chocolate lollies, page-19

"IMO your post wasn't remotely close to being defamatory. A veeeerrrrry long bow to draw indeed."


This will be my final post on this thread as it is not my intention to create angst amongst posters.

Firstly Wealthcrea8or your tou was way over the top and also defaming. However I will simply accept that you took my post out of context as it was in no way an attempt to bully you. Rather I would have preferred a debate about this subject taken off the CKK thread.

It would appear that many posters mistakenly think they can pass judgement and make comment on company directors as they see fit because they are shareholders. This simply isn't true. Our main job as moderators is to moderate any posts that may be construed as defamatory or breach copyright.

Below is the defintion of defamation in Australia

T"he publication of any false imputation concerning a person, or a member of his family, whether living or dead, by which (a) the reputation of that person is likely to be injured or (b) he is likely to be injured in his profession or trade or (c) other persons are likely to be induced to shun, avoid, ridicule or despise him.

Publication of defamatory matter can be by (a) spoken words or audible sound or (b) words intended to be read by sight or touch or (c) signs, signals, gestures or visible representations, and must be done to a person other than the person defamed."

just for everyones edification. The original post goes very close to the wind I think you would agree.

end of discussion from me on this subject