Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Sign in to follow this  
brownsfan019

Suggestion for Scam Alert

Recommended Posts

James,

I think this area could be a great area over time. One suggestion to make it work and protect the person submitting the review is to allow the poster to submit the thread as an Anonymous user. As you saw in my thread about a vendor, they became rather obnoxious and while it just reaffirmed my opinion of them, the thread is no longer on TL.

 

Not sure how that could work, but maybe a check box that when posting in this forum you can submit as Anonymous - user name AND IP address. Place a restriction that only premium members can do it since premium is now open to those with 300 or more posts. That would hopefully eliminate any abuse by spammers or those that just want to post rubbish and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi brownsfan,

 

Unfortunately I have removed the scam section in order to protect TL. I received a notice from a legal firm and do not want anything to do with them and would rather avoid this mess altogether. I checked up on the internet laws and an anonymous format will not work.

 

In order to protect both TL and the members, I have decided to remove the scam alert forum. FYI... apparently a website can not be held liable for third party content as in the case here. (need to do more research) Another related case is Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Computer Services, Inc., which was a case of defamatory bulletin board postings. Initially, the poster was tracked. When they could not, Prodigy was sued but later Congress enacted the Communications Decency Act (CDA) to prevent courts from treating internet system operators (in this case the owner of the bulletin board) as publishers of third party content. Thus, the Attorney General ruled that patently offensive language to be unconstitutionally vauge, overboard, and subjective.

 

I reckon this is a case by case judgement. However, just so everyone on TL stays safe the spam alert section has been removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.