LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old July 20th 08, 05:49 PM posted to,,,,alt.chess
external usenet poster
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Why doesn't Lafferty answer the Section 230 question?

On Jul 20, 5:21 am, WPraeder wrote:


You may find this useful:

Wayne Praeder

I have just finished reading the entire court decision in Batzel v.
Smith, 333 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2003). It is an interesting and
relevant decision. Thank you very much for posting it.

However, the difference between this case and the email by Susan
Polgar accusing a rival candidate of being a child molester is that
the original email that Polgar forwarded was from an anonymous source.
Not only do we not know who wrote it, but it is entirely possible that
Polgar herself wrote it. Indeed, it is widely believed that the
"anonymous" postings that frequently appear on her blog stating "We
don't want no women or freeking foreigners here. Go back to where you
came from", were writen by Polgar herself.

Thus, Susan Polgar enjoys no immunity for accusing a rival candidate
for election of being a child molester.

By the way, the person she accused of being a child molester was not
me, Sam Sloan. It was another candidate.

Sam Sloan
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kristen Dupre for USCF President Rob (Chess Politics) 58 March 20th 08 06:11 PM
Gregory Alexander's Latest "Confidential Information" Smear Brian Lafferty (Chess Politics) 28 February 15th 08 03:57 AM
Safe Harbor against Deletion by the Moderator samsloan (Chess Politics) 183 January 24th 08 11:43 PM

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.

About Us

"It's about Chess"


Copyright © 2017