Chris and others...
While I see Chris's point and agree that this issue isn't worth rocking
the boat over...
I do agree, that if an issue is slanderous and libelous then there are
questions, however, this simply means people should have their fact
straight before they comment.
However, I also don't feel that we should be held to ransom by the list
provider.
On the other hand... it does also bring us back to the original question.
Cheers Don
Christopher Sawtell wrote:
On Friday 08 September 2006 10:03, Don Gould wrote:
Where you dob him in is here...
NO, NO, NO!!!
If the provider of this ( look at the address ) list were to receive even a
whiff of legal proceedings about broadcasting a libel, we'd lose the list
facility before anybody could say the proverbial 'Jack Robinson'.
Please, please, do not post messages which could be interpreted as slanderous
or libelous on this list.
--
Don Gould
www.thinkdesignprint.co.nz - www.tcn.bowenvale.co.nz -
www.bowenvale.co.nz - www.hearingbooks.co.nz - SkypeMe: ThinkDesignPrint
