Someone created a negative site about me

[Anonymous]

Op didn’t say what she did. Let’s not just assume she harmed the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op didn’t say what she did. Let’s not just assume she harmed the kids.

She DID say it affected the kids. We're not assuming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op didn’t say what she did. Let’s not just assume she harmed the kids.

She DID say it affected the kids. We're not assuming.

Affected does not mean harm....

[Anonymous]

She could have been an event planner for all we know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mommyish.com/i-had-to-fire-my-nanny-after-finding-out-about-her-trouble-with-the-law-996/

This is not it. Post does not mention nanny's name ("Yvette" is the mom).

OP, do some soul-searching and make sure you've owned your mistakes. Then, either send an apology letter and/or bury the results on google. Lots of way to do this, described upthread. Good luck.

Also Yvette seems to think she should have known better. I don't see the kind of white hot revenge-oriented rage that the OP described.

[Anonymous]

You could try changing your name

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If what your former employer is saying is true, it's not libel. She has the right to free speech. I agree with a poster way earlier in the thread that you could create your own website explaining yourself and how you have realized your errors and have grown since, etc.
You could also contact the former employer, apologize, and explain how you have changed your ways and ask them to take their website down.

I would not create a website saying negative things about your employer.

When will people on this site learn what free speech is?

PP you quoted. Please enlighten me.

NP here. I *think* what the PP was saying is that the right to free speech is the right to not be jailed or otherwise impinged upon by the government by what you say. It has nothing to do with other people not giving you the opportunity to speak, but the government. In Hong Kong this week a candidate for political office was arrested so he couldn't speak out - if that happened here that would be a denial of free speech.

Quoted pp again
But the government/courts is not going to interfere with someone telling the truth about any person/subject. OPs former boss has the right to tell her story. The web hosting service can choose to have their own rules, and not allow such site to be supported by them--but if they don't have such rules/objections, and it is not libel, courts will not force OP's former boss to take it down.

Your “right to free speech” is allowed under the First Amendement and only protects your speech with regard to the government. What you are describing is not the right to free speech as again, free speech is only applicable to interactions with the government. And yes, the courts may absolutely rule against OP’s boss. Spend some time reading about torts. Libel isn’t the only protection that we have in civil matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If what your former employer is saying is true, it's not libel. She has the right to free speech. I agree with a poster way earlier in the thread that you could create your own website explaining yourself and how you have realized your errors and have grown since, etc.
You could also contact the former employer, apologize, and explain how you have changed your ways and ask them to take their website down.

I would not create a website saying negative things about your employer.

When will people on this site learn what free speech is?

PP you quoted. Please enlighten me.

NP here. I *think* what the PP was saying is that the right to free speech is the right to not be jailed or otherwise impinged upon by the government by what you say. It has nothing to do with other people not giving you the opportunity to speak, but the government. In Hong Kong this week a candidate for political office was arrested so he couldn't speak out - if that happened here that would be a denial of free speech.

Quoted pp again
But the government/courts is not going to interfere with someone telling the truth about any person/subject. OPs former boss has the right to tell her story. The web hosting service can choose to have their own rules, and not allow such site to be supported by them--but if they don't have such rules/objections, and it is not libel, courts will not force OP's former boss to take it down.

Your “right to free speech” is allowed under the First Amendement and only protects your speech with regard to the government. What you are describing is not the right to free speech as again, free speech is only applicable to interactions with the government. And yes, the courts may absolutely rule against OP’s boss. Spend some time reading about torts. Libel isn’t the only protection that we have in civil matters.

You're kidding, right? The OP is clearly an entitled, delusional brat who takes no responsibility for her actions. Do you really think that she didn't paint herself in the most favorable way possible? On what grounds could the courts POSSIBLY rule against OP's boss?? Even by the OP's own admission, everything she wrote is a 100% truthful and accurate account, and she has proof of that to boot. I'm just dying to know what you possibly think that someone could sue her for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If what your former employer is saying is true, it's not libel. She has the right to free speech. I agree with a poster way earlier in the thread that you could create your own website explaining yourself and how you have realized your errors and have grown since, etc.
You could also contact the former employer, apologize, and explain how you have changed your ways and ask them to take their website down.

I would not create a website saying negative things about your employer.

When will people on this site learn what free speech is?

PP you quoted. Please enlighten me.

NP here. I *think* what the PP was saying is that the right to free speech is the right to not be jailed or otherwise impinged upon by the government by what you say. It has nothing to do with other people not giving you the opportunity to speak, but the government. In Hong Kong this week a candidate for political office was arrested so he couldn't speak out - if that happened here that would be a denial of free speech.

Quoted pp again
But the government/courts is not going to interfere with someone telling the truth about any person/subject. OPs former boss has the right to tell her story. The web hosting service can choose to have their own rules, and not allow such site to be supported by them--but if they don't have such rules/objections, and it is not libel, courts will not force OP's former boss to take it down.

Your “right to free speech” is allowed under the First Amendement and only protects your speech with regard to the government. What you are describing is not the right to free speech as again, free speech is only applicable to interactions with the government. And yes, the courts may absolutely rule against OP’s boss. Spend some time reading about torts. Libel isn’t the only protection that we have in civil matters.

You're kidding, right? The OP is clearly an entitled, delusional brat who takes no responsibility for her actions. Do you really think that she didn't paint herself in the most favorable way possible? On what grounds could the courts POSSIBLY rule against OP's boss?? Even by the OP's own admission, everything she wrote is a 100% truthful and accurate account, and she has proof of that to boot. I'm just dying to know what you possibly think that someone could sue her for.

Try reading about tort law. But if your the person above who doesn’t understand the first amendment, don’t bother. You don’t understand the judicial system in this country and how the constitution and laws are applied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If what your former employer is saying is true, it's not libel. She has the right to free speech. I agree with a poster way earlier in the thread that you could create your own website explaining yourself and how you have realized your errors and have grown since, etc.
You could also contact the former employer, apologize, and explain how you have changed your ways and ask them to take their website down.

I would not create a website saying negative things about your employer.

When will people on this site learn what free speech is?

PP you quoted. Please enlighten me.

NP here. I *think* what the PP was saying is that the right to free speech is the right to not be jailed or otherwise impinged upon by the government by what you say. It has nothing to do with other people not giving you the opportunity to speak, but the government. In Hong Kong this week a candidate for political office was arrested so he couldn't speak out - if that happened here that would be a denial of free speech.

Quoted pp again
But the government/courts is not going to interfere with someone telling the truth about any person/subject. OPs former boss has the right to tell her story. The web hosting service can choose to have their own rules, and not allow such site to be supported by them--but if they don't have such rules/objections, and it is not libel, courts will not force OP's former boss to take it down.

Your “right to free speech” is allowed under the First Amendement and only protects your speech with regard to the government. What you are describing is not the right to free speech as again, free speech is only applicable to interactions with the government. And yes, the courts may absolutely rule against OP’s boss. Spend some time reading about torts. Libel isn’t the only protection that we have in civil matters.

You're kidding, right? The OP is clearly an entitled, delusional brat who takes no responsibility for her actions. Do you really think that she didn't paint herself in the most favorable way possible? On what grounds could the courts POSSIBLY rule against OP's boss?? Even by the OP's own admission, everything she wrote is a 100% truthful and accurate account, and she has proof of that to boot. I'm just dying to know what you possibly think that someone could sue her for.

Try reading about tort law. But if your the person above who doesn’t understand the first amendment, don’t bother. You don’t understand the judicial system in this country and how the constitution and laws are applied.

NP. Unless you can identify the tort, you’re talking out your ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If what your former employer is saying is true, it's not libel. She has the right to free speech. I agree with a poster way earlier in the thread that you could create your own website explaining yourself and how you have realized your errors and have grown since, etc.
You could also contact the former employer, apologize, and explain how you have changed your ways and ask them to take their website down.

I would not create a website saying negative things about your employer.

When will people on this site learn what free speech is?

PP you quoted. Please enlighten me.

NP here. I *think* what the PP was saying is that the right to free speech is the right to not be jailed or otherwise impinged upon by the government by what you say. It has nothing to do with other people not giving you the opportunity to speak, but the government. In Hong Kong this week a candidate for political office was arrested so he couldn't speak out - if that happened here that would be a denial of free speech.

Quoted pp again
But the government/courts is not going to interfere with someone telling the truth about any person/subject. OPs former boss has the right to tell her story. The web hosting service can choose to have their own rules, and not allow such site to be supported by them--but if they don't have such rules/objections, and it is not libel, courts will not force OP's former boss to take it down.

Your “right to free speech” is allowed under the First Amendement and only protects your speech with regard to the government. What you are describing is not the right to free speech as again, free speech is only applicable to interactions with the government. And yes, the courts may absolutely rule against OP’s boss. Spend some time reading about torts. Libel isn’t the only protection that we have in civil matters.

You're kidding, right? The OP is clearly an entitled, delusional brat who takes no responsibility for her actions. Do you really think that she didn't paint herself in the most favorable way possible? On what grounds could the courts POSSIBLY rule against OP's boss?? Even by the OP's own admission, everything she wrote is a 100% truthful and accurate account, and she has proof of that to boot. I'm just dying to know what you possibly think that someone could sue her for.

Try reading about tort law. But if your the person above who doesn’t understand the first amendment, don’t bother. You don’t understand the judicial system in this country and how the constitution and laws are applied.

I wasn't the person above, no. I am, however, a person who understands English grammar.

[Anonymous]

OP, if you did what was said, you need to go into a different line of work. But, everyone deserves a defense. I recommend hiring an attorney and sending your former employer a cease and desist. That should take care of it.

[Anonymous]

Also.... I had a really bad Au Pair once. Total liar, endangered the kids, was seen by one of the young IT guys at my work in front of a large pile of cocaine at a party (who told me). I’d never in a million years blast her by name on the Internet. She was young and didn’t understand the consequences. I gave her a good talking to about growing up and being responsible and she promised to do better in her future. That’s enough for me. There’s something wrong with OP but the mom blogger needs to let it go.

[Anonymous]

(To be clear- I sent the bad Au Pair home with a talking to. I didn’t keep her.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SHarktank just had a service that will wipe certain things from the internet. Their service starts as free, and goes up depending on what you need wiped.

Is going by a nickname a possibility?

Website please? I don’t think that a service can completely remove webpages from the Internet. They can only change the google search parameter to push the search results to the bottom of the list.