And correspond re the issue.

You have promoted what you want that will not be deleted by,
The moderators in normal circumstances..

You can communicate with everyone if you want to do that.

You can communicate with selected only (UP TO YOU).

This way your issue gets across & stays on the forum,
For everyone to see genuinely interested parties can,
Contact you by whatever rules you put in place re your email .

Can't think of any other way around this where everybody,
Gets what they want.

Of course what you are doing here can then be widespread through other forums etc.

Cheers.
Garyf.

Got to be so careful Garyf. I bought a serviced block of land in a sub division. When it came time to settle, I refused as there was no power to the block yet. The developer offered me a lend of a generator! I emailed his office email and described him as being a 'lightweight' developer in my opinion. Next thing you know I get a solicitors letter claiming I defamed him. That was because I sent the email to his office and not him personally, therefore in the eyes of the law I published my opinion! Had to hire a lawyer and apologise.

So if you're circulating emails amongst people you don't really know, then you could be found guilty of that one. Must be sure the email goes directly to the person you intended it for.

What your really talking about there is a private message service (or PM) which a lot of forums have but this one doesn't have (maybe because of the previously mentioned problem).

Understand R.P.

But here I thought we aren't defaming anyone on the site (YET) (L O L)

The Secondary contact to you is from interested parties who wish,
To know what you actually mean hence they initiated the contact,
To you wanting to know the post.

With the block of land you initiated the opinion straight to the,
Person not through a 3rd party as what the pro-pun site is,
Then stated only interested parties can hear "your opinion" at "THEIR",
Bequest not yours.

So as you have not defamed them publicly & they requested,
Your opinion how can they sue you on something private,
Between 2 x parties because they didn't like what you said,
Providing of course what you are stating "IS FACTUAL"

May be wrong but that's how I interpret it if anyone,
Can clarify for R.P & MYSELF feel free.

Cheers.

Hi T/O.

Guess it's then up to the individual how far they are prepared to go,
With their post then.

Cheers.

Management has made quite clear why the Terms of Use apply.

If you want to name and shame then please do it somewhere else, not here.

Thanks for your views.

Enough discussion has now taken place.

This thread is now being closed.

Moderator.