diebold promises, delivers e-voting fraud

[Senor Herbert]

"The media would be all over that shit, Osborn. Are you trying to tell me with a straight face the media would hush that deal up? Get real, they would lap that up like a thirsty dog and you know it. Who are you calling a minister of propaganda, Osborn?"

there is a media blackout about e-voting fraud. do you think it's just a coincidence that they're not covering this topic?

ainnee, please stop this cynicism. you think the right is beyond reproach? think again.

[Osborn F Enready]

Annie, Oberon, obviously neither of you READ what I had posted before.

ONCE AGAIN,

BEFORE I STATED THE MEDIA WOULD NEVER TOUCH IT.......

NOW THEY DID, WITH AN ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE ONE SOURCE OF BAD INFO THEY FOUND.....

THEN I POSTED TO SAY, WOW, LOOK I WAS WRONG, THEY ACTUALLY COVERED IT.....





DOES THE BIG TYPE HELP YOU TO READ?

[castille]

First, when a machine is hacked by outsiders, it's not fraud on the company's part.

Second, you can be sued for making false claims. If someone makes a false claim on Volconvo, it is possible for the owner of Volconvo to be sued for that claim.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: castille First, when a machine is hacked by outsiders, it's not fraud on the company's part. Second, you can be sued for making false claims. If someone makes a false claim on Volconvo, it is possible for the owner of Volconvo to be sued for that claim.

Not if it's considered Libel or Slander. According toChilling Effects

"Question: Can an ISP or the host of the message board or chat room be held liable for
defamatory of libelous statements made by others on
the message board?

Answer: No. Under 47 U.S.C. sec. 230(c)(1): "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." This provision has been uniformly interpreted by the Courts to provide complete protection
against defamation or libel claims made against an ISP, message board or chat room where the statements are made by third parties. Note that this immunity does not extend to claims made under intellectual property laws. "

I'm not sure of the specific legalese but I think these kinds of issues come under the heading of "opinion."

[Osborn F Enready]

And just to clarify how I feel, pursue your right to sue, I implore you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(dashes added to comply with etiquette for no one-line answers. Please notice a total of 4 lines were used above, not including these two.)

[castille]

I'm not the one that owns the company, Osborn. You should be more nervous about the company who you defamed. Being poor won't help either - many people and companies will gladly sue even if they have nothing to sue for, so it serves as a warning to others who may commit the same actions.

You should also note under section 230 in relevance to liability extent of libel or slander, that it is necessary for a ISP or sole website to hold a section providing relevant details that absolve it of all liability in such a situation.

[Osborn F Enready]

B R I N G I T O N MR CORPORATION. I dont play by their rules that are padded for their exclusivity.
I welcome the chance.

[OberonDOtherseid]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready B R I N G I T O N MR CORPORATION. I dont play by their rules that are padded for their exclusivity. I welcome the chance.

Bring it on Mr. Corporation? Did he state he was from any corporation? I didn't see that. I am co adminisrtator of a forum myself and I find what he is saying quite interesting. Why don't you take a walk or something and relax a little and let the rest of us have a chance to take in what he is trying to say? Or is this your idea of content?


Castille, what about what Scribbler posted?

Quote by: Scribbler "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." This provision has been uniformly interpreted by the Courts to provide complete protection against defamation or libel claims made against an ISP, message board or chat room where the statements are made by third parties. Note that this immunity does not extend to claims made under intellectual property laws. "

Does this still fall under 'opinion' if the poster states his opinion as 'fact' ?

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: OberonDOtherseid Because anyone who isn't chirping and clucking must be a republican, right?

That's not very productive, Mr ODT.

[OberonDOtherseid]

Ecxuse me, Poohey, I have already been warned for that post by both Sean and Scribbler last week, giving me an official warning point after the matter a week later smacks of double jeopardy, don't you think? Retract the warning and use your mod forum a little more often so you can communicate!!!