| There isn't any reason to think that the not-to-or-about rule will be rescinded in any case in which a litigious bully doesn't threaten to sue for his right to post to an unwilling recipient. I'm sure that anyone who makes a credible threat to sue them as CH did will get the right to make deposits in your inbox whenever they want to, and say what they want to within the TOU about you anyplace, anytime, with your right of protection limited to covering your eyes. Of course violations of the TOU will then be unknown to you, and as we know, CH has already, earlier, violated the TOU in a distressing way in the case of Poet (the post was removed and he was suspended for it), and as I have shown, he has, additionally, recently flat out lied about her, claiming that she "made negative inferences about our young men in uniform" when she did no such thing. So I'd say the Ignore feature isn't an entirely satisfactory solution for her. |
