My monitoring will be done retroactively instead. I will forthwith delete comments that I find abusive or otherwise unacceptable by my own personal standards. Please be civil!
(And I had to get out of bed to do this, because I couldn't fall asleep otherwise after my talk with Apmel.)
Go back to sleep now buddy :)
ReplyDeleteNot to moderate comments is to betray the publisher responsibilities. I've turned down several comments that do not meet the requirements of Freedom of information legislation (tryckfrihetsförordningen). A blog is more stringent regulatory requirements.
ReplyDelete"Evil people" is given a space they do not deserve. Hiding behind anonymity raises the bar for what the individual can think of to say.
A very dangerous way to go especially considering what happened in Oslo, and what happens in London.
To pre-moderate comments is a surefire way to stop real time debates in comments. To post-moderate comments is of course the publishers responsibility. The built in spam filtering in Blogger is enough to stop unwanted ads in the comments.
ReplyDeleteNo Apmel, the spamfilter isn´t enough. But you are men and not women.
ReplyDeleteTheres a big different on reply and comments to a man and a women.
I found to my suprise that SL is full of men who sincerly hates women in general and woman who thinks and talks in particular.
I got a reply that told me and most other female blogger, by name, what we should do instead of blogging. If i published that on, and several more, I would have get in trouble with the law and hade to explain myself in court.
Vanadis, I am a man, but two of the most read blogs internationally that i follow are written by women, Soror Nishi and Miso Susanowa, and both of them have only post-moderated blogs in spite of their writing very harshly about a lot of subjects.
ReplyDelete-"Damn I´m right", borrowed from your blog, I do not change views just because a man tell me to.
ReplyDeleteI'm strong enough to take me the same right as a man. Should I postmoderate I have to sit at the computer all day. I have a "first life" to live too.
An interesting enough blog posts live long anyway.
My experience is that if I dont moderate comment then it becomes as Flashback forum. It's just me and the sender who has seen the comments I did not publish. How others are doing and not doing are their thing. In Sweden, we have Swedish laws and I have to follow them; "-Threats and harassment is a violation of the law and must be dealt with if we are to end the misery"(Quote from the Swedish police website). There is sentence from high court regulating this.
And I wasn´t trying to change your views Vanadis. We have different opinions about this is all. But if I had wanted to change your views it wouldn´t have been because you are a woman. Kandinskys' DAMN RIGHT I´M RIGHT on my blog is as you knew written by a woman :)
ReplyDeletePS Follow laws has never been my cup of tea. I refused military service when I was 17.
-But you cant stop argue and let me "poor little woman" get the last word. I know Kandinsky is a woman but you are the publisher and responsible.
ReplyDeleteI am pleased that we have different opinions, otherwise the comment feature is pretty useless. :)
Jeezzuuus... my anonymity is threatened by these ppl!!!
ReplyDeleteApmel reveals that the primatar behind Kandinsky is a woman!
Vanadis says she KNOWS ...!!
Moderation back, please Bock!!
Well, it seems we are off to a great start... with the unmonitored comments ;)
ReplyDeleteVanadis, I suggest you read the verdict by Göta hovrätt 2011-04-19 in the case number FT 2010-10, where they found that the blogger of a blog with moderated comments was the person responsible for defamation in a comment by publishing it.
If it had instead been a blog with unmoderated comments the person who wrote the libelous comment would have been responsible.
The blogger´s responsibility with an unmoderated blog is to remove libelous comment when he sees it or when his is attention is called to it. If he doesn't remove it at that point he becomes an accomplice and is then accountable together with the person who commented.
Sorry Kandi!
ReplyDeleteLOL Kandinsky, actually I read it as Apmel is telling us that the avatar Kandinsky is a woman, he doesn't say the primatar is one.
ReplyDeleteAnd I will never accept that calling someone "a woman" as slander, I think that should always be considered as a compliment.
A later verdict published 2011-08-04 12:08:
ReplyDelete"Moderator convicted of slander in blog comments
The Court of Appeal finds that a moderator of a blog previously convicted of a separate post also should be held responsible for a comment written by a third party." Översatt från Dagens Juridik http://www.dagensjuridik.se/2011/08/moderator-doms-fortal-i-bloggkommentar
I follow "Good journalistic practice" and I wan´t to be the first one to know whats written on my blog. My friends will hold me reponsebel anyway.
The key word in that is "moderator", Vanadis. This blogger monitored the comments and was therefor answerable for allowing it to be published.
ReplyDeleteBut it still not a verdict in the supreme court as guidance. It´s still a matter of how mutch the jurors of The Court of Appeal understand of words like blogging, comments and moderator. And when do you became a moderator? Checking all the time? Checking once a day? Or once a year?
ReplyDeleteI have listened to so many verdicts in the court of appeal and if I came in that situation I have to answer to the court of appeal the first thing I would say would be: -Where appeals to?
Verdicts are not sufficiently indicative to the non-lawyer. Ordinary bloggers should probably continue to check the comments until Supreme Court decided a case
You are correct, it is not a decision by the Swedish Supreme court, but both the appeal court in the case I mentioned and the case you cite are in agreement.
ReplyDeleteIf a blogger moderates his comments - that is actively decides if a comment should be published or not he is responsible for the comment as if he had written it himself.
If the blogger doesn't moderate comments he is only responsible for the comments if he doesn't remove a libelous comment when he sees it or when his is attention is called to it.
If he doesn't remove it when he is made aware of it he becomes an accomplice and is then accountable together with the person who commented.
(See the Swedish Supreme Courts verdict in NJA 2007 s 805 (NJA 2007:99)
Rubrik: Fråga om ansvar för hets mot folkgrupp; enligt brottsbalken beträffande den som underlåtit att ta bort meddelanden från en elektronisk anslagstavla (I=B 2673-06) och enligt yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen beträffande utgivaren av en webbplats (II=B 2115-06). Även fråga om underlåtenhet att ta bort meddelanden från en elektronisk anslagstavla kan utgöra medhjälp till hets mot folkgrupp eller brott mot lagen (1998:112) om ansvar för elektroniska anslagstavlor (I=B 2673-06).)