Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh typical DCUM burn. You can’t craft an actual response to refute something, because you clearly don’t understand it, so you point out a typo. Idiot.

So educate us, oh wise one. So far we haven't seen any evidence that you understand anything either. Are you going to answer the question about what the grounds for ruling against the boss might be?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are definitely people who could hack into that blog and change the content.

My DD may be one of these. I'll have to ask her.

Oh yeah, that will be a great thing to add to her resume

Anonymous wrote:There are definitely people who could hack into that blog and change the content.

My DD may be one of these. I'll have to ask her.

Anonymous wrote:Could the site be more about public awareness regarding some type of criminal act? OP stealing the kids social security numbers or OP mascarading as a teacher while being a sex offender etc...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh typical DCUM burn. You can’t craft an actual response to refute something, because you clearly don’t understand it, so you point out a typo. Idiot.

So educate us, oh wise one. So far we haven't seen any evidence that you understand anything either. Are you going to answer the question about what the grounds for ruling against the boss might be?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh typical DCUM burn. You can’t craft an actual response to refute something, because you clearly don’t understand it, so you point out a typo. Idiot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You may have a case for invasion of privacy, depending on the state you're in/where this happened.

Is what she saying untrue? If so, then you do have a defamation case. It's unclear what you mean by "she has proof of everything she says."

Can you tell me more about invasion of privacy?

When I say she has proof, I mean exactly that. She has texts and emails and documents that back up what she says about me. She is not lying, but I have changed and she is still making life hard years later.

How can I win a defamation lawsuit if what she saying is true?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:You can try contacting whoever hosts the website. It might violate their terms is service.

Or, make a website about her and then agree that you will both remove them.

I am afraid of making a website about her because I don’t really have much on her. If I go and make a website and she sues me for defamation, what do I do then?

If she sues you, that’s when you can negotiate the removal of both sites. But, trying to contact the hosting service first is probably better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh typical DCUM burn. You can’t craft an actual response to refute something, because you clearly don’t understand it, so you point out a typo. Idiot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe OP?
http://happilyevaafter.com/when-sht-hits-the-fan/
http://happilyevaafter.com/nannygate-2-0/

Oh dear god. Are you seriously googling your life away trying to find OP? She never even said she was a nanny. Get a life PP.

Anonymous wrote:

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.