Happily, my new comment moderation policy has made it impossible for MU! and the other merry pranksters to continue their lunkhead flame war. Of course, their comments still show up in my Typepad account. For the most part, each of them just accuses all the others of impersonating him (if you can follow that). It's pretty weird.
Strangest of all was a comment from MU! explaining that he brought about all this chaos for my own good. You see, it was "a lesson" that I needed to learn. He claims he was concerned that "libelous" comments from Forests would lead to lawsuits that would cousume "any miniscule [sic] income" I make, so he decided to demonstrate my "ultimate liabilities."
This is certainly very nice of him - except that, unlike MU!, I've actually looked into the law in this area, and I know that a blog author is not liable for statements made by others that appear on a comments thread.
It all comes down to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. As described by a legal website, Section 230
provides a strong protection against liability for Internet "intermediaries" who provide or republish speech by others...
The vast weight of authority has held that Section 230 precludes liability for an intermediary's distribution of defamation.
The same site goes into more detail about Section 230 (emphasis added):
Section 230 says that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."...
Bloggers can be both a provider and a user of interactive computer services. Bloggers are users when they create and edit blogs through a service provider, and they are providers to the extent that they allow third parties to add comments or other material to their blogs.
And here's a nice little summary from an online newspaper called The Blog Herald (again, emphasis added):
A lot of times, commenters on your site will say something that is mean spirited toward someone else and it’s possible that the person who the comment is about will write you and request its removal.
While it may be a reasonable reaction on their part, if they threaten to sue you for libel, they are way off target.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act makes it clear that the medium of a libelous message can not be treated as the source. As such, if the comment didn’t come from you but was merely posted on your site, you have no responsibility for it and no need to remove it.
That being said, you may still want to remove the comment because libelous comments do not make for a good community and it probably isn’t the kind of discussion you want to encourage. However, the legal risk of having it up is effectively nil, at least as long as you are in the U.S.
So as much as I appreciate MU!'s heartfelt attempt to educate me on these matters - and to educate other bloggers, apparently, since he says he has done this many times before - the truth is that I'd already educated myself, which is how I already knew that MU! is entirely wrong.
All he's actually accomplished is to make it harder for legitimate users of this blog to have a conversation.
Worse than the lawyers are the self-important amateur lawyers.
Posted by: Michael Darnton | March 25, 2013 at 08:12 AM
Time to get back to life after death topics! {grin!} Seriously, if it's not about near death experiences, death bed visions, or the holographic nature of our universe I don't have much interest in it anyway. Some of the other message boards I participate on have some folks that love to talk and argue about politics, and that's all they are interested in, so I just put them on ignore since I have very little interest in politics. It seems like such a fleeting thing to worry about. At this stage of the game in my life I've got my sights set on more eternal things. I figure I just passed the fall of my life and am all ready into the first few days of winter (using it as a metaphor for life's journey). I'm curious where I'm going when this life is over and what is in store for me. Reminds me of David Kessler's book "Visions, Trips, and Crowded Rooms" about the things that people in hospice experience. Great book by the way. I really liked it.
Posted by: Art | March 25, 2013 at 10:00 AM
||All he's actually accomplished is to make it harder for legitimate users of this blog to have a conversation.||
Um, mission accomplished? :(
Posted by: Matt Rouge | March 25, 2013 at 01:55 PM
Naturally, MU! can't just admit he's an idiot, so in a follow-up comment he tells me he really did educate me by getting me to look up the legal liabilities faced by bloggers. Wrong again. I'd looked up the basic info years ago, though I did have to refresh my memory on which section of the CDA was relevant. And incidentally, I carry insurance that covers me in the unlikely event of a libel suit anyway.
But why would someone who's been a professional author for 30 years know anything about legal issues involving the written word? That's just crazy talk.
He also seems to think that setting up a message board is my way of addressing liability issues. Not so. If it happens, it will be a way of allowing legitimate commenters to have a conversation without interference from him and his fellow miscreants. It has nothing to do with legalities.
Okay, I'm done talking about or responding to MU! now. I agree with the "don't feed the trolls" sentiment, but it ticked me off that after shredding our comments threads and causing pointless chaos, MU! had the gall to claim he did it for my own good, because he is so much smarter and more knowledgeable than I am. Why do idiots always think they're brilliant? It's probably related to the Dunning-Kruger effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
For the record, MU!, my complete silence regarding any further comments you make should not be construed as anything other than a total lack of interest in you.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 25, 2013 at 02:46 PM
It's an unfortunate limitation of Typepad that you can't just approve certain commenters for instant approval.
Posted by: Matt Rouge | March 25, 2013 at 03:37 PM
Totally off-topic (though this latest troll episode is certainly a topic worthy of leaving behind), I just left a review on Amazon of a biography of a girl who was raised by monkeys.
An amazing true story if ever there was one.
http://www.amazon.com/Girl-No-Name-Incredible-Monkeys/dp/1605984744/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1364242295&sr=1-1&keywords=the+girl+with+no+name
What a pleasure it is to leave a first review for a book that deserves a very wide readership.
Posted by: Bruce Siegel | March 25, 2013 at 04:26 PM
One of the rarely mentioned issues in parapsychology is the huge volume of mentally disturbed individuals it attracts. This applies to both sides of the equation.
Pseudo-skepticism seems to appeal to a disproportionate number of sociopaths, and some folks in the True Believer faction can't distinguish a psychotic episode from a Vision.
Because of its struggle for balance and truth, this blog tends to turn off most of the nut cases, but a few folks are bound to leak through - apparently those who deal with their cognitive dissonance by splitting up into multiple personalities.
But even Michael has a bit of tolerance for emotional confusion. Heck, so far, he let's me comment doesn't he ? :D
Posted by: Rabbitdawg | March 25, 2013 at 08:32 PM