For example, if someone slandered your name, would you flag them? Here is a comment taken from a religious Q&A comment on Hubpages: "Compulsive lying with an inclination towards spreading intrigues. Something pre-psychotic or just plain immature, but definitely stemming from an inner chronic turmoil," Pitiable." Would you consider that bullying, especially if you had simply pointed out the flaw in someone's hypothesis, in a non-bullying manner? My understanding is that personally attacking hubbers is against policy, yet this person remains. Thoughts?
sort by best latest
SavvyDating, the lawyers at the media companies where I worked said we needed to remove libelous material when brought to our attention. Otherwise, we would risk facing a lawsuit as well, even though the comments came from someone else.
Thank you. I told HP that the comment is slander. Furthermore, I work for a law firm. I"ll look into it further. I appreciate the things you have defined, very much.
I think you would have to show actual proof that they damaged your reputation, like if someone called you a pedophile and it cost you your job or something. I'm not a lawyer, but libel is a tricky thing.
Ralph makes a good point. In your situation, I doubt anyone on HP believes a word of that person. You have to prove damage and HP has to refuse to act. Of course it would act. FYI, I'm not trying to stir the pot. Just explaining why the risk.
Sadly, those most invested in controlling others are also the ones who cannot distinguish between trying to "own their own truths and facts." We have a generation of 40 to 50 somethings trying to own facts and truth. Not going to happen.
You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.
Amen to that, sister. Everything is a personal attack with them, and yet they claim to be "evolved" "peaceful" "intelligent" & "spiritual." Right. And I've got ocean front property....
There are too many bossy, overbearing NeoNazi Conservatives who masquerade as the fount of all knowlege. As I recall, there are 1st Amendment Rights that do not ALLOW CONs to have the ONLY voice in anything. Enough with bossy control freaks. Ban them
Hello Ewent. Did you enjoy your time away after you were banned from Q&A?
I'm sure you ladies don't appreciate being painted with a broad "these are my worst opinions of the worst conservatives" brush so why do you feel it's okay to speak about liberals that way?
Savvydating...whatever gave you the idea "I" was banned? Do you always ASSume? I am never banned because I never post anything but truth and facts. You don't get to own your own truth and facts. Sorry ...did you enjoy thinking I was banned? No class.
Lol, Aime. We are already painted that way. Did you not read Ewents comment? Tamara was speaking specifically about thin-skinned types who are easily angered by the slightest disagreement and I agreed.
Thin skinned types or your brand of bullying you attempt to paint with a glossy coat of superiority? Sorry but you are the bully and just cannot admit that. Time to let truth about bullying mentalities out and transparency reign free.
Yeah I'm sorry but in a post with a photo saying "no bully zone" I think you guys are doing a bit of bullying yourselves. Just because Ewent said something that you felt was out of line doesn't mean you need to throw it back at everyone else.
Again, I was referring to skin thinned types who claim to be "evolved." They are generally New Age types who mock Chrdtianity. I did not say Ewent made that claim. Don't know where her anger comes from.
Ever notice how the least mature minded individuals in this country are also the MOST thin skinned? Just dare to tell them TRUTH or FACTS and substantiate with proof and right away they run to ban or censor. Then it's the victim card for them.
Yes, if it is excessive, HP will do something. They did actually ban at least one of his Q&A's before. Same guy who wrote the comment above. As for the "underage" commenter guy--- what a slimeball.
Let me know how the persistent need to takeover over and be the only voice heard is not bullying. Either Savvydating has a serious problem reconciling her own bullying or she prefers to deflect that onto others. Either way, bad bad juju that.
Good information. Thank you!
Thank you Ralph. However, I read what you said to Tsad where you told him to F off. That seems like an emotional reaction to me. As you know, I will remove myself from the post, but the schoolyard thing is foolish. I agree with you there.
If you're going to use something I said in a comment, please try to get it right. Here's the exact quote " My religion is none of your F business. Live and let live by each their own standards." No criticism of Tsad as far as I can see.
My point is that you were speaking to Tsad in that manner, because you disagreed with him, and your comment is not "taking things in stride," as you say you like to do. Just pointing out a discrepancy.
Your point should be - I'm sorry for trying to mischaracterize what you said Ralph. IT's OK - I forgive you for trying to make me look like the bad guy and trying to prove me wrong. As I said - Live and let live by each their own standards
Lu, I know U R a fair & logical woman. Everyone has a limit 2 what they will tolerate. Tony pushes people beyond this all the time. If u haven't experienced it yet, You WILL. Believe what U feel.
I believe that Tsad is a very passionate man who loves the Lord. He may come on strong at times, and I see some people may take offense, but I choose to stick up for him. He has a thick skin and he does not use vulgar language when "countering."
RE: conversation between Ralph and Tsad. Tsad was goading Ralph in a rather unchristian manner. If Tsad “loves the Lord all that much,” he would express his opinions without goading people. Ralph was within his rights, maybe leave off the "F".
Indeed. Thank you, Rochelle. That being said, a ban may occur at some point, usually much later, if the bad behavior is consistent and if HP staff is aware of the unacceptable behavior.
They do not necessarily come back. If they are not flagged, they are essentially being rewarded for bullying. I will always flag a bully, even on behalf of others. However, not commenting on their questions is
the best way to go.
With a bully getting reported can also be a reward. Being ignored is to them the ultimate insult.
I understand your point, but the worst bullies actually delete all comments, which are usually from Christians, anyway----no matter how benign the comment. So, I don't they don't mind being ignored. They state that Q&A is a way to make money.
savvy, you nailed it as I am frequently told "take your meds", "adjust your tinfoil hat!", or "you should be in a rubber-room". My favorite is the totally unfounded "racist" just because I am a Bible-believing birther who knows 9/11 WAS an inside.
Thank you for explaining things so thoroughly, Tsmog. I am sorry you were banned. I will review the rules again at some point soon.
Welcome El Shaddai 2016. I agree with you wholeheartedly, and this was my experience, along with many, many others who dared to politely disagree.
Hi Brad. I believe that Flagging with actual content is sometimes necessary, but being "flag happy" over a difference of opinion is unwise. This was an unwarranted attack. However, the context is missing here. He has since twisted some context.
I think HP should explain to anyone why he/she is banned. After being a victim of office backstabbing, I don't like to see it being done to anyone. However, I think most trolls know why.
Miz....Perhaps if one emails the HP Team, they will give the reason. I am not sure. However, they will not disclose the reasons for others having been banned.
Flagging others who post facts and truth is good business for the media? So unless everything is written according to some bizarre CONservative ideology, well folks..it's just wrong according to these control freaks.
I meant to put the URL for the Hub about the plagiarism in my reply, above. Forgot to do that. (I must be a really dumb bully... So, here it is -
It is good to point out the truth, but it should be done respectfully. The above comment about me was neither true or respectful. Perhaps I will look at your article. Thank you for commenting, Gustave.
Yes, I did remove myself from the conversation. However, enabling low level speech is inappropriate. Thus, the reason for the Flag button. Thanks for your input, Shanmarie.
After seeing more of this discussion, I think I read somewhere that it was told the slander should be your profile. . .I'd report that too. It's just plain rude. And purposeful.
Thank you shanmarie. You are very kind. I realize that without context, it is sometimes difficult to assess situations. In truth, such words are unacceptable in any context, when all is said and done. ;)
Can u or someone say who it is? It's hard to judge a conversation based off one sentence. If it is a commonly known name that might help me understand the conversation. Savvy and I disagree on much, but she's always been civil, so curious who this is
Hey girl...I wouldn't take the liberty to say a name Bcuz I am "speculating." ( It's someone who insults ALL the time. ) Savvy could tell us who it is Bcuz she has quoted him anyway & eventually we'll see the comment.
Paula, I hear you & I didn't reply to his comment. He stated that is how my profile should read. He does this with everyone except his atheist friends. I usually ignore him, but the scapegoating gets old, especially when he claims to be "loving."
It's sad when there are so many ppl who fit that description I can't figure out who! lol. I just know I've never seen savvy be "rude" to anyone. so I don't get why the conversation happened. Oh well. Maybe I'm just not in forums enough!
He said ~~That is how UR profile should read??! Well, that's pretty damned rude. I can tell U what they hate more than being banned. It's having UR friends comment how RUDE or WRONG they are! send the link in an email. (Got ya Ann.)
Thanks Paula and Annsalo. He did say that was how my profile should read. I'll email you later tonight or in am, Paula. I still have the link, but I'll have to check if HP deleted the question or not.
I will still flag those who pretend to be evolved & loving, yet live to mock others. They bring the whole discussion down and they are unacceptable. I still say they are bullies even if most people disagree. But, I usually don't reply to insults.
The person who made the comment responded by bullying because he cannot take disagreement. I actually appreciate constructive criticism, but bullying is against all policies anywhere, including here.
Savvydating obviously has reinterpreted the 1st Amendment to mean we only get to post and publicize what Savvy Dating okays. See the tyranny in that yet? I always feel sorry for people who are all too engrossed in trying to control others.
The commenter was scapegoating. Besides, you wrote a hub personally denigrating a hubber years ago. Did she call you delusional, or was it the other way around? Anyway, she was banned. Guess it's hard to determine HP's rational for banning or not.
Leaving censorship in the hands of Hub Pages is not something I would do. It is totally up to the Hub Pages employee who can ban or not ban someone.
Yes, but they do not see the wrongdoing unless it is called to the employee's attention.
I wrote a hub in direct response to a Q, and that was the same person who attacked my husband. Not once in that article did I attack her, only her beliefs that led to attack onHubby.I didn't say person was right, just cldnt makedecision off 1 sentece
Annsalo, I agree that speaking about your husband is off limits. Don't remember your stating that she talked about him, but it was long ago.
1 answer hidden due to negative feedback. Show
1 answer hidden due to negative feedback. Hide