Mr ROK asks: “if a blog is not moderated, is there an onus on the blog manager who does not control content?”

This blog IS moderated. The “blog manager” DOES control content.

For example, every time I send a message to this thread, I get a message telling me that my message is “under moderation.”

I don’t know, for example, if this reply to Mr ROK will reach Mr. ROK. The blog owner decides that.

What is known is that the blog owner has read this message and has made a decision.

Anonymous,
Tanks fa comin ta ma defence hear. I is 100% bajan but can represent in Standard if need be. Tell wunna so a’reddy. You understan J/can dialect? Me needa but if reading one a dem blogs, I won’t be offended if I come across some. I doan know wah de ass C. H trying to prove. He tink we in a class room settin? Cah ya c*^t do. Bimbro’s question wasn’t directed to he, so if he got a problem wid he lang. he cudda simply ‘scroll’ pass instead a trying to insult. Show-off shite.

De two analogies he use to consolidate he argument doan even mek de grade.

Bimbro,
how ya hun? doan leh dese ‘betta dan wunna’ passy-holes come to intimidate you. Spoke it how ya knows it. Good.
He mussy a corrections offica.

Tell me sumting bout dis defamation ting. If I come an say dat Bimbro is a bulla? I cud get sue fa dah? Xplane.

Mash up / Anonymous,
I does enjoy de two a wunna. Sucre.

Anonymous, I can perceive some sense in Bush Tea’s assertion. Ur assuming everyone’s intelligent and will view a piece of writing for what it’s worth. However, there r posters who’re more hung-up on who wrote the piece than what the item says to make the exercise not worth while. There are a number of idiots on this blog and perhaps, most blogs. There’s merit in both your arguments!

Hi Bonny and thanks for the defense honey. No, I’m not worried about Chris! I wonder why he shows his pic and, he’s no beauty either!!

Ladd!!

Bonny, was thinking this morning they’re lots of little stories I could share with u ’bout my exp. of life hay in Britain but wid d weirdos pun dis board who love tuh throw things back in yuh face and twist things, I caan do it!! Sad, but dat’s some uh d idiot Bajees fuh yuh! Anyhow, u have a good time in Bim today dear. Nearly my bedtime here!! U take care!!

Mr ROK asks: “if a blog is not moderated, is there an onus on the blog manager who does not control content?”

Let’s be clear about this. This blog IS moderated. The “blog manager’ DOES control content. I have given examples of this before and I choose not to do it again.

So, for example, the owner of the blog is entirely free to choose, and is free to choose as many time as he wants, to publish the assertion that a decent and elderly Canadian woman, murdered in Barbados, is “white trash”.

“David” and “the BU Family” are completely free to publish that for an international audience. “David” and “the BU family” are entirely free not to challenge that assertion in any single way and to let it stand.

“David” and the entire “BU Family” can and, demonstrably, WILL decide whether or not to post this message.

If that’s not clear, please do not hesitate to send me a question through the “BU Family”.

What is certain, of course, is that the owner of this blog has seen this message and has made a decision about whether it should be published. Just as he made decisions about the lady who, apparently, was “white trash”.

Best wishes to you.

C.Halsall,
F*^k you too. Good.

Bimbro,
As woman, I tink he kinda cute but pussees cute too and he sure is one cute pussee. Meowwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Nevva had a white meat yet but where there’s life there’s hope. So he betta watch out. Bonny doan segregate. He want lickinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.

HOw could Bonny degrade her self so low whether in jest or in earnest to such a white foreigner runt?

David wrote “we presume that even now this is a matter being discussed by attorneys-general worldwide and their equivalents.”

“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”. – King Henry VI Act IV, Scene II / William Shakespeare

Are defamation cases decided by (lay) juries or by lawyers?

Bush Tea wrote “reputation builders’ like LIB to jump in and misuse the blog….’

And yet LIB’s use(or mis-use) of this blog has not enhanced his reputation.

Chris Halsall wrote “And this is the thing — we Bajan’s seem to think it’s cool to talk in a way that only we can understand each other.”

But Chris the French talk in a way that only French speakers can understand, and so do the Germans, and the Dutch and the Portugese etc.

You get me?

Speakers have responsibilities, but so do LISTENERS. If the cabby was speaking heavy Bajan your friend should have listened more carefully. That said when I was a student a a major North American University it took me the the better part of a semester to understand my Indian born English Literature teacher. And once when I was in Birmingham I listened to a conversation between my brother in law and a native of Birmingham and up to today I have no idea what was said.

So you see Chris it is not only a Bajan thing.

If you and you friend are to live among us you both have a responsibuility to learn standard Bajan English.

Chris Halsall wrote “2. I once had an understudy who refused to speak “international English”, even though he could. He stopped being invited into the Executive conference calls….”

Fair enough. But this blog is not about executive conference calls. It is a BAJAN blog. It is called Barbados Underground.

Chris you have to learn time and place. Even though Standard Bajan English may not be acceptable in a international conference call, it is perfectly acceptable and indeed shoui be encouraged on a Bajan blog.

Time and place Chris. Time and place.You have to learn time and place.

J asked:

“Are defamation cases decided by (lay) juries or by lawyers?”

The defendant elects whether he wants a jury or a judge alone. Lawyers do not sit of jury panels.

To Chris Halsall:

Bimbro is a better writer than you are.

He writes excellent Bajan.

And when he feels like writing standard English his writing is much better than yours (or Jack Bowman’s).

@J: “Speakers have responsibilities, but so do LISTENERS. If the cabby was speaking heavy Bajan your friend should have listened more carefully.

Why? We Bajans claim to be English speaking? We also claim to be 98% literate. Are we?

@J: “But this blog is not about executive conference calls. It is a BAJAN blog. It is called Barbados Underground.

Agreed.

But is has been argue that we Bajans need to become more competitive.

The cabby lost the job. As did the young Bajan who was originally welcomed into the conference calls?

Are we comfortable being an island amongst ourselves, amongst a planet of competitors?

(If yes, then may we rest in peace….)

@J: “Chris do us all a favor[sic].

8u7 w3’r3 y0u, J, 4813 70 und3r $74nd my 480ve?

No need to correct my spelling Chris.

I can spell favour in the English way.

Or favor in the American way.

I canunderstand Bajan English, English English, American English, Jamaican English, and Canadian English and a few more Englishes besides.

You can unburden yourself of the responsibility of teaching me.

J,
You pun a ‘high’. Go girl. If you ga any hiah, you gun touch a cloud ya, sus ‘croissssssssssss.

Men so damn touchous; I glad enough I had that sex change as soon as I turned 18.

J,
Wah you gun kill me hay fa tonite nah?Lord mek peace. Ya had a sex change?So wah ya is now? A piece a dis n’ a piece a dat? Havis mercy LOrd. A deadin.

Jack Ass Bowman Human Rat Faeces,
‘Has anyone ever been so boring to so many’?
Yes, you Jackass. So now ya kno wah ya plan ta do ’bout it? Get lost? Good riddance to rubbish.

Bimbro
” There are a number of idiots on this blog and perhaps, most blogs”

AAAAAAAAAAAghhhhhhhhhhhh

Yuh c d girl who MJ wanted to mother his nex child?!! I tell yuh!! I wun mind ****ing her either!!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2605269/Michael-Jackson-wanted-British-doctors-baby.html

In reaI Iife we have to express ourseIves coherentIy, so to be understood by other EngIish speakers. Whereas on a bIog you can say it how you want, take it or Ieave it. How you expresss yourseIf sends a message, in both reaI and cyber terms. You want to excIude peopIe? Use words to excIude them. More fooI you. Go ahead, preach to the converted if you wish. In the meantime, do stop critising grammer etc. how banaI.

What’s this *ucker complaining about now, Dave?!!

David

I have just noticed that you said ‘intimated;

and not ‘initiated’ legal action.

Sorry,I thought you were saying that someone had started legal action against you.

That had me very,very concerned.

Relieved to know that I misunderstood what you posted.

David, this is an EXCELLENT piece of journalism. And the BU family has responded extremely well. Very intelligent and insightful, but more important than anything else, sympathetic comments and responses. Except, of course, our old friend J, who, as usual, mired in her egomania and out-of-date prejudices, completely misses the point.

I am in the course of researching the matter of defamation and will suggest a few guidelines later. For now, however, and in order to add a little humour to the situation, and the law CAN have its funny moments, I want to alert the BU family to the “small penis rule”. I am not making this up…refer to Wikipedia.

Back in 1908, a newspaper in Manchester in the UK called the Sunday Chronicle, published a fictitious report on life in the French town of Dieppe. In it they referred to the carryings on of one Mr Artemus Jones, a church warden from Peckham, who was the life and soul of a gay [this was before ‘gay’ was synonymous with homosexual] band that frequented the casino and patronized the local French hookers (female specified).

There was, however, a barrister whose name was Artemus Jones (later Mr Artemus Jones QC and even later, Sir Artemus Jones, a judge). Mr Jones sued the newspaper and the jury awarded him substantial damages, even though he was not in Dieppe at the time and had never been a church warden anywhere, far less Peckham. The newspaper pleaded that it was a fictitious name and not intended to cause damage or affront. However, it lost.

Today, if that case came before a court in Barbados (or most countries, for that matter) Mr Jones would lose and rightly so. It could be proved that malice was not a factor (and the existence of MALICE plays heavily in establishing a case of libel) and that, as Mr Jones was not in the location reported on and had never been church warden, the character was not identifiable as being him.

So, as long as the BU family avoids the motive of MALICE, they are on fairly solid ground. But still, a few simple guidelines by way of safeguard are a good idea.

Which brings me back to the “small penis rule”.

The theory of that rule is that, if the reporter had said that Mr Jones possessed a small penis, Mr Jones might have thought twice about exposing (pun intended) himself to the laughter and derisory comments of his peers.

There is no reference to a rule similar to ‘small penis” for women and maybe the BU family would like to suggest a few acceptable alternatives for the ladies.

Sorry, David, too good to let go and the Family might have fun with that.

While the law has certainly moved on since 1908, the small penis rule subsists and was highlighted in a case involving the prolific and very popular novelist, Michael Crighton, just a very few years ago. Look it up on the Internet.

Generally, however, the Google case is not something to over-react to, merely to keep an eye on and put a few guidelines in place as protection against.

Here is an example. Remember, there is one woman, which the paucity of the English language forces me to refer to as an “author” or “writer” who, eschewing her black roots and African heritage, has chosen an Arawak name which now appears to have also been adopted by her son (who has a VERY small penis), and who constantly publishes books in the traditional manner. Books that make defamatory remarks (for example) about a former chief justice, accusing him of sexual misconduct with underage boys. By the way, this “author” or “writer” has amazingly large pectorals.

The sum of all this is that the BU family, with a few guidelines that will not really reduce their comments and freedom of expression substantially, can continue just as they have always done.

As for the cowboys, well, if they fall to some massive libel suits, that is their problem for not recognising, as BU has, the signs and searching the Internet through Google under the heading of “internet defamation” and keeping themselves updated properly on what is, after all, their business.

Well done, BU. VERY well done.