Not acceptable under any circumstances!

This is a site for the free and frank discussion on the Stadium Construction.

I will not have folk calling my house at 8:20am on a Sunday morning threatening me with legal action over the content of this site. There are appropriate ways in which this matter can be addressed.

This site is not about defamation. I have deleted or heavily edited comments which are incorrect to the point that they are defamatory. However anyone reading this site will know that this is about open discussion about the stadium. To that point one half of the editors of this site are AGAINST the stadium, and you will notice that I will accept anti-stadium discussion.

Let me make this very clear, I have NEVER posted on this site under any ALIAS. I need not hide behind such things.

I am very proud of this site. The likes of this site has never been done before in New Zealand. This site has produced robust and frank discussion at times. This site has shown inaccuracies in fact and argument from both sides of the debate. However this site has also engaged political discussion in which people’s sensibilities may be hurt. Recently, a false and erroneous comment about someone was deleted. I was more than happy to speak to the offended party, and the matter was resolved amicably. This is the way such things should be resolved.

However if you have legal action to bring against this site, the only contact I will have is with lawyers – I WILL NOT HAVE THOSE OBJECTING TO OPINION ON THIS SITE CALLING MY HOUSE.


Update: I have again been contacted at my house at 10:30am Sunday morning (despite the above statement).

I listened to the person, then requested which comment was claimed to be defamatory, as I was willing to consider any requests. The person was unwilling to do so. Thus I am unable to fulfil that request.

Let me make this 100% clear, DO NOT RING this house at said times, in such a tone, and expect it to be deemed as an acceptable means of communication. I was more than willing to talk to and consider requests, it was clear by the phone call that this was not going to happen.

Further: The contents of this statement are not defamatory. This post is a statement of fact of events which occurred this morning. I will not be removing this post. A statement of facts of events cannot by its very nature, be defamatory.

Statement: I respectfully ask that folk NOT call my house. There are appropriate ways in which I can be contacted. Any phone calls or letters to my house will be deemed as unacceptable behaviour and steps will be taken under the Harassment Act 1997.


Update: This site was down while I sought legal advice, and although not legally obliged to do anything with 99% of the comments on this site, in an act of good faith I took down more than possibly required, and have responded to requests.


Filed under Stadiums

14 responses to “Not acceptable under any circumstances!

  1. David

    Paul, when STS has been mentioned by a number of different people, it has quite often been accompanied with abusive personal comments.

    If those sorts of comments had been made about me, I might make a few phone calls as well, but I’d probably take much stronger action.

    I’ve read a number of comments by some that have been pretty offensive, full of hatred and vindictivness, and rather than adding anything to the debate have been little more than personal abuse.

    It might be a good time for everyone to take a breath and focus back on the issues and less on the personalities.

  2. Elizabeth

    Apart from this excitement… we’re reliably informed the STS Appeal decision is due out on Monday 10:30am. Enough to make anyone nervous or rumbustious?

  3. meg55

    {this message has been deleted – EK}

    • Elizabeth

      What if? is here chiefly to celebrate the stadium. It’s not compulsory for persons questioning the stadium to post here. Of late the debate has been excellent on some other built environment matters (while we twiddle thumbs on stadium news) thanks to the efforts of a small coterie of excellent posters.

  4. Richard

    Why does sour cream have a date on it?

  5. Tom

    Word is that the farmers market site ( that is leased from council) could be in jeopardy. Can anyone confirm ?

    {Edit: Sorry Tom, in the light of the spotlight that this blog is under at the moment, I am taking the hideous step of editing any comments which are in any way shape or form could be conceived as mischievous. I am sorry, it seems pathetically draconian, but this seems to be the climate in which we are operating at the moment. I hope to have normal transmission resumed as soon as possible. – Paul}

  6. Adrian

    I used to doubt that my opinion of STS could sink any lower. It just has.

  7. meg55

    Adrian, please do not conflate two members of STS with the membership as a whole. You are getting a rather one-sided view of events on this blog at the moment. I am a member of STS whose post this morning was deleted by the editors, without any explanation.

    {meg55 – Your comment here has been moderated. Please re-read Paul’s post ‘Not acceptable under any circumstances!’. I won’t accept any more private emails from you on this subject. The co-editors of this site have full discretion to moderate comments. EK}

  8. Meg, you will appreciate that I am somewhat reticent to allow any comments which pertain to or contain any notion of defamation. I have noted your comments. But in the light of lawyers being thrown about willy-nilly today, the second anyone said anything which could be misconstrued today, I was editing them. In the light of today’s events there simply was no other way this could happen outside of me putting the above post up and turning off all comments too.

    But considering all comments made by me over at the StS web site are deleted without any notification – complete censorship, I would be appreciate you being careful as to your claims of neutrality on this site. At least I allow you and any member of the public to air their opinions (regardless if they are on my side or not).

    I am very proud of this site, this is a site in which both sides of the debate are openly and freely debated.

    Elizabeth and I still don’t agree with each other on the stadium. I don’t agree with Fliss Butcher on the stadium, after all she is a City Councillor who opposes the stadium. But I allow views from all sides to be aired on this site.

  9. Phil

    Some posters need to consider their own actions before taking the moral high ground here. Comments like “selling pencils” and derogatory personal remarks over physical appearances have only served to enflame an already volatile situation. Unnecessary rubbish which may well have resulted in irreparable damage to this forum, had it not been for the maturity of the site moderators. And my thanks to them. Lessons to be learnt here from all sides. Hopefully they are heeded.

  10. Adrian

    In case you’ve forgotten, Phil, this is a group that fronted its webpage with a nazi cartoon. If that doesn’t invite ridicule and condemnation upon them then nothing does. My points (and opinions) about STS have only been confirmed and strengthened by this latest disgrace. Threatening litigation over a blog is simply contemptible.

  11. Can we please now put this issue to bed. We all have our own opinions of each other, and they have been expressed.

    I have been through this site, (and while somewhat unnecessarily I feel) I have edited some comments made, let me be very clear about this. Although possibly undignified, low level vitriol in the form of name calling is not and can not under an circumstances be confused with anything more than cyber name calling.

    Compared to the history of public protest and civil disagreements, what has been expressed in this and other forums can only be considered at worst name calling and at best childish (with the odd exception which has been dealt with).

    If you enter the public arena on a public debate, then state the most ridiculous things like South Dunedin is going to float away, that the roof is made of glass or that it is a terrorist target, it would be an extremely forgiving, mature, if not saintly stance to not apply valid criticism of such stupidity.

    Any casual viewer to this forum will have noticed over the last few months that this site has neither the time nor the inclination to engage the StS or it’s upper echelon leadership. This site had moved on, we have bigger issues to discuss (like the duh – the issues) than the personalities. And until this past incident this site’s total focus had been on the ‘facts’ of the matter and other issues altogether. We are not interested in the slightest in the committee or leadership of the StS.

    But let me be very clear about this. While there has been claims of this, that and the other over the last 48hrs, this does not mean that valid public criticism (and to that point valid non defamatory remarks) will NOT be silenced. Threats over perceived damaged sensibilities WILL NOT and SHALL NOT silence valid contextual criticism.

    For this site has for a very long time now a place for BOTH sides of the debate to be aired, and in this day and age of precious sensibilities is a rarity. Despite what some think, 50% of the Editors/Admin/Authors of this site are anti the stadium development.

    This thread will now be closed and I would appreciate if we could get back on with the matter of discussing anything and everything that involves the stadium development and NOT the StS outside of what should and will be valid public criticism.

    There may be times in which facts can be mistyped, or even misinterpreted. If something is factually wrong, leave a comment and it will be addressed where necessary. However we must also forgive and allow genuine mistakes to be made, this is possibly one of the more human traits – to make mistakes.

    Public opinion CAN NOT and WILL NOT be silenced.

    This thread is now closed.