What is sad...

Hey James,

What is sad is the fact that such a disclaimer is necessary in the first place. In reality the courts have pretty much sided with discussion board owners and have made us immune from liability. But that still does not negate the potential of someone entering into litigation against us and if/when they do the disclaimer is just one more piece of ammunition to fight the litigation. I know of this from first hand experience.

There was a scammer online who was stealing literally hundreds of thousands of dollars from innocent (mostly newer) Internet marketers. Everything on his site looked legit but when people ordered they were hit with several hidden fees. What was supposed to be a simply $99 transaction ended up becoming one of about $1000 and fees were taken monthly from the "victims". Because this site was centered around marketing in the world of online auctions, my discussion board became the place to warn others about this scam and to ask for assistance. All the while, I remained completely neutral as many, MANY others came in and posted their concerns and complaints.

In less than a month if you searched for the scam site the major SE came up with my board. My traffic went through the roof as word got out that this scammer was being sued in a class-action and all of the participants in the civil action had decided to use my board as a starting point. All the while, as I said, I remained completely neutral. My board was essentially just a communication spot for the victims. About two months after the first post I received notice from a law firm in California that I "had to remove all of the offending post or face the civil consequences".

My first reaction was to email the owner of the scam site and invite them to post in reply. Before I did this I contacted an attorney and was told "NO!, Don't do that!!!". He basically said that I had two choices:

1. Fight it and face the possibility of lots of expense. He said I would definitely win but if they have a big warchest, it might take a long time and lots of money.

2. Erase the post.

His final advice was pretty simple; he could start the fight with a letter explaining to them that the California anti-slam laws would protect me and inviting them to explain their position. Basically it was a brilliant maneuver meant to force them to show their cards. If they responded it would be obvious they would indeed fight; if they didn't I could then choose to take more of an offensive position.

I placed him on retainer and he sent the letter. I never received any reply whatsoever. And in less than a month after he sent the letter the scam site was down and out of business.

People don't realize when they visit boards like this what hassles there are in the background just keeping the board up and running. Civil threats, people attacking others, spammers, and email harvestors start a nice list of things that might make people think twice about starting such a board. In the end I did not remove the post because I stood on principle. I know Leslie has done the same thing at her own expense and as a matter of fact it is my understanding that her fight actually made it possible for all board owners to hold fast to the ideal of the Internet; sharing information openly without fear of retaliation.

This post should be some food for thought next time someone visits this board, mine, or another like it. When you post, YOU own it and any civil actions that might result. The board owners put up with a lot of hassle to keep the board up and running in order to allow you to share your thoughts and information. And posting is a privilege, not a right. Don't abuse it. And that my friends is why Maw, myself, Tony Blake, and any other board owner might sometimes come across as a little gruff.