I have always admired Chas for his knowledge of the history of WWFC and have said so in numerous posts. If restricted his contributions to the subject about which he is such an expert, I don’t think he could offend anyone. However, he occasionally veers into dangerous waters, usually due to his political beliefs, and I myself have been on the receiving end of his vitriol. It doesn’t bother me, because as the old saying goes ‘if you dish it out you’ve got to take it as well’. I think this is a classic example of neither poster being thick skinned enough to take it on the chin and move on. I hope they find a solution because the gasroom would be a poorer place without them.
@bargepole & @ChasHarps Is there any way that we can move forward from here? Could we agree to leave each other posts alone and just avoid this conflict?
@ChasHarps you did go too far and changed the tone of your comments from banter to personal to abusive. If the shoe was on the other foot and Barge was coming after you, how would you feel? The Gasroom should be a safe space where all views are valid and should be respected, even if you don't agree with them. If you have a genuine dislike for someone, just avoid them.
However @bargepole coming after someone with the threats of legal action doesn't help this situation either. Maybe a word with @drcongo who's admin of the Gasroom might have helped this situation. Your actions, while were trying to get the behaviour to stop has kicked a wasps nest and Chas does have the right to defend himself.
How about taking the weekend to allow the dust to settle, don't interact with each other and maybe log back in on Monday with fresh eyes and mindset?
I saw on Twitter this morning that Billy Sharp is looking at (and could be talking to) a League One club and wants to become the all-time top goal scorer in the league. What do you think about him joining the club?
Please Note: I have not seen any evidence to suggest that he is looking at Wycombe
Billy Sharp would be a real good signing, not sure about his character but he certainly knows where the back of the net is. He would be a Simon Garner type signing.
Genuinely interested. Anyone know if there is any legal precedent for a username (other than someone who clearly links it to their identity) successfully suing for libel?
Asking for a friend….
(@trevor may soon be able to buy out the Couhigs if so…)
There was a case in Canada recently where somebody successfully sued anonymous posters and won. But it was a moral victory as they obviously didn't know who to get the damages from.
In 2015, the then owners of Blackpool FC, and the club, sued someone who had posted defamatory comments on the fans' forum. They had obtained a High Court injunction, requiring the website to disclose the identity of the poster.
The Court awarded £20,000 in damages to each of Karl and Owen Oyston, and £1,000 to the club.
If you’re pontificating about stuff like most of us, you’re going to encounter people who answer back.
Bargey’s style is very much Rod Liddle / Clarkson / Littlejohn mould, designed to wind people up and get a reaction. That’s fine by me but DOFL, take the reaction on the chin.
The only people who get sustained stick on this forum are those who actively court it. With the possible exception of @glasshalffull who suffers for always being positive!
Unless I've missed a keen interest in boating, even the name "bargepole" suggests specific tapping into the "wouldn't touch it with a bargepole" phrase, seemingly picking such a name to suit the making waves style of posting.
You could only really be compensated, so you'd have to prove lost earnings related to the accusations , the Oystons may be loathsome but if a fan had lied in any respect and more fans had boycotted based on that info they'd have an angle.
For the action to be considered in good faith you'd presumably also have to prove this doesn't happen every day as standard on here to a level where people would expect a bit of stick occasionally when baiting people, and that you were any better and didn't call people names and overstate things yourself.
I have been called some things on here by former posters that might have been nice little earners in the past, If I had known I could brief a silk because I've been called a 'Dave Spart' that changes everything.
@ReturnToSenda I am sure there must be a sport one...who doesn't just go on about Boris being undone by cake (rather than supporting sexual assaulters) wokeism at the BBC and Meghan Markle...but I could be completely wrong.
To be clear, I hold no candle for the Oystons, but was simply responding to a question about forum posters being sued. The case was decided res judicata by a High Court Judge, and if you have a problem with that, take it up with him.
What that case establishes, is that there is a distinction between forum banter, and personal abuse which can cause reputational damage.
Comments
I have always admired Chas for his knowledge of the history of WWFC and have said so in numerous posts. If restricted his contributions to the subject about which he is such an expert, I don’t think he could offend anyone. However, he occasionally veers into dangerous waters, usually due to his political beliefs, and I myself have been on the receiving end of his vitriol. It doesn’t bother me, because as the old saying goes ‘if you dish it out you’ve got to take it as well’. I think this is a classic example of neither poster being thick skinned enough to take it on the chin and move on. I hope they find a solution because the gasroom would be a poorer place without them.
@bargepole & @ChasHarps Is there any way that we can move forward from here? Could we agree to leave each other posts alone and just avoid this conflict?
@ChasHarps you did go too far and changed the tone of your comments from banter to personal to abusive. If the shoe was on the other foot and Barge was coming after you, how would you feel? The Gasroom should be a safe space where all views are valid and should be respected, even if you don't agree with them. If you have a genuine dislike for someone, just avoid them.
However @bargepole coming after someone with the threats of legal action doesn't help this situation either. Maybe a word with @drcongo who's admin of the Gasroom might have helped this situation. Your actions, while were trying to get the behaviour to stop has kicked a wasps nest and Chas does have the right to defend himself.
How about taking the weekend to allow the dust to settle, don't interact with each other and maybe log back in on Monday with fresh eyes and mindset?
Anyways, back to the topic of conversation.
I saw on Twitter this morning that Billy Sharp is looking at (and could be talking to) a League One club and wants to become the all-time top goal scorer in the league. What do you think about him joining the club?
Please Note: I have not seen any evidence to suggest that he is looking at Wycombe
A football topic! Is that allowed?
To be fair you have taken some stick and as you say taken it on the chin.
Good for you as you have to rise above it.
Think the two of them should either have a straightener in the car park or just get a room........
Our car park is prestigious enough to stage heavyweight bouts, to be fair. The slope might be a bit of an issue, though.
Billy Sharp would be a real good signing, not sure about his character but he certainly knows where the back of the net is. He would be a Simon Garner type signing.
@ChasHarps just says it how he sees it. If you get aggravated, that's your problem not his. Snowflake.
Bargepoo called me a speccy geek. Do I have grounds to sue for defamation as I sometimes wear contact lenses?
Genuinely interested. Anyone know if there is any legal precedent for a username (other than someone who clearly links it to their identity) successfully suing for libel?
Asking for a friend….
(@trevor may soon be able to buy out the Couhigs if so…)
I'm afraid not. By your own admission, you 'sometimes' wear contact lenses, which implies that you wear glasses the rest of the time.
Two of the statutory defences to a defamation claim are Truth (section 2 of the Act), and Honest Opinion (section 3).
The speccy part of that is well out of order 😘
If it was possible, forums would shut down as millions of people would sue each other all week.
There was a case in Canada recently where somebody successfully sued anonymous posters and won. But it was a moral victory as they obviously didn't know who to get the damages from.
Dude, let it go. You're going down a rabbit hole and I fear you'll get stuck
In 2015, the then owners of Blackpool FC, and the club, sued someone who had posted defamatory comments on the fans' forum. They had obtained a High Court injunction, requiring the website to disclose the identity of the poster.
The Court awarded £20,000 in damages to each of Karl and Owen Oyston, and £1,000 to the club.
The full Judgment is available here: Oyston & Anor v Ragozzino [2015] EWHC 3232 (QB) (09 November 2015) (bailii.org)
If you’re pontificating about stuff like most of us, you’re going to encounter people who answer back.
Bargey’s style is very much Rod Liddle / Clarkson / Littlejohn mould, designed to wind people up and get a reaction. That’s fine by me but DOFL, take the reaction on the chin.
The only people who get sustained stick on this forum are those who actively court it. With the possible exception of @glasshalffull who suffers for always being positive!
Unless I've missed a keen interest in boating, even the name "bargepole" suggests specific tapping into the "wouldn't touch it with a bargepole" phrase, seemingly picking such a name to suit the making waves style of posting.
You could only really be compensated, so you'd have to prove lost earnings related to the accusations , the Oystons may be loathsome but if a fan had lied in any respect and more fans had boycotted based on that info they'd have an angle.
For the action to be considered in good faith you'd presumably also have to prove this doesn't happen every day as standard on here to a level where people would expect a bit of stick occasionally when baiting people, and that you were any better and didn't call people names and overstate things yourself.
Wow, looking to the Oystons to back you up
That's a new low for anyone
Jesus H Christ. I just ignored the poor quality Daily Mail columnist, but using the Oystons as a benchmark is sort of unsurprising.
I must have missed a lot of @ChasHarps vitriol.
I have been called some things on here by former posters that might have been nice little earners in the past, If I had known I could brief a silk because I've been called a 'Dave Spart' that changes everything.
Are you saying there are good quality Daily Mail columnists?
@ReturnToSenda I am sure there must be a sport one...who doesn't just go on about Boris being undone by cake (rather than supporting sexual assaulters) wokeism at the BBC and Meghan Markle...but I could be completely wrong.
To be clear, I hold no candle for the Oystons, but was simply responding to a question about forum posters being sued. The case was decided res judicata by a High Court Judge, and if you have a problem with that, take it up with him.
What that case establishes, is that there is a distinction between forum banter, and personal abuse which can cause reputational damage.
On the other side of the coin, back in 2017 when I was a law student at the OU, another student tried to sue me and 6 others for comments made on the OU law forum. It ended badly for her, and she was hit with an £8k costs bill: Open University law student fails in bid to sue six classmates over 'defamatory' forum comments - Legal Cheek
Lunchtime. Goes to Gasroom to see any news. 48 new messages on the rumour thread. Exciting stuff.
Oh well
Does anyone else read Bargey’s posts in the style of this character?
https://youtu.be/XOhZgAPn_CU
Bloody hell, with all the new comments I thought the ITK Kipper had been teasing us all morning. Instead it’s all legal threats and beefing.
May I suggest pistols at dawn? Or if that feels too Bargey and not enough Harpsey, five rounds of bare knuckle?
Or maybe some Relate sessions?