If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawker)   That whole anonymity thing on the Internet? Yeah, about that   (gawker.com) divider line 187
    More: Followup, Courthouse News Service  
•       •       •

12984 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jan 2014 at 9:48 AM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-10 11:53:37 AM

Theaetetus: walktoanarcade: Theaetetus: walktoanarcade: An IP address is not a person and there is no way to prove if someone else uses said address.

They could admit it. You're just being unimaginative.

That's a laugh for a couple reasons. This thread is now supremely ironic.

[pitchforkdiaries.com image 600x400]
What a supreme may look like.


*blindfolded* I'm thinkin' of somethin' orange. Something ORANGE....


You give up? It's an ORANGE!
.....DUNda DUNda DUNda DUNda DUN DA NA NAAA!!!!
 
2014-01-10 11:54:58 AM

Starshines: HindiDiscoMonster: vharshyde: Statement: A thing you say.
Statement of Fact: A thing you say with the intent that it be assumed to be factual.
False Statement: A thing you say that isn't true.
False statement of Fact: A thing you say that you intended to be assumed as fact but is not true.
Does that help hammer it out for you? This is pretty basic, I feel.


So, the judge is saying he is psychic... ok, that clears things up.

You should have quit while you were only a little behind.


The reason you say a false statement is because you intended it to be assumed as fact yet it's not true.

The distinction makes no sense in a common sense way. I am sure legally there is some kind of distinction. Just not seeing it.
 
2014-01-10 11:56:44 AM

durbnpoisn: I never assume that anything is anonymous on the internet.  However, I do feel a little more secure around Fark if only for 2 things.  There are so many users here, I rarely get noticed.  I don't think I know a single user here in real life.


Sine you have no friends in real life, that makes the intarwub pretty anonymous for you,no?
 
2014-01-10 12:00:27 PM
I have no problem with this, if they really are customers then they have nothing to worry about. Online reviews are getting to the point of being worthless anyway, taking away a persons anonymity would be a big step toward straightening them out. If you're not willing to stand behind what you say then in my opinion you have no business saying it.
 
2014-01-10 12:00:41 PM
It's almost like people get upset about false comments on the intertubes that could harm their business.


It's funny how most people don't seem to think their bullshiat anonymous statements are a problem, but if anybody suggests anything even slightly inaccurate about them online, they get all high school outraged about it, with lengthy, poorly spelled diatribes about how the other person got it so very wrong.
 
2014-01-10 12:01:57 PM
There's a Farker called HoopyFrood who knows who I am IRL because we used to work in the same office. But aside from him, I'm pretty sure that no one here knows or cares about my actual identity. And that's perfectly fine with me. Why wouldn't it be?

(Spoiler alert: I'm not really all that fabulous.)
 
2014-01-10 12:05:55 PM
Normal people should not lose the many protections anonymous postings offer because abnormal people abuse technology to be the same stalking creeps they always were and forever shall remain.

Of course I believe no one should leave a false review, but I don' think it's right for people to jaywalk when there's a perfectly good crosswalk, so my solution is to shackle everyone.

You can still move, albeit slowly,  but it's safer for you and in case a cop needs to chat, you won't go far.
 
2014-01-10 12:06:26 PM
It's not anonymity, it's lack of immediate repercussions.  The internet would be a lot different if you could punch someone through a monitor.
 
2014-01-10 12:15:22 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Starshines: HindiDiscoMonster: vharshyde: Statement: A thing you say.
Statement of Fact: A thing you say with the intent that it be assumed to be factual.
False Statement: A thing you say that isn't true.
False statement of Fact: A thing you say that you intended to be assumed as fact but is not true.
Does that help hammer it out for you? This is pretty basic, I feel.


So, the judge is saying he is psychic... ok, that clears things up.

You should have quit while you were only a little behind.

The reason you say a false statement is because you intended it to be assumed as fact yet it's not true.

The distinction makes no sense in a common sense way. I am sure legally there is some kind of distinction. Just not seeing it.


Blame the English. Or French if in Louisiana.
 
zeg
2014-01-10 12:16:30 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Starshines: HindiDiscoMonster: vharshyde: Statement: A thing you say.
Statement of Fact: A thing you say with the intent that it be assumed to be factual.
False Statement: A thing you say that isn't true.
False statement of Fact: A thing you say that you intended to be assumed as fact but is not true.
Does that help hammer it out for you? This is pretty basic, I feel.


So, the judge is saying he is psychic... ok, that clears things up.

You should have quit while you were only a little behind.

The reason you say a false statement is because you intended it to be assumed as fact yet it's not true.

The distinction makes no sense in a common sense way. I am sure legally there is some kind of distinction. Just not seeing it.


The distinction is that a statement of opinion is different from a statement of fact. This is true not just legally but also generally.

Just because the word "fact" (which, as a lone noun, does imply truth) appears in "statement of fact" does not mean that the latter is the same as the former. It's just a modifier that briefly and succinctly describes the form of the statement. It's not always necessary to distinguish what type of statement one is talking about, but does actually have trouble understanding what "statement of fact" implies?

It so happens that a "statement of fact" is a technical legal term as well. The reason for this is obvious: legal proceedings hinge on disputed truths, and much of the process is to determine which claims are true and false. So you naturally get things like "findings of fact" and "statements of fact." Since it's impossible to know the "actual fact," "legal facts" wind up being rather different things that hopefully are mostly the same as the actual ones.

It's really not a very complicated idea, and unless I'm missing something, is vastly preferable to constructing a separate vocabulary. Hell, even in the real world people understand that "facts" are fairly often false, whether due to deception, misunderstanding, or ignorance.
 
2014-01-10 12:20:20 PM

Unoriginal_Username: So, the owner is going on the assumption that because he reply's to comments by his customers, and that these specific ones were posted by anonymous users that they were not written by actual customers. So now he want's to sue for defamation.
What happens when he finds out that yes, they were customers who were pissed off and just didn't feel like creating an account on yelp? Do they get to counter sue?


Have you ever tried commenting on Yelp?  They require a user ID, even if it's Heywood Jablome.  You cannot post entirely anonymously.
 
2014-01-10 12:20:37 PM

yakmans_dad: HindiDiscoMonster: FTA: "false statements of fact"

hmmmm... I think maybe the judge should have stopped while he was ahead...

I could imagine what is meant. There are statements which are obviously opinions. The only truth or falsity is whether they are in fact the speakers opinions. If I say, "It's raining." That supposed to be a fact statement. If the sun is shining, the fact statement is false.

Or the judge could be incoherent.


I vote incoherent... we know how much those guys drink (esp on the job)...
 
2014-01-10 12:21:18 PM

Warlordtrooper: Also no absolute right to anonymity?  Be careful what you ask for because that means the government can force the identities of donors to super PACs to be identified.


You say that like it's a bad thing.
 
2014-01-10 12:22:11 PM

StoPPeRmobile: StainedGlassRuby: Unoriginal_Username: So, the owner is going on the assumption that because he reply's to comments by his customers, and that these specific ones were posted by anonymous users that they were not written by actual customers. So now he want's to sue for defamation.
What happens when he finds out that yes, they were customers who were pissed off and just didn't feel like creating an account on yelp? Do they get to counter sue?

He would know if he had screwed customers around like that, and it would be his folly to bring all that to light, if he is a crooked business owner.  Now if he's just a bully who knows what he'd do.  But to go to such lengths - It would not protect his reputation to identify customers he really did screw over.

And if customers are yelping that, and not even lodging complaints with the business then they're pretty dumb.  He deserves to be given a chance to make it right if people are that upset.

Stalkers will simply love this.



I just meant unsatisfied customers should file complaint with business owner before just yelping about it.    If they're going straight to yelp to complain, then how are they going to get any resolution?      I didn't mean to imply that they deserved to have their personal info revealed.
 
2014-01-10 12:22:48 PM
I'm ok with this.  This guys business is not a very good example but people shouldn't be able to libel a business for their own amusement or whatever other reason and have their anonymity protected.  Yelp is something people actually use to make purchasing decisions so writing false things there can be directly damaging a business in no uncertain terms.
 
2014-01-10 12:23:17 PM

zeg: It so happens that a "statement of fact" is a technical legal term as well. The reason for this is obvious: legal proceedings hinge on disputed truths, and much of the process is to determine which claims are true and false. So you naturally get things like "findings of fact" and "statements of fact." Since it's impossible to know the "actual fact," "legal facts" wind up being rather different things that hopefully are mostly the same as the actual ones.


That's the part I wasn;t getting.

It's if I say "The ball is orange" and I think the ball is orange yet it's actually blue, that makes it a false statement.

If I say "The ball is orange" when I damn well know it's blue, that makes it a false staement of fact.

/right?
 
2014-01-10 12:23:48 PM

Starshines: HindiDiscoMonster: vharshyde: Statement: A thing you say.
Statement of Fact: A thing you say with the intent that it be assumed to be factual.
False Statement: A thing you say that isn't true.
False statement of Fact: A thing you say that you intended to be assumed as fact but is not true.
Does that help hammer it out for you? This is pretty basic, I feel.


So, the judge is saying he is psychic... ok, that clears things up.

You should have quit while you were only a little behind.


oh come on, I love being a large behind...
 
2014-01-10 12:24:48 PM

Hermione_Granger: They seem to making the argument that you have to be an actual customer to leave a bad review of a company.

I don't think that's the case. I could leave a bad review of a company who gave a friend or relative shoddy service. I could leave a shoddy review of a company if they were hard to contact, get a quote from or overall gave me a reason not to be their customer. I could leave a shoddy review of a company if one of their vans cut me off in traffic.

Reviews do not have to be spot on truth. They're about perception and opinion. If you don't like my opinion about your crappy company, tough shiat. Man up and change your service perspective or stfu.

/pms & estrogen surge hitting hard today


Your biology must be clouding your thinking.  Either that, or you're a Teahadi.  What you're saying is that character assassination is A-OK.
 
2014-01-10 12:25:05 PM

ReapTheChaos: I have no problem with this, if they really are customers then they have nothing to worry about.


I'm thinking they would be worried about getting hit with a defamation suit, rightly or wrongly. I'm thinking they would be worried about spending thousands of dollars, missing work, and the general stress of being sued by a vindictive petty asshole that you already wish you had never done business with.

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Yelp can suck a fart from my ass.
Posed a review of a local Mexican joint (nothing over the top, pretty straight forward review) and they pulled it.


It seems like this could have been remedied in a number fo ways without even coming withing 100 miles of privacy and free speech issues.

Like a simple "Unverifiable, Anonymous Reviews of a highly negative or positive nature can be challenged and absent any validation, removed." policy.
 
2014-01-10 12:26:04 PM

Mr_Fabulous: There's a Farker called HoopyFrood who knows who I am IRL because we used to work in the same office. But aside from him, I'm pretty sure that no one here knows or cares about my actual identity. And that's perfectly fine with me. Why wouldn't it be?

(Spoiler alert: I'm not really all that fabulous.)


I know, but do you HAVE to wear those Elton John glasses with the frilly things literally ALL the time? I mean geeze... those things are gonna catch fire one day while you are grilling by the pool.
 
2014-01-10 12:29:22 PM

zeg: It's really not a very complicated idea, and unless I'm missing something, is vastly preferable to constructing a separate vocabulary. Hell, even in the real world people understand that "facts" are fairly often false, whether due to deception, misunderstanding, or ignorance.


you know what you call a "fact" that is not true?

incorrect, untrue, wrong, erroneous, fallacious, flawed, distorted, inaccurate, imprecise, and there are more...

see? we already have words to deal with it...
 
2014-01-10 12:34:47 PM

StainedGlassRuby: I just meant unsatisfied customers should file complaint with business owner before just yelping about it. If they're going straight to yelp to complain, then how are they going to get any resolution? I didn't mean to imply that they deserved to have their personal info revealed.


It isn't about resolution. It is about protecting other people from wasting their money in your shiatty business.
 
2014-01-10 12:34:56 PM

BojanglesPaladin: ReapTheChaos: I have no problem with this, if they really are customers then they have nothing to worry about.

I'm thinking they would be worried about getting hit with a defamation suit, rightly or wrongly. I'm thinking they would be worried about spending thousands of dollars, missing work, and the general stress of being sued by a vindictive petty asshole that you already wish you had never done business with.


You're assuming it will even go to court. The guy has several bad reviews, he's not suing any of them, he just wants to know who these anonymous reviewers are because he suspects they were never customers. If that's the case then they deserve to be sued.
 
2014-01-10 12:41:37 PM
I will give Mr. Hadeed 4 stars for his excellent rug repair & cleaning. I would give him 5, but he is a little expensive and I can only understand about 25% of what he says.
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-10 12:44:11 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: o, I don't care what wiki says... it's not the be all end all of wisdom, nor do I care what some esoteric fuddy duddy says is correct, it sounds clumsy and wrong, and the idea can be represented much more gracefully.

false = opposite of true
facts are true


"Apples are the best fruit," is an opinion.
"The average weight of an apple is 10 pounds," is a fact.
 
2014-01-10 12:46:25 PM

doglover: edmo: It's simply really:

[img.fark.net image 350x339]

But Will is a dick. Like a really big dick. We have hours of video evidence.


Either that or the writers wanted the character to be a really big dick and Wil did a decent job of acting.  I like Wil, he seems like a decent guy.  Wesley, well, they could have left that character out with no harm to the show.
 
2014-01-10 12:47:58 PM
There is one solid fact on the Internet: (to paraphrase 'Rule 34') If it can be f**ked up, it will be f**ked up.

Several consumer complaints sites started out well -- then just got slammed with BS, frequently infested with those idiots inserting ad laden comments and others lying their arses off. Not to mention the squabbles between posters who disagreed with each others evaluation of the same product or service.

Then, of course, are the comments written by average folks, who in reality are paid employees of a listed company, whose job is to fake being a user of a disputed product and deliver a glowing report.

Take everything you read with a grain of salt. Some things you might need a pound or so.
 
2014-01-10 12:52:51 PM

Rik01: Then, of course, are the comments written by average folks, who in reality are paid employees of a listed company, whose job is to fake being a user of a disputed product and deliver a glowing report.


Don't forget people paid by competing products to give scathing reviews.
 
2014-01-10 12:58:09 PM

ReapTheChaos: You're assuming it will even go to court. The guy has several bad reviews, he's not suing any of them, he just wants to know who these anonymous reviewers are because he suspects they were never customers. If that's the case then they deserve to be sued.


You may want to review the information on this case a little more carefully. He has ALREADY filed.
"Hadeed sued them for making defamatory statements, according to Tuesday's court opinion." All seven of these people are ALREADY defendants.""[T]he Doe defendants have a constitutional right to speak anonymously over the Internet," Judge William Petty said for the majority . "However, that right must be balanced against Hadeed's right to protect its reputation." He has ALREADY filed suit against them. The decision with Yelp is simply a procedural decision about determing their identity.

This is not entirely uncommon, where you file a suit against parties to be determined - "The owner of this piece of land" is sued, and then they figure out who exactly that is. Or a suit against members of Anonymous, for instance. Or the infamous RIAA suits against john doe pirates, followed by IP based subpoenas. They are Doe defendants until identified, but they are already being sued. (They just don't know it yet)

Now, it is possible that some or all of these seven defendants will be able to verify that they did business with him, but that does not immediately release them from the case. They will still need to defend against the defamation claims, and can still be found guilty. Whether they are actual clients or not does not mean what they wrote was true or that it cannot be judged defamatory. (also even if they are NOT clients, they mat still not be found guilty of defamation). Either way, these seven people will be facing legal expenses, lost time and a great deal of stress.

So I'm afraid you are incorrect here. There is no assumption about whether it will go to court - it's already in court, and these people are already defendants.
 
2014-01-10 01:00:14 PM

impaler: HindiDiscoMonster: o, I don't care what wiki says... it's not the be all end all of wisdom, nor do I care what some esoteric fuddy duddy says is correct, it sounds clumsy and wrong, and the idea can be represented much more gracefully.

false = opposite of true
facts are true

"Apples are the best fruit," is an opinion.
"The average weight of an apple is 10 pounds," is a fact.


I don't know where you are getting your apples, but please tell me where to buy 10lb apples.
 
2014-01-10 01:01:02 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: I'll tell everyone who I am on the net:Herman Munster1313 Mockingbird LaneMockingbird Heights, OH 43616 (I always pick a random state and zipcode)xxx-555-1212 (I also pick the appropriate area code for the zipcode I use)


You are freeaking me out man. I use that EXACT same trick.
 
2014-01-10 01:01:47 PM
This guy must have a crapload of money burning in his pocket. Hadeed Carpet Cleaning is the official rug cleaning service of the Washington Capitals and, runs 127+ commercials during one game.
 
2014-01-10 01:01:54 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: I don't know where you are getting your apples, but please tell me where to buy 10lb apples.


I was illustrating the difference between facts and opinions. Not the difference between correct facts and incorrect facts.

Facts have the attribute of being verifiable. In this case, "the average weight of an apple is 10 pounds," would be an incorrect fact.
 
2014-01-10 01:02:41 PM

StoPPeRmobile: What about fake reviews that are positive and lies?


Again, this is where a third party verifier could come in handy. At the same time that it provides the identities of fraudulent-and-negative reviewers for Hadeed to pursue, it could provide a list of fraudulent-but-positive reviews for Yelp to purge. Everyone wins, except the fraudsters.
 
2014-01-10 01:03:09 PM

Rik01: Take everything you read with a grain of salt. Some things you might need a pound or so.


It would be very funny indeed if after all is said and done these defendants get slapped with a $1 fine for defamation. For the court to decide that measurable damages for a bad Yelp! review are effectively negligible, because no one attaches any significance to them anyway.
 
2014-01-10 01:04:43 PM

JoieD'Zen: Unoriginal_Username: So, the owner is going on the assumption that because he reply's to comments by his customers, and that these specific ones were posted by anonymous users that they were not written by actual customers. So now he want's to sue for defamation.
What happens when he finds out that yes, they were customers who were pissed off and just didn't feel like creating an account on yelp? Do they get to counter sue?

In this case I agree with his ruling. Cyber defamation and bullying are out of control right now and people should be held accountable for the damage they cause.


Are you comparing the situation of cyberbullying a teenage girl to the point of suicide to "bullying"  a business.  Seriously?  Stop and think for a second just how absurd that comparison is.  Businesses need less protections and the individual people need more protections from businesses not the otherway around.    This is some multimillion dollar business trying to use the legal system to extort cash out of people for voicing their opinions.  It's still extortion when the RIAA does it, and its still extortion when any business does it.
 
2014-01-10 01:07:53 PM

acohn: They require a user ID, even if it's Heywood Jablome. You cannot post entirely anonymously.


I use Gene Masseth.
 
2014-01-10 01:10:31 PM

impaler: Rik01: Then, of course, are the comments written by average folks, who in reality are paid employees of a listed company, whose job is to fake being a user of a disputed product and deliver a glowing report.
Don't forget people paid by competing products to give scathing reviews.


Yes, there was a local story that reported a local restaurant had many bad reviews that were traced to a competitor down the street. These weren't chains, but Mom and Pops. Very nasty.

But you should be able to tell who they are in the future. They will add a line that talks about having a "friend" who had this happen to them. So they have an excuse why they are listed as a customer.
 
2014-01-10 01:15:16 PM

impaler: HindiDiscoMonster: I don't know where you are getting your apples, but please tell me where to buy 10lb apples.

I was illustrating the difference between facts and opinions. Not the difference between correct facts and incorrect facts.

Facts have the attribute of being verifiable. In this case, "the average weight of an apple is 10 pounds," would be an incorrect fact.


they have a name for incorrect facts... they are called lies or as I said earlier, they are also called:

incorrect, untrue, wrong, erroneous, fallacious, flawed, distorted, inaccurate, imprecise... and more of course if you need more examples.

fact fakt/
noun: fact; plural noun: facts
1. a thing that is indisputably the case.
synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty

/can't call something a fact if it is not in fact a fact.
 
2014-01-10 01:17:51 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: FTA: "false statements of fact"

hmmmm... I think maybe the judge should have stopped while he was ahead...


You should just learn what it means. Ignorance is never clever, cute or funny.
 
2014-01-10 01:21:15 PM

gshepnyc: HindiDiscoMonster: FTA: "false statements of fact"

hmmmm... I think maybe the judge should have stopped while he was ahead...

You should just learn what it means. Ignorance is never clever, cute or funny.


I think maybe you should read further in the thread before derping so hard... it will feel less like putting both boots down your throat via the rectum.
 
2014-01-10 01:32:50 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: gshepnyc: HindiDiscoMonster: FTA: "false statements of fact"

hmmmm... I think maybe the judge should have stopped while he was ahead...

You should just learn what it means. Ignorance is never clever, cute or funny.

I think maybe you should read further in the thread before derping so hard... it will feel less like putting both boots down your throat via the rectum.


That was a stupid, unfunny line. You should feel bad for having typed it.
 
2014-01-10 01:39:36 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: zeg: It so happens that a "statement of fact" is a technical legal term as well. The reason for this is obvious: legal proceedings hinge on disputed truths, and much of the process is to determine which claims are true and false. So you naturally get things like "findings of fact" and "statements of fact." Since it's impossible to know the "actual fact," "legal facts" wind up being rather different things that hopefully are mostly the same as the actual ones.

That's the part I wasn;t getting.

It's if I say "The ball is orange" and I think the ball is orange yet it's actually blue, that makes it a false statement.

If I say "The ball is orange" when I damn well know it's blue, that makes it a false staement of fact.

/right?


No.  That's just the difference between it being false because of deception and it being false because of misconception.

False but not statement of fact:  I like Walmart's potatoes.
False statement of fact:  I bought potatoes from Walmart yesterday.

Opinions, clear jokes, hyperbole, and writing intended to be taken as fiction are not statements of fact.  Though, that doesn't mean people won't mistakenly believe them (such as the Onion in reposts by random Facebook people).
 
2014-01-10 01:40:54 PM

HindiDiscoMonster: /can't call something a fact if it is not in fact a fact.


"Statement of fact" is not "fact." "Statement of fact" means "statement that is not an opinion."

A true statement of fact is a fact. A false statement of fact is an untrue non-opinion. It may be a lie, or it may be an incorrect but honest belief.
 
2014-01-10 01:42:23 PM
Yes, people leaving comments are not being nice, but Yelp is not an encyclopedia of truth; it's an advertising company with a weird creative team (anonymous-or-not voluntary posters), edited for profit by Yelp itself.

As long as it charges businesses a fee to remove "inaccurate" reviews, it is not unbiased, and all businesses and all consumers should treat Yelp info as seriously as the output of a poorly-designed pseudo-random number generator.

Yelp shakedown: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/eastbay/yelp-and-the-business-of-extort i on-20/Content?oid=1176635
Shakedown: http://blogs.findlaw.com/strategist/2013/08/yelp-shakedown-complaints - lawsuits-over-review-sites-practices.html
Shakedown: http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bella/2012/05/yelp-extortionists-res t aurants-shakedown.php

Inverse Shakedown http://www.epicurious.com/articlesguides/blogs/editor/2012/05/the-yel p -extortion-scam.html

Basically, no information on the Internet can be believed unless you're on a secure session with a site whose certificate has not been rendered meaningless by a man-in-the-middle attack / spoofed DNS server / bogus certification / Nicholas Cage in a Bad Mood AND you've got strong reason to trust that site such as a signed legal agreement vetted by your lawyer.  Do not take my word on this, as I am actually a picture of a golden retriever on cheezburger, and as such I have a steak in this.
 
2014-01-10 01:49:27 PM
"But Hadeed can't possibly prove that until he knows their identities, which requires a court to rule that First Amendment protections don't apply. "


I'm guessing the Gawker writer is not a lawyer...
 
2014-01-10 01:58:08 PM

ErinPac: Jim from Saint Paul: zeg: It so happens that a "statement of fact" is a technical legal term as well. The reason for this is obvious: legal proceedings hinge on disputed truths, and much of the process is to determine which claims are true and false. So you naturally get things like "findings of fact" and "statements of fact." Since it's impossible to know the "actual fact," "legal facts" wind up being rather different things that hopefully are mostly the same as the actual ones.

That's the part I wasn;t getting.

It's if I say "The ball is orange" and I think the ball is orange yet it's actually blue, that makes it a false statement.

If I say "The ball is orange" when I damn well know it's blue, that makes it a false staement of fact.

/right?

No.  That's just the difference between it being false because of deception and it being false because of misconception.

False but not statement of fact:  I like Walmart's potatoes.
False statement of fact:  I bought potatoes from Walmart yesterday.

Opinions, clear jokes, hyperbole, and writing intended to be taken as fiction are not statements of fact.  Though, that doesn't mean people won't mistakenly believe them (such as the Onion in reposts by random Facebook people).


So the difference is whether you are suggesting action along with your false statement? Or is having an action just an easier way for you to explain it to me?

"F,BNSOF: I like Honey Boo Boo.
FSOF: I watched Honey Boo Boo yesterday."  ?
 
2014-01-10 02:01:28 PM
Jim from Saint Paul:
That's the part I wasn;t getting.

It's if I say "The ball is orange" and I think the ball is orange yet it's actually blue, that makes it a false statement.

If I say "The ball is orange" when I damn well know it's blue, that makes it a false staement of fact.

/right?


that's exactly right, and even though ianal (*snerk* must have spent too much time in the farrah thread), i believe the reason for legal terms for "false statements" and false "statements of fact" involve perjury.  there's a difference between testimony being wrong because someone was unaware of the truth, and testimony being wrong because someone deliberately lied.
 
Ral
2014-01-10 02:05:39 PM
People are surprised by this? Anyone who really believes in true anonymity on the internet is a sucker.
 
2014-01-10 02:08:45 PM

ErinPac: Jim from Saint Paul: zeg: It so happens that a "statement of fact" is a technical legal term as well. The reason for this is obvious: legal proceedings hinge on disputed truths, and much of the process is to determine which claims are true and false. So you naturally get things like "findings of fact" and "statements of fact." Since it's impossible to know the "actual fact," "legal facts" wind up being rather different things that hopefully are mostly the same as the actual ones.

That's the part I wasn;t getting.

It's if I say "The ball is orange" and I think the ball is orange yet it's actually blue, that makes it a false statement.

If I say "The ball is orange" when I damn well know it's blue, that makes it a false staement of fact.

/right?

No.  That's just the difference between it being false because of deception and it being false because of misconception.

False but not statement of fact:  I like Walmart's potatoes.
False statement of fact:  I bought potatoes from Walmart yesterday.

Opinions, clear jokes, hyperbole, and writing intended to be taken as fiction are not statements of fact.  Though, that doesn't mean people won't mistakenly believe them (such as the Onion in reposts by random Facebook people).


"i like walmart's potatoes"  is an "i" statement... of a personal fact...
the clear jokes, hyperbole and fictional statements i'll give you, but opinions are divided between statements of fact and, say, an editorial on how a certain law could help/hurt the economy...
 
Displayed 50 of 187 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report