Legal Stuff & Discussion in English

[Shtirliz]

Did I call user X. "an idiot"?

No, the person who answered you called him an idiot. You posed a question.

[Птиц]

No, the person who answered you called him an idiot.

Where? :confused:

He answered who wrote the rules, and then asked a question.

[Shtirliz]

Where? :confused:

He answered who wrote the rules, and then asked a question.

A - What kind of an idiot wrote these stupid rules?
B- User X. did.

That's not defamation.

B.-Do you think he's an idiot?
A.-Yes, I most certainly do.

That's not defamation ither

[Птиц]

That's not defamation.

That's not defamation ither

I did not ask if it was.

I asked if, in your opinion, I called "user X." an idiot.

so, what IS defamation, then?

de·fame
–verb (used with object), -famed, -fam·ing.
1. to attack the good name or reputation of, as by uttering or publishing maliciously or falsely anything injurious; slander or libel.

—Synonyms 1. malign, disparage, discredit, vilify, derogate, revile, denigrate, backbite

.

[Shtirliz]

I did not ask if it was.

I asked if, in your opinion, I called "user X." an idiot.

so, what IS defamation, then?

Here, i found something that can shed some light:

If the person makes a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation. Whether a statement is viewed as an expression of fact or opinion can depend upon context - that is, whether or not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as being in a position to know whether or not it is true.

[Baghera]

Legal elements of the tort of defamation:
1. Defamatory statement
2. Of and concerning P
3. Publication
4. Damage to P's reputation
Libel - written
Libel per se (damages are presumed)
i. Business or profession
ii. Criminal offense
iii. Loathsome disease
iv. Sexual misconduct
Slander
Slander per se

Defenses of the D:
1. Truth
2. Consent
3. Privilige

[Птиц]

Here, i found something that can shed some light:

whether or not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as being in a position to know whether or not it is true

my point exactly - the subject of our discussion has no way of knowing for sure, whether or not this or that person is "mentally unstable"

[Shtirliz]

my point exactly - the subject of our discussion has no way of knowing for sure, whether or not this or that person is "mentally unstable"

'K we are going around in circles. What do you propose?

[Птиц]

'K we are going around in circles. What do you propose?

withdraw

[Shtirliz]

withdraw

alright, :D