Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (214361)	8/3/2007 2:36:54 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

I think there is probably a balance to be had. I think if one publishes things that look like "facts", and one does it based on poor data, or conjecture, and one ruins the reputation of another, that's a problem. I think there should be an element of proof required even where public figures are involved. I have never studied English law and I don't know how tough their standard is- but I do know that not showing up means you didn't present evidence. I'm in the middle in terms of the law on this. I'm not sure what reputation stealing you are referring to. The US attorneys whose reputations were tarnished when they were fired for "poor performance" despite good job reviews? That's the last big truly undeserved tarnishing by the government I can remember. I'm sure there are other cases. What did you have in mind?