• Welcome to DNForum.com™ - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars
    If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

People To Avoid Dealings With Petition

Status
Not open for further replies.

foundrstack

Web Developer
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
3,376
Reaction score
354
I have a concern. After reading what is described at this post: http://www.dnforum.com/thread162829.html and it got me thinking. If the accused should be punished if they are found guilty, why is the accuser going unpunished when they post false claims? I vote that a false accuser should be at least warned or temporary banned, and a permanent ban for repeat offenders.

Making false accusations does real harm to a person (and/or companies) reputation and business. It reminds me of back in the 1800's when a group of people would accuse a woman of being a witch and then burn her at the stake. Just because someone is labeling a person as a scam, doesn't make it so. It could be a competitor trying to give them a bad name or someone who just had a misunderstanding.

We either: a) need a better system to handle disputes or b) make it harder to make false accusations by punishing those that do, just like we would punish those who run scams

Making false accusations against an individual is equivalent to slander and it should be treated as such. There is two sides to every story...

Just a thought and something for everyone to think about.
 
Upvote 0
Agreed we need a better system to deal with both the complainants and respondents to avoid projudice! However, both sides deserve a fair amount of being listened to inorder to establish the grounds the case.
I agree there are serious potential damages slander could cause a business or an individual!!
just my 2 cents
 
I've said it before and will say it again that the aforementioned section is useless and very often misused by those who feel bad about themselves and want to project their feelings onto others.
 
they should make it so that a mod has to approve the post before it will go live. I know it will create more work, but that would be better then just any post getting in there without proof.
 
Mr. Deleted said:
they should make it so that a mod has to approve the post before it will go live. I know it will create more work, but that would be better then just any post getting in there without proof.

Ditto. From what I heard when I used to be a mod (and the reason I am not anymore) was one of the mod's was complaining they didn't have enough work to do. This can be their department now.
 
meganerd said:
I have a concern. After reading what is described at this post: http://www.dnforum.com/thread162829.html ...
Good thoughts, Tia, as are those which followed. But wouldn't it have made more sense to post them in the original thread, which you referenced herein? Had I not received a subscription alert containing Mr. Deleted's related post in the original thread, I'd likely have never seen your comment(s).

MODS: In the interest of topical continuity, can you please merge this thread into http://www.dnforum.com/thread162829.html? (Thanks.)
 
Promediary said:
Good thoughts, Tia, as are those which followed. But wouldn't it have made more sense to post them in the original thread, which you referenced herein? Had I not received a subscription alert containing Mr. Deleted's related post in the original thread, I'd likely have never seen your comment(s).

MODS: In the interest of topical continuity, can you please merge this thread into http://www.dnforum.com/thread162829.html? (Thanks.)
The following errors occurred when this message was submitted:
Promediary has exceeded their stored private messages quota and can not accept further messages until they clear some space.
...
 
Promediary said:
Good thoughts, Tia, as are those which followed. But wouldn't it have made more sense to post them in the original thread, which you referenced herein? Had I not received a subscription alert containing Mr. Deleted's related post in the original thread, I'd likely have never seen your comment(s).

MODS: In the interest of topical continuity, can you please merge this thread into http://www.dnforum.com/thread162829.html? (Thanks.)

I thought about that but I think each thread serves a different purpose. This thread was made to make a call/motion on a change, where your thread warns about the issue. But if they should be merged, so be it.
 
Mr. Deleted said:
Quote:
Promediary has exceeded their stored private messages quota and can not accept further messages until they clear some space.

Sorry, Mr. D. I am an incurable packrat, so my PM inbox is almost always full. Feel free to drop me a note at removed.
 
Last edited:
meganerd said:
Making false accusations against an individual is equivalent to slander and it should be treated as such. There is two sides to every story...


Agreed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom