Posted on 06-Apr-2004 07:24 GMT by Christian Kemp (Edited on 2004-04-06 10:09:44 GMT by Christian Kemp) | 1057 comments View flat View list |
I am currently being threatened by my former employer (they are "compelled [to] take action against [me]") for the way I am running ANN, and how this allegedly violates my employment contract with them ("interfere _in any manner_ with any business relationship between the Company and any of its customers or business partners"). This might entail drastic changes to the relative freedom of speech ANN has always allowed its visitors, or ANN might close down altogether. Updated 10:00 CET.
|
|
List of all comments to this article |
Legal threats? : Comment 332 of 1057 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Darrin on 06-Apr-2004 17:34 GMT | In reply to Comment 309 (Fabio Alemagna): >Please, be more clear. Enumerate which statements you are referring to.
OK, here’s a few examples…
>Please dude, don't abuse of this issue to further your agenda, ok?
So anyone with a viewpoint different to yours has an “agenda” and are abusing ANN as a result?
>Look, it's because of people like you that this issue has been brought up in the first
place. Why don't you crawl back under your rock instead of spreading crap over this
site?
Exactly what BBRV appear to want – nobody should post anything against them… and you AGREE.
>It seems like Christian wanted some sort of revenge, after all, and purposedly and
carefully worded a news item to cause trouble. Can you really disagree with that? All evidence points to it.
So now Christian is on a man vendetta just like in the Death Wish movies? You really want us to AGREE with that?
>I find it pathetic, to say the least, that some people don't even have the decency to shut up until things are clearer, from ALL sides.
OK folks, no speculating from now on. No need to have a “post comments” feature on ANN as all we need to do is read the “news” and accept it. Our thoughts are no longer welcome!
>I rather think all red trolls should go back to their place and save their advices for someone else.
Translates to “Anyone that agrees with what Christian has done is an evil red troll with no brain! It’s all Amiga’s fault!”
>No, I apparently don't think like the majority here. For one, I don't endorse what BBRV allegedly wrote to Christian, but on the other hand I don't endorse the silliness that pervades this whole thread.
Agreeing with Christian is silly? You attack Christian’s methods of defending himself, but claim this isn’t endorsing BBRV?
>to Christian and demand that he makes names and his accusations clears and substantiated with facts.
Oh, we can’t post thoughts, but you DEMAND that Christian PUBLISHES the facts even though it might be illegal due to privacy notices?
>I beg to differ. Christian has purposedly (you can't say no, all evidence points to it) and carefully written a news item that makes no names and doesn't substantiate with facts the few words it contains, but only suggests something, even the name of the persons involved is just suggested.
Christian has deliberately started a flame-fest? Isn’t that slander??? He only “suggested” then names? How many previous employers of his can you think of that might want to censor his site and close him down? Hmmm…. Let’s see…. One… er… er… er…
>I didn't say people shouldn't comment on it.
ROTFL!!!!
>Moveover, Christian should have moderated all slandering posts, as he has always done.
If he did then some of yours would need to be removed.
>If those were his reasons, then he should have simply announced that the policies changed when they would have changed. No point in announcing that they, maybe, some time in the future, might change, or might not.
OK, so know he can’t report what’s actually happening? Is this a news site or a history site?
>Ok, then please explain it to me.
He had. Several times.
>We've heard one side of the story, and not even all of it. It's objectively not enough to make any judgements, no matter how trustable any of the parties involved is.
And the reason we haven’t heard the other side of the story is…..?
>So I'm safe in assuming that your only interest in this story is not knowing the truth, but slandering Genesi and BBRV.
Anyone supporting Chris is simply slandering Gensei?
>And slandering BBRV in what way helps ANN surviving? You mean, that you think that doig precisely the actions that Christian is allegedly considered responsible for, and for which he's allegedly been threatened for, helps him? You surely need help, if that's what you think.
So it’s Chris’ fault for trying to defend his website that’s at fault her? That’s like saying that it’s a shooting victim’s fault for staying in the path of the bullet. Nice one.
>You really sound silly, don't you? I've never asked him to publish the email verbatim, I've asked him to tell the whole story, and to make names, none of which is illegal.
If you get the “whole story” then don’t you need the email verbatim? If you didn’t then it wouldn’t be the WHOLE story.
Anyway, that’s enough of that. Here’s something you wrote that I liked:
>One thing is for sure, though: if there's anything we're not lacking of, in this community, are law suits. No one else beats us on that one, we should be proud of it! |
|
List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|