A question about GFY Rule #9 ... "Proof or Ban"

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • CXA
    Confirmed User
    • Nov 2005
    • 211
    #1

    A question about GFY Rule #9 ... "Proof or Ban"

    As a webmaster of an active adult forum I can appreciate GFY's Rule #9

    False accusations against a person or company. We all want to know what companies and individuals have done you wrong. Just make sure you back any claims you make up with solid proof. If you plan on calling someone a scammer, liar, cheat, or anything else, have your proof in order and post it with your claim. False accusations will be grounds for immediate banning.

    I believe this is an EXCELLENT rule.

    Here's my question:

    Let's say an affiliate makes an accusation against a large, well-known program and offers substantial proof to back up the allegations.

    Should the Program be required to offer any proof in their response or should they be allowed to get away with evasive answers that do not address the accusations at all?


    I think the Program should face banning .. or some sort of sanctions .. if they fail to offer any proof whatsoever in response to a serious allegation.
    .
    .
    Last edited by CXA; 12-08-2010, 05:54 AM.
    Don't complain ... compete

    [email protected]
    Tags: None
    • Fletch XXX
      GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!!
      • Jan 2002
      • 60840
      #2
      gfy rules are not stone, never have been.

      Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site?

      Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me

        Comment

        • ottopottomouse
          She is ugly, bad luck.
          • Jan 2010
          • 13177
          #3
          Originally posted by CXA
          Should the Program be required to offer any proof in their response or should they be allowed to get away with evasive answers that do not address the accusations at all?
          The program is under no obligation to pay any attention to you.

          The rule is there to stop people making shit up and accusing someone of something they haven't done.
          ↑ see post ↑
          13101

            Comment

            • CXA
              Confirmed User
              • Nov 2005
              • 211
              #4
              Originally posted by ottopottomouse
              The program is under no obligation to pay any attention to you.

              The rule is there to stop people making shit up and accusing someone of something they haven't done.
              Interesting point.

              You're saying the program has no obligation to respond.

              Okay then, let's say that the program DOES respond, I think there should be a requirement that the response be "responsive" and not "evasive".
              .
              .
              Last edited by CXA; 12-08-2010, 06:14 AM.
              Don't complain ... compete

              [email protected]

                Comment

                • Juicy D. Links
                  So Fucking Banned
                  • Apr 2001
                  • 122992
                  #5
                  Originally posted by CXA
                  Interesting point.

                  You're saying the program has no obligation to respond.

                  Okay then, let's say that the program DOES respond, I think there should be a requirement that the response be "responsive" and not "evasive".

                  my pov on this.. if someone /company fucked/screwed/ owes you money and you have some sort of "proof" and arent just doing it to fuck someone up then go for it..


                  alot of these fuckwads I have noticed try to fuck ya then when GFY is brought into it the issue gets "resolved" most of the time..

                  I would just do it as long as you have some good juice

                    Comment

                    • marketsmart
                      HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER
                      • Dec 2004
                      • 20419
                      #6
                      Originally posted by Juicy D. Links
                      my pov on this.. if someone /company fucked/screwed/ owes you money and you have some sort of "proof" and arent just doing it to fuck someone up then go for it..


                      alot of these fuckwads I have noticed try to fuck ya then when GFY is brought into it the issue gets "resolved" most of the time..

                      I would just do it as long as you have some good juice
                      your posts always give me a boner...




                      .

                        Comment

                        • Juicy D. Links
                          So Fucking Banned
                          • Apr 2001
                          • 122992
                          #7
                          Originally posted by marketsmart
                          your posts always give me a boner...




                          .
                          I am so hard now , gonna drizzle some oil on myself

                            Comment

                            • czarina
                              Webmaster Extraordinaire
                              • Jul 2002
                              • 10751
                              #8
                              it's not a courhouse, people. That rule simply exist to keep people from dragging someone else's name thru the mud

                                Comment

                                • Kenny B!
                                  Confirmed Abuser
                                  • Jun 2003
                                  • 5718
                                  #9
                                  It should fall on the accuser to provide proof or be banned not the other way around.
                                  Kenny -at- YourPaysitePartner.com
                                  Skype: kennyb514

                                  Do business with us:
                                  Your Paysite Partner
                                  Kenny's Pennies
                                  Sticky Dollars
                                  Radical Cash
                                  Indie Bucks
                                  Stand Ahead


                                  Read My Ambush Interview Here

                                    Comment

                                    • Barefootsies
                                      Choice is an Illusion
                                      • Feb 2005
                                      • 42635
                                      #10
                                      Originally posted by Kenny B!
                                      It should fall on the accuser to provide proof or be banned not the other way around.
                                      Correct.

                                      If you are going to accuse someone of something, have proof and post it with the O.P. or , with allegation. If you do not have that, you should be banned according to the rules.

                                      The rule exists because of people take their personal vendettas and agenda to the boards in an attempt to smear someone's name and business based on the "so I heard", or the half truths, third party stories, or making statements with a questions mark, and those similar type of remarks with nothing to back them up.

                                      Hence the rule.
                                      Should You Email Your Members?

                                      Link1 | Link2 | Link3

                                      Enough Said.

                                      "Would you rather live like a king for a year or like a prince forever?"

                                        Comment

                                        Previous template Next
                                        Working...