MADBAZ:
Can’t be bovvered, only one sure way to get this thread deleted.Stobbies is going bust on monday.
You cannot be serious!
Can’t be bovvered, only one sure way to get this thread deleted.
Stobbies is going bust on monday.
Given the content of this thread I dont think William is going to be that concerned about it, 
MADBAZ:
Shut yer ■■■■■■ whining will ya. Its not hard to understand ffs.
This^
JamieR85:
As for it being reported, some ppl really must have nothing better to do than report things, get a life you ppl!
It was me who reported it (I don’t know if anyone else did). The rules are there to stop legal action against tnuk - I like tnuk, so I reported it. Problem with that?
Rikki, I hope the kids went up OK 
JamieR85:
Rikki-UK:
Or perhaps they have a business/job to defend against unfounded and damaging drivers bull manure, you know the sort of crap that most of us filter out in cafes, on the train, and in truckstop bars.Ok we shall see then! They do say theres no smoke without fire.
Of course there is smoke, smoke and mirrors. For your information I posted the information about Norbert Dentressangle from my own reputable source. I also posted almost word for word what Norbert are now saying. The bit which seems to have got you spitting feathers is this.
This will be supported by a second base in Yorkshire, served by a fleet of dedicated and shared vehicles.
The only people who guessed it was Wakefield were doing just that, Guessing.
Threads are not normally deleted, just edited, I don’t think bad manners come into it.
Posted on 14th July 2011 in reply to the Bus Driver in a thread called Weird
Wheel Nut:
Robert Northerndangle has got two new major contracts with Coca Cola, one delivering vending machines and post-mix dispensers to pubs, clubs, bars, restaurants etc.They have taken on a major canned drinks contract with Kiln Farm being the main hub but trunking between 5 plants to various warehouses throughout the UK. They have also got another similar operation in Yorkshire.
That might be why someone from Sheffield rang the bus driver!
And one driver talks to another driver driver, who adds a bit, the next driver talks to another and exegerrates a bit for effect, who talks to another who… you get the idea… all of a sudden the rumours are that so and so are going bust because they have lost their major contract…, a mile away from the original FACTS of the story… such is the way drivers rumours go, and have done for generations, only today by the power of the internet the bull manure is easily acessible to all, including customers, suppliers, employees and lawyers… 
Look up a famous WW1 story about a message passed down the trenches, starting “send reinforcements we are going to advance”.
While you write the post, on the rumour you have heard, we are legally the publishers of it, if we are aware of a post that could be damaging and WE cannot substantiate it, then we could be liable for any damages…
Thats why chinese whispers are removed unless a CREDIBLE source can be produced…
some things we can substantiate , but cant say why on the forums but are happy enough with what we have if it got legal and we let those stay… the benefit of working for a company with a large number of journalists and a very expensive legal team
so why some things stay and others not is not always as cut and dried as a public source, but WE have to have that information before we allow any post that could be damaging to remain published
“My mate told me, I heard in the RDC waiting room, the blokes on the train etc were saying etc” are as credible as most of the military careers in Hereford that many of those spouting such rubbish claim.
Rikki-UK:
Look up a famous WW1 story about a message passed down the trenches, starting “send reinforcements we are going to advance”.
send three and fourpence, we’re going to a dance…
*(for our younger readers, three and fourpence means three shillings and four pennies 
)
JamieR85:
Ok fair enough but would have liked a PM from the person removing it to say that it was being removed and the reason why, some ppl have no manners.?
I replied to your thread shortly after you posted it saying that you needed to post hard evidence to back up your statement or it would get removed and you’d be receiving the full wrath of Rikki. I don’t know what - if any - responses you or anyone else made after that, but presumably you couldn’t back up your statement with hard evidence so it was removed. As a general rule the mods/admin will leave the thread but remove the content and leave a note saying why, but in their defence (which is rare for me to do, btw) they don’t have to and it does state quite clearly in the forum rules that unsubstantiated content will be removed without prior warning so you don’t really have anyone else to blame but yourself.
and my joke has been deleted!
As usual it is all down to the corporate owners of community forums that ■■■■ themselves at the merest hint of anything that could be challenged in the courts.
All this without any evidence to show that a forum, such as this, has ever been successfully sued in the UK for libel and has substantial damages awarded against it.
There is another forum i use, football related, that was taken over by Sky…previously it had been a fun place with some very edgy stuff going on, but never once fell foul of the law (well apart from one mad irish female reporter but that was more outrage and didn’t involve anything illegal). Yet overnight it became an over moderated walking on eggshells type of place. Posts and threads got deleted for the merest hint of libel or rumour…and people got banned for doing things that had been perfectly acceptable for the previous 4 or 5 yrs!
More than once they were asked to provide some evidence that special interest forums have been sued successfully for libel, defamation call it what you want…and we are still waiting.
Of course the lawyers will advise the companies that they have to react like this…just another bill to them. “Consultation on media affairs…£100000000000000000000000” etc
Lets inject a little bit of reality in this…if i am Asda’s logistics director and i am looking for a new contractor to take on my store deliveries, i am sure that this forum would be right at the top of the list of places to look for recommendations! Or maybe not?
The Sarge:
Rikki-UK:
Look up a famous WW1 story about a message passed down the trenches, starting “send reinforcements we are going to advance”.send three and fourpence, we’re going to a dance…
*(for our younger readers, three and fourpence means three shillings and four pennies
What, no thru’penny bits?
DonutUK:
More than once they were asked to provide some evidence that special interest forums have been sued successfully for libel, defamation call it what you want…and we are still waiting.Of course the lawyers will advise the companies that they have to react like this…just another bill to them. “Consultation on media affairs…£100000000000000000000000” etc
Lets inject a little bit of reality in this…if i am Asda’s logistics director and i am looking for a new contractor to take on my store deliveries, i am sure that this forum would be right at the top of the list of places to look for recommendations! Or maybe not?
I take your point about the Logistic Director not reading or even caring what is written here about Pollock, Stobart or Bill Smith Logistiks, and it seems as though some sites do take things too seriously.
However Truck Net UK has a place on the internet, a very successful place, where a few drivers can have a laugh, tell jokes, pass on help and information and help newcomers. Providing that those newcomers are willing to learn form the elders experience. I really am at the end of my tether with this forum at the moment because of the spoiling tactics of certain members, some brilliant threads have been locked, spoiled, or lost their direction because someone has an issue with, or a stiff ■■■■ for a certain company!
Section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 1996 provides that:
“In defamation proceedings a person has a defence if he shows that -
(a) he was not the author, editor or publisher of the statement complained of,
(b) he took reasonable care in relation to its publication, and
(c) he did not know, and had no reason to believe, that what he did caused or contributed to the publication of a defamatory statement.”
There are lots of ■■■■■■■■ written on the threads about drivers hours, WTD and the rules of the road, some are typed by people who should know better, driving instructors, policemen and transport managers. Not one case has come to court where a driver or employee has been able to blame something they read on this forum. The members wouldn’t allow it, look how much crap is spoken about drivers hours, there are professional people spreading the “wrong” information, yet it takes an ex publican and driver to teach the correct terminology and legislation to many drivers and those in a managerial position.
This link makes an interesting read.
Most such cases never reach court because most complaints tend to be to an ISP or site owner, which would take down the defamatory content as soon as it was notified and the person making the libelous allegations would back down.
It’s a fair point!
Interesting link…however it still does not demonstrate that the owner of a site or forum has been successfully sued.
It merely demonstrates that if you, as a user, posts something potentially damaging you may be held to account for it.
One would wonder why Yahoo, who “published” the damaging remarks were not also brought to court? The answer i suspect is that they can afford far better legal protection than Ms Williams could as the user.
Or maybe, just maybe, the legal eagles recognise that the owner of a forum is not necessarily the right person to go after in these circumstances…and that the user is responsible for their own content.
Of course it doesn’t say whether the complainant had contacted Yahoo and asked them to remove the objectionable comments…which if he hadn’t done should surely have weakened his case somewhat?
At the end of the day, it shouldn’t be the moderators job to nursemaid users…users should understand that if you post something libellous, then you could well end up in court defending it.
The thing is, until all of this gets tested in court there’s no legal precedence, therefore no-one really knows what could happen. We, however, have no desire to offer ourselves up as a test case. And neither does anyone else, hence everything being settled out of court/removed by owners and moderators all over the UK-based web. It’s a Catch 22 situation, for sure. Unfortunately it leaves us with no choice but to say “This is our policy, like it or lump it”, which I appreciate is unsatisfying for the user, but what can you do.
DonutUK:
At the end of the day, it shouldn’t be the moderators job to nursemaid users…users should understand that if you post something libellous, then you could well end up in court defending it.
but if you’re a hotshot lawyer looking to win a test case you’re not likely to go after a lorry driver with limited funds you’ll look for a publishing company who might have more funds !!!
Lots of very fair points above, but there’s one thing that might have escaped some folks’ attention.
Surely, it is absolutely without doubt that the owners of a forum/website have the last word on what gets to be seen on their forum/website by the general browsing public, because the owners provide both the platform and the opportunity for people to post their views.
Some people attempt to use and bully TNUK in a completely uncaring way, regardless of whether TNUK could/might get sued, which is hardly fair IMHO. I suggest to those people that they start their own website/forum, for which they accept full personal responsibility under their own name, and then they can bleat/waffle on about freedom of expression and post absolutely anything else they like at their own risk.
The owners of TNUK have given us their instructons as to what is or isn’t acceptable, and Lucy has mentioned one of those instructions which is that the owners of TNUK do NOT wish to become a test case. Wouldn’t it seem sensible that commonsense says that we have to err on the side of caution until the legal goalposts are firmly established?
It’s not rocket science, but that instruction from the website owners seems fair enough to me.
dieseldave:
Lots of very fair points above, but there’s one thing that might have escaped some folks’ attention.Surely, it is absolutely without doubt that the owners of a forum/website have the last word on what gets to be seen on their forum/website by the general browsing public, because the owners provide both the platform and the opportunity for people to post their views.
Some people attempt to use and bully TNUK in a completely uncaring way, regardless of whether TNUK could/might get sued, which is hardly fair IMHO. I suggest to those people that they start their own website/forum, for which they accept full personal responsibility under their own name, and then they can bleat/waffle on about freedom of expression and post absolutely anything else they like at their own risk.
The owners of TNUK have given us their instructons as to what is or isn’t acceptable, and Lucy has mentioned one of those instructions which is that the owners of TNUK do NOT wish to become a test case. Wouldn’t it seem sensible that commonsense says that we have to err on the side of caution until the legal goalposts are firmly established?
It’s not rocket science, but that instruction from the website owners seems fair enough to me.
what many tend to forget is that a website is the property of whoever owns it which basically means that they can do as they wish with it, it is not a democratic right to have anything published it is at the discretion of the owner, don´t like it ? tough go elsewhere
Vascoingles:
dieseldave:
Lots of very fair points above, but there’s one thing that might have escaped some folks’ attention.Surely, it is absolutely without doubt that the owners of a forum/website have the last word on what gets to be seen on their forum/website by the general browsing public, because the owners provide both the platform and the opportunity for people to post their views.
Some people attempt to use and bully TNUK in a completely uncaring way, regardless of whether TNUK could/might get sued, which is hardly fair IMHO. I suggest to those people that they start their own website/forum, for which they accept full personal responsibility under their own name, and then they can bleat/waffle on about freedom of expression and post absolutely anything else they like at their own risk.
The owners of TNUK have given us their instructons as to what is or isn’t acceptable, and Lucy has mentioned one of those instructions which is that the owners of TNUK do NOT wish to become a test case. Wouldn’t it seem sensible that commonsense says that we have to err on the side of caution until the legal goalposts are firmly established?
It’s not rocket science, but that instruction from the website owners seems fair enough to me.
what many tend to forget is that a website is the property of whoever owns it which basically means that they can do as they wish with it, it is not a democratic right to have anything published it is at the discretion of the owner, don´t like it ? tough go elsewhere
+1