Dear All

Apologies, we have removed a large thread in general. I am affraid that we are unable to state the reason for this at this time.

I would appreciate it if you would bear with us until such a time as we are able to.

We would also appreciate it if you did not speculate as to the reasons for the deletion, etc.

Kind regards

Simon

PS. Any speculation that follows at to which thread, who was involved, or what the reasons for deletion are, are simply speculation, should be considered to be false and are not the views of scoobynet.

 

 

Please do not throw stones at this sign.

Nor speculate as to why you shouldn't throw stones at this sign.

Please ignore this sign.

 

The plot thickens.....

 

This thread never existed
It was never seen
It was never replied to
It contained posts about nothing
Anyone who knew anything about it will misteriously disappear
Moderators will deny knowledge
As will Webmaster
A cover story will be made to explain the missing users
The guys in sunglasses and black suits are just tourists
THis is not a conspiracy
There was never a conspiracy
There is no goverment, corperational or legal meddling with this Forum
There is no such thing as "The one"

Please move along, there is nothing to see here

 

Referring back to a previously deleted thread where I posted factual information in respect of Scooby Sport, Hayward and Scott and Janspeed, Puff told me that I would receive a reply from either Simon or Shaun but I am still waiting.
I fully accept the need to police threads but cannot accept there should be deletion of factual, helpful (to Scooby netters) information and I wonder now if that was influenced unfairly by Puff's association with Scooby Sport?

 

Claire Short is on the radio now giving full details of what has happened....

 

Lol,

I don't think it even needs a SN thread. That story is woven into the very fabric of UK scooby folklore.

 

LOL at some of the comments.

Harvey, apologies for not responding to you regarding that previous thread. This has purely been a time factor, but I can understand why you would be dissapointed not to receive a reply. Again, please accept my apologies.

Regarding the deleted thread. It was deleted due to there being comments considered to be potentially libellous within it.

Thank you so much for everyone's support so far (the jokes are funny, and in no way damaging, etc which is really nice to see), it is a testiment to the community as it is now.

All the best

Simon

 

Will the thread in question forever be known as the DTIAL (deleted thread in a lake)?

Nick.

 

what ever happened to delete the potentially liable content and keep the main thread that people so painstakingly contribute too? This is becoming a habit Simon. Every time that happens i think, why did i bother. Just a thought.....

 

Good point JF

 

and what happen's if the so called "information" is true? will it be made known!!

 

SDB in 'community' and 'support' mentioned in same post shocker

sorry if its SIAL

 

I was hoping to get a reply to a certain question in that thread.

John.

 

John

Your question was answered

By Mike Wood


You missed it

 

Just look at this - Flash, Boing .....

It's all very MiB ...... or is it already an X-File?

 

Is what an X-file? I can't seem to remember.

The thread in question had some interesting information and contained valuable opinions from the more knowledgable scoobynet members, it's a shame to vape the lot because of some libellous content. The main question raised by the thread still needs answering from a wider audience, namely "Have you had it done, and are you happy with it". If you know what I'm talking about

 

Hi Guys

As stated in the forum guidelines. If a thread requires too much time to remove the potentially dogy content, the whole thread will need to be removed.

There is the possibility that the thread in question will be reinstated pending the finalising of some details and the time it would take to remove the content in question.

There are a number of complicated issues surrounding this kind of thing. One of the difficult parts is this.

If we remove part of a thread, it is POSSIBLE that in law it could be considered that we are condoning and are happy with the rest of the thread. This means that we would need to run the entire thing by our lawyers and have them pour over each word in order to decide if it is dangerous. If we did this, time would be lost and therefore the potentially offending content would be in view for too long for us to be considered to be acting on due diligence.

Apologies for the loss of this thread. I appreciate your support.

Simon

 

Simon - Fair enough - but has anyone actually tried to take legal action against you for things on here??

 

Hi MadMark

Good question, and I should have made this clear. In this specific case, I wish to make it clear that no companies have threatened legal action, and the decision to remove the thread was ours and ours alone without request from any parties.

Please trust us however that we did have very good reason, and as can be seen by me feeling the need to post this thread, we take the deletion of a thread very very seriously, and do it only as a last resort.

---

regarding your specific question (if I have read it correctly), on average we receive legal threats from companies at the rate of one every 2 - 3 months. Some of which have come very close to going to court, most of which are resolved very quickly.

A couple have cost us quite a bit of money, so anything we see which has the makings of this kind of siutation, we actively contain as quickly as possible.

All the best

Simon

 

Simon - Owch!

OK - that makes a lot more sense now, thanks for letting us know! You just need a "tame" solicitor to moderate then!

MM.

 

A great shame as that post was getting to grips with some really meaty issues, some of which, in my view, were in the public interest. Not sure how much I am permitted to say here, given that the thread has been wiped.

Maybe a way forward in future would be for Webmaster to post a suitable legal disclaimer within the thread (a "sticky" disclaimer, if you like) which should get Scoobynet off the hook from potential legal action but allow a debate with a public interest focus to continue?

For clarity, the public interest element I was interested in was the "weights & measures" argument.

Hope what I have written above has not compromised Webmaster in any way. I feel like I'm treading on eggshells here.

WB

 

Simon, I wonder if its possible to use a new thread to answer the original question (i.e. have you had it done and are you happy ?) without going down the same lines as the original - possible in general, rather than technical terms ?

Just an idea for those who might be considering having 'it' and would, therefore, like to know the opinion of the members who have done 'it' .. If you see what I mean ...

Mark

 

Should not have to worry about legal action:

Important - Opinions expressed are not necessarily the opinions of ScoobyNet, Wales Rally GB or any individuals directly or indirectly involved in this website or the companies and individuals associated with it. No responsibility is taken or assumed for any comments or statements made on this or any associated or relating bulletin board. Your personal information will be kept private except to comply with applicable laws or valid legal reasons.

 

That was the point I was trying to make in the original thread. It did not seem as if anyone had any genuine complaint.... it was just unfortunate that the thread was linked to a specific product, but that the argument (a valid one) was on a general theme which could have been confused as a criticism of the product.

 

OK Chaps

Let's not start discussing the subject of the actual thread in this one. I appreicate it is easy to get drawn into it though.

I will start a new thread in general.

XtremeScoobies. In an ideal world you would be correct.

All the best

Simon

 

Sorry Webby... I was trying to be as vague as possible!!

 

No problem Jolley, as I said, it's easy to get drawn into this kind of thing

All the best

Simon

 

Is there no way the "disclaimer" can be worded to legally cover you? Else not really much point it being there LOL!