Composing Forum Rules & Guidelines

[Sweeney]

This seems to be a way of saying that if you cause loss or damage in the future to the forum owners through what you have done then you promise to make good their loss (ie to indemnify them). This might arise if as a result of your posting a libelous statement the forum owners become liable as the owners of the vehicle used to publish the statement - but note that earlier this set of rules says that use of the forum is governed by International and US law which may be significantly different from UK law - the phrase "hold harmless" is one I have not come across in the UK but it may be common in US legal agreements and "harmless" here means free from harm ie undamaged; in the UK the word is used to indicate someone or something not capable of causing harm which is somewhat different.

Barry

[capt larry]

In the US Hold harmless refers to accepting liability for ones actions which cause claims for damages to be brought on another person or entity.  Indemnify refers to paying for any damages awarded to that other party. It may seem redundant but it merely reflects the two prongs of the issue, liability and paying for it.  As noted in my prior post, I think it is remote from a practical stand point for anyone using the forum for its legitimate purposes.

CL

[SS369]

My Vote > No rules need be be posted. I think this thread has opened enough eyes to the subject.

And if you can't seem to remember to be civil, please keep your eyes closed and stay home.

Scott

[WebAdmin]

And if you can't seem to remember to be civil, please keep your eyes closed and stay home.

...or more preferably get a good knotting book and keep your fingers busy doing something other than posting?

I don't know where the format for the registration came from.  Possibly it was suggested by the forum hosts, who are probably American, and that's why it has the slight US slant to the law clause, rather than a UK slant.  I suppose, in addition to being the Guild's longest running branch meeting, we are also the most non-geographical, suspended out there, amongst the satellite waves and the ether particles, just held together by a few busy electrons.... am I digressing?

So far we appear to have two ayes and 1 no.  Voting concludes Monday evening   For the trial run I would simply sticky it to all boards, and count the views.

Regards

Glenys

[DerekSmith]

Glenys,

Just in case you counted me as a yes, my vote is NO.

The rider was, if the yes's won, then could it go to the Announcements board.

Derek

[Sweeney]

My vote is No

[skyout]

"Rules? We don't need no stinking rules!" Except maybe the Golden Rule, it doesn't stink. lol

Just repeating my no.

[Webmistress]

Forum Registration Agreement
Just to clarify, there has always been a registration agreement in place on this forum and its previous incarnation. New forum members must signify their agreement to this document as part of the registration process. To the best of my knowledge, the agreement has not been altered since this forum's inception. If it was, I would personally recommend that the updated version was posted on the Announcements board.

Forum Mods
It has been suggested that the current mods have a less than high profile. I hope they accept this for the compliment that it is. Good moderators don't need to draw attention to themselves. They work quietly - often in the background - to try and ensure that most forum users are able to continue their discussions without unwanted distractions. They only intervene when they consider it to be absolutely necessary. Over-zealous intervention only provokes bad feeling, in my experience.

Posting Guidelines
Some online communities do have formal posting guidelines but this is most commonly seen in forums with a very high turnover. In comparison, this forum has a low turnover and a well-established core community. That said, publishing, guidelines does nothing. At the end of the day, it is the social pressures within a community that determines what is, and what is not, acceptable. Formal guidelines are rarely read by newcomers - not even if you make the post sticky and decorate it with flashing lights that spell "Please read first". Frequently, the only time a Posting Guidelines document comes in useful is when it's used to hit someone over the head during an argument and that rarely works out well, in my experience.

If there were frequent and ongoing problems with behaviour on the forum, then, yes, I think there might be a case for publically clarifying what is, or isn't allowed. But I've not seen any evidence of such problems. What I have seen is people sorting out their own problems and disagreements in a fairly reasonable and mature manner. Should that change in the future, perhaps I might revise my opinion but, for now, I think that the forum's users are adult enough to control their own posting behaviour.

[Dan_Lehman]

In the US Hold harmless refers to accepting liability for ones actions which cause claims for damages to be brought on another person or entity.

  Indemnify refers to paying for any damages awarded to that other party.

It may seem redundant but it merely reflects the two prongs of the issue, liability and paying for it.

But the dictionaries -- and here I'm referring to Garner's A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage
and Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed.) -- give these BUT ALSO purely redundant
definitions.  Actually, the former gives "hold harmless;" as one, among several; the latter
is what says that a preposition "for/against" is called for.  But note that the clause at issue
here had no indemnify from/for particulars, and so IMO is overly vague.

In the situation here, I might post something that causes offense to some
third party, who sues IGKT.net:
1) by agreement does the clause say that I will recompense IGKT.net
for any losses;
1b) does it suggest that (all) other users should contribute, too?

2) or does it say rather that the suit is wrongly aimed by the third
party, who is part of the agreement, and must not seek redress
vs. IGKT.net, only (somehow) against me, the poster?

I agree that in practicality all of the above seems beyond the realm
of possibility (though, egads, wild lawsuits are surely not -- I'm not
sure e.g. of the status of the some-time "judge" who sued a cleaners
for some $50million (10^^6) over lost or botched pants (which sadly
got into court system and though overruled did put the Korean cleaners
out of business).

--dl*
====

[Sweeney]

I think there is an unanswered question here - who does own the forum? Presumably the owners of the software have no reponsibility for its usage? If, as I suspect, the IGKT as a body owns the forum (as it, as far as I know, owns the domain name igkt.net) then it is for the Council to decide whether to have rules and what they should be - and as the IGKT is a UK based charity those rules should presumably be governed by UK and where appropriate Internstionsl law. I am still not in favour of rules of etiquette (the basics that govern joining and using the forum along the lines of the registration agreement - and I agree with Dan here - should be written in plain English and not simply lifted from elsewhere).

Barry

[DerekSmith]

Barry, that looks perfectly right and reasonable - The Council own the Forum and the liabilities around its use, so the Council should decide if and what should be published.

I look forward to reading the decisions of our shiny 'new blood' Council.

PS.  As it is an 'International' Guild and an international forum, what would be the consequence of say a States side litigation lawyer chasing a 'No Win, No Fee' claim for damages in the US courts

Derek

[Sweeney]

Derek

There is an outside chance that our insurance would cover the Guild (if indeed the Guild were to be held liable) but it will not cover an individual who is not a Guild member or a member expressing a personal view. That said a lawyer would want a cast iron case as they might have to commit a lot of cash to taking on such a case which would be expensive to enforce against a non-US citizen. I don't have any experience of defamation case law - if anyone does perhaps they would comment?

Barry

[capt larry]

Barry,
I agree and hence my "remote" position.

As to "defamation" or "libel" - difference being written or spoken words, there are some important general concepts.  First, the statement must be patently FALSE and the speaker/writer knows this and still publishes it.  Therefore, "the truth is an absolute defense".  To constitute actionable claims, the words must be directed toward a person's character, business or profession.

CL

[Sweeney]

That's an interesting distinction - in the UK spoken defamation is "slander", written is "libel", both come under the umbrella heading of defamation. The defences of the statement being true or "fair comment" are to my mind a bit late - though not a rule I suggest that everyone should avoid any comment about a person as an individual - we can disagree, we can offer comment on eg a piece of work as long as that opinion is truly held but I cannot envisage any circumstances where a comment about an individual is justified on this forum other than perhaps a compliment. Any other comments should be restricted to the arguments etc postulated not the person who posted them. That said if anyone feels that a remark posted on here was defamatory to them (whether legally they appear to have a case or not) it should be removed immediately it is brought to a moderator's attention - to delay could mean the difference between the forum owners being culpable or not (Demon Internet had this problem in 1997 when they took 10 days to remove material after it was brought to their attention and the courts held that that was too slow).

Barry

[skyout]

...I think that the forum's users ...

Mel called us all "users" this time.

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1154.msg8045#msg8045

Good morning, people.

One of the forum users ...

As I was the one that sent you that PM, not to get touchy here, but calling me a "user" just sounds bad to me. I may not be a member of the IGKT right now for personal reasons, but I still consider myself a member of the International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum. This forum I feel is great and has helped me in numerous ways and I have returned the favor with contributing posts hopefully that have helped others as well. Possibly you can find another term than "users" to describe myself and others. JMO

The Great Magnificent Contributor would work for me. Just kidding but user sounds like someone that only takes without giving in return or something. Thanks.

My apologies. In my line of work there are usually 2 groups - developers who make stuff and the people wot use the stuff (usually referred to as "the users"). I'll try to remember to use 'forum member' in future.

No worries Mel. I'm sure it is as you say, lingo of the trade, so no class action suit will follow. LOL

Happy Halloween to all!

The Great Magnificent Contributor