The non-Member messages are most often posts to other Forums, provided without attribution. In this case, FFL Members are denied the opportunity to respond to these posts.
So either the FFL Member who posts for his "friend" gets to hide behind his anaonymous "friend" (what I try to point out to Rick about his practice), or, alternatively, the non-Member gets to post without any responsibility attached for his/her words. --- In [email protected], "richardjwilliamstexas" <willytex@...> wrote: > > > > danfriedman: > > What's happening is that FFL Members continue to > > post on behalf, or in spite of, non-Members. This > > has led to a number of misunderstandings, > > discontinuities, and worst, defamation posted > > behind this screen of provided anonymity. > > > So, you're thinking that some members are posting > messages on behalf of non-members, because some > non-members don't want to become members, because > they want to post defamation, so they get members > to post it? Why can't the non-members just become > members and post their own defamatory messages? > > This is just outrageous!!! > > > > > Can FairfieldLife adopt a Policy restricting > > > > non-member posting? This issue has come up > > > > before, and has led to many misunderstandings. > > > > > > > Apparently posting to FFL is available only to > > > members. Non-members can read, but not post. > > > > > >
