Page 1 of 1
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 09:23 #1639 | |
postal
5191 posts 
|
I know that the rubric for Open Mic states "Free to discuss any topic you like- subject to usual. rules.... " but I'm not sure it is really necessary to use the section to copy links to stories widely reported in the national media along with speculation about the event. For example, there is speculation today about the Sudbury LC accident (albeit copied from one of the papers more interested in creating an issue than reporting the facts). I understand that this concerns a person currently under arrest in regard to the incident and I don't think it wise to continue this sort of speculation while the matter is potentially sub judice. Am I being over fussy, or does anyone else agree? JG “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 09:23 #10788 | |
|
postal
5191 posts
|
I know that the rubric for Open Mic states "Free to discuss any topic you like- subject to usual. rules.... " but I'm not sure it is really necessary to use the section to copy links to stories widely reported in the national media along with speculation about the event. For example, there is speculation today about the Sudbury LC accident (albeit copied from one of the papers more interested in creating an issue than reporting the facts). I understand that this concerns a person currently under arrest in regard to the incident and I don't think it wise to continue this sort of speculation while the matter is potentially sub judice. Am I being over fussy, or does anyone else agree? JG “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 10:33 #10790 | |
TomOF
452 posts |
Hi Postal, I was thinking about the same thing. I think it's right to draw people's attention to the fact that there has been an accident but not to speculate about the probable cause. The best way to let people know is to link to the news article as this will give reasonably accurate information as to what has gone wrong and where ( although the article makes mention of a loco and two coaches hitting the truck ). Unfortunately the media love to speculate and they do comb forums in the aftermath of such an event looking for snippets they can print ( I've seen this done a few years ago on another forum). In short my opinion is to let people look at the facts as presented to them from different sources and form their own conclusions pending the official report. Regarding speculation , I think it's neccesary for a forum to protect itself from the threat of legal action in case someone's theory turns out to be untrue - the accident at Moreton In Lugg being a case in point as quite a few forums are chosing to stop threads on the subject. Considering a significant proportion of the people that use rail forums don't work on the railways or have any connection with what's going on it probably for the best. Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 11:26 #10792 | |
Right Away
71 posts |
Forgive me, but I feel it is an exaggeration to say the story is “repeated” when the original post merely contained a link for others to follow if interested and a very short non-“speculative” comment IMHO from information contained within the ‘news’ paper article. Informative and entertaining as this forum and other similar forums are, we should keep a sense of perspective with respect to how much influence we ‘think’ that a small gaming community might have in the real world (no disrespect intended to the developers and devotees of the superb SimSig simulation). In this context implying that an Open Mic post may in some way prejudice a possible court case seems to me to be a little OTT and could be construed as a way to limit freedom of speech without infringing the forum’s published rules and code of conduct. Do we really want to put people of making a post because they are frightened they might cross some invisible and imaginary barrier of our own making? Open Mic is often used to provide links to railway and signalling related information, for example, the RAIB reports. Most users of this site will be familiar with RAIB and know where to look for such information but nonetheless it is kind of someone to take the trouble to post the links – I certainly find them handy. Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 11:38 #10793 | |
GeoffM
6287 posts |
I think you have two issues here: 1. Reporting of news which made national news anyway 2. Speculation into events, whether by laymen or people who claim to have insider knowledge The first I'm not too bothered about. If people want to repeat ad nauseum then others will learn to simply ignore them. The second is something we do watch for and have moderated accordingly in the past where appropriate. Healthy debate with incontrovertible public facts is fine but "I think person X caused the accident" is not, and it's somewhere between the two that a line has to be drawn. SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 11:44 #10794 | |
|
GeoffM
6287 posts |
Right Away said:Informative and entertaining as this forum and other similar forums are, we should keep a sense of perspective with respect to how much influence we ‘think’ that a small gaming community might have in the real world (no disrespect intended to the developers and devotees of the superb SimSig simulation). In this context implying that an Open Mic post may in some way prejudice a possible court case seems to me to be a little OTT and could be construed as a way to limit freedom of speech without infringing the forum’s published rules and code of conduct. Do we really want to put people of making a post because they are frightened they might cross some invisible and imaginary barrier of our own making?I think you've misunderstood the point about court cases. The issue is about whether anything that somebody posts on this board could become a libel issue which results in either me (the owner of the website) or the poster concerned, or both, getting sued - quite separate from the incident itself. It's not about us influencing investigations or judicial processes directly related to the incident. SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 13:45 #10796 | |
|
Right Away
71 posts |
I certainly would not wish to see anyone sued for defamation. The first post in this thread seeks to discuss whether to refrain from posting links to stories in the media where the media article itself may or may not contain ‘speculation’ which might be harmful to someone under judgement in the future. Naturally, if the story is embellished with unfounded information by the poster then that could be a matter of concern. But if no new content is added then it is just a matter of personal taste as to whether readers find links to railway-related tabloid articles in Open Mic useful or boring. The point I was trying to make in response to the first post is that if we become oversensitive and self-censoring then some people genuinely interested in railways, signalling and SimSig, and with perhaps something useful to contribute occasionally, may be scared to post to the forum in case they make some terrible blunder. Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 14:10 #10797 | |
|
postal
5191 posts
|
Perhaps I didn't give equal emphasis to the points I was trying to raise in my original posting. As Geoff says, "If people want to repeat ad nauseum then others will learn to simply ignore them." One of the points I was trying to raise was whether it was a sensible use of Forum resources and readers' time to repeat what was freely available elsewhere until the boredom threshold for Forum users is reached?. Is the assumption that other readers of the Forum are incapable of reading, seeing or hearing anything else than that which is presented through this Forum? Perhaps my signature for this month gives a clue to my personal views! JG “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 16:23 #10798 | |
|
Right Away
71 posts |
Perhaps we’re closing in on the real issue here in that a post has failed to meet another reader’s exacting standards? Why not just ignore the post?
Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 18/08/2010 at 20:50 #10803 | |
Peter Bennet
5362 posts |
Unless it's to debate or discuss the point at issue I don't see the point in posting links to headline news but I don't particularly have a problem with it being done. I also don't have any particular problem with people discussing known facts; such as what sort of crossing it was- CCTV, AHB, whatever? That seems to me a reasonable question and reasonable to give an answer as would be whether the train was travelling up/down or the vehicle was crossing L to R or vv. Speculating as to what happened at the point of incident, who was to blame, whether something was working or not is probably over the line. Anyway that's my ha'p'worth and I think is more or less what Geoff said earlier. Peter I identify as half man half biscuit - crumbs! Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 19/08/2010 at 10:41 #10813 | |
|
kbarber
1712 posts |
Sub judice is an issue as well, I think. Should speculation on a forum find its way into the wider public domain (by whatever means) it would be open to defence counsel to argue that their client's right to a fair trial had been prejudiced. Of course it's the judge who has to rule on whether that is so - the initial claim is just that & no more - but it does have the potential to affect judicial proceedings. That means anyone speculating could find themselves in contempt of court as a result. If I understand it correctly there's nothing new in that and Right Away's fears that people might be dissuaded from posting are irrelevant - forum rules mean nothing if the law has potentially been infringed. I'd prefer to read Postal's comments as a suggestion that we exercise appropriate discretion to avoid putting ourselves on the wrong side of the law. I suspect quoting something published in a newspaper might be ignored even if it were technically contempt - the paper's circulation will certainly be larger than this forum and its impact much more influential on a jury, unless there are some special circumstances. But I wouldn't personally want to put that theory to the test! Log in to reply |
| Open Mic 19/08/2010 at 15:03 #10823 | |
northroad
870 posts |
Must admit I do use the Sim Sig forum to keep up to date with what is happening in general whilst I am away working in Kazakhstan purely and simply because the Company firewall on our server for the accomodation seems to reject any web page that has video, news or anything similar in the web address. I would have thought that the old statment of "the opinions made on this site do not necessarliy reflect those of the owner" or something similar would have covered this area. However this may not be the case in all countires of the world. For what it is worth I have just found these comments on the Wiki page listed under the subject matter of 'Internet Forum' Liabilities of forum owners and moderators Several lawsuits have been brought against forums and moderators claiming libel and damage. A recent case is the scubaboard lawsuit where a business in the Maldives filed a suit against scubaboard for libel and defamation in January 2010. For the most part, though, forum owners and moderators in the United States are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which states that "[n]o 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." Read into it what you will. Geoff Log in to reply |