Skydancer Photos wrote:
Folks. You are free to discuss this topic. You are free to agree, disagree, post opinions, advice, etc. But there will be NO threats of violence. Period!

Thanks in advance.

Really.. Well there was alot said it that post that needs be said minus the "threat" which wasn't a threat as I said... Can you send me the rest of my post so I can repost it?

Joel Adams wrote:
Really.. Well there was alot said it that post that needs be said minus the "threat" which wasn't a threat as I said... Can you send me the rest of my post so I can repost it?

I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

Skydancer Photos wrote:

I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

Thank you

Skydancer Photos wrote:

I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

This whole thread has been making attacks on Carrie Leigh accusing her of being a thief and committing fraud.. even after a statement by her...

Skydancer Photos wrote:
I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

Joel Adams wrote:
Thank you

I am sorry, but I need to rescind my previous offer. After carefully reading your entire post again, there is no way that I can send it to you for reposting. There are far too many instances of personal attacks, insults, foul language, and threats. Feel free reply to other member's posts again, but please keep it civil and free of personal attacks and threats.

Skydancer Photos wrote:

Skydancer Photos wrote:
I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

I am sorry, but I need to rescind my previous offer. After carefully reading your entire post again, there is no way that I can send it to you for reposting. There are far too many instances of personal attacks, insults, foul language, and threats. Feel free reply to other member's posts again, but please keep it civil and free of personal attacks and threats.

And these things do not happen in Model mayhem forum posts? I have seen them, only no-one cried about them. So you will allow slander. but you will not allow me to call someone an a'hole. Nice...

Skydancer Photos wrote:
I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

I need you to send me a copy of my post for legal reasons.. I will not repost it, but I need it.

Thank you

Skydancer Photos wrote:

Skydancer Photos wrote:
I will send you the post. You will also need to refrain from any personal attacks or foul language.

I am sorry, but I need to rescind my previous offer. After carefully reading your entire post again, there is no way that I can send it to you for reposting. There are far too many instances of personal attacks, insults, foul language, and threats. Feel free reply to other member's posts again, but please keep it civil and free of personal attacks and threats.

Just asking politely why, if "Harassment, bullying, personal attacks and other boorish behavior are not tolerated," that this thread has not been removed for its personal attacks on Carrie Leigh.  This whole thread, because of the accusations of theft, lack of intelligence, etc., constitutes actionable online defamation at worst, and at very least has been a spectacle of personal attacks on and unsubstantiated accusations against and harassment of an individual who has not said one word in this thread.

This thread needs to be moved in total.  I hope you will do that.  Thank you.

Skydancer Photos wrote:
I am sorry, but I need to rescind my previous offer. After carefully reading your entire post again, there is no way that I can send it to you for reposting. There are far too many instances of personal attacks, insults, foul language, and threats. Feel free reply to other member's posts again, but please keep it civil and free of personal attacks and threats.

Then why not just lock down this (what has become) a trainwreck of a thread.

The OP (& the others who felt cheated) have gotten the answers they were looking for & how they can go about getting recourse.

John Horwitz wrote:
I have a copy

Please send it

Joel Adams wrote:

This whole thread has been making attacks on Carrie Leigh accusing her of being a thief and committing fraud.. even after a statement by her...

Even after a statement by her........her what?

And when does someone's "statement" ever indicate irrefutable truth?
Hells bells, we can just empty our prisons for crissakes.

Joel Adams wrote:

Please send it

For your protection it has been sequestered in a secure database - I hope you understand

Farenell Photography wrote:

Then why not just lock down this (what has become) a trainwreck of a thread.

The OP (& the others who felt cheated) have gotten the answers they were looking for & how they can go about getting recourse.

+1,000

Stephen Thorne wrote:
My understanding is that that was just posted yesterday and instead of running and hiding they have initiated concrete steps to address complaints.

Wouldn't the first step be to stop processing new paid orders?  I might not know the ins and outs of the publishing business, but logic tells me that stop taking new orders would be one step before trying to satisfy old orders. 

Or is the money gathered from new orders how they plan to repay the old ones?

Farenell Photography wrote:

Then why not just lock down this (what has become) a trainwreck of a thread.

The OP (& the others who felt cheated) have gotten the answers they were looking for & how they can go about getting recourse.

Just so everyone who has commented here knows and for the benefit of those who have the power to remove this thread, here is the legal definition of actionable defamation:

The publication or broadcast of any libelous or slanderous statement about an individual or business that can be proven to be false and published with the intention of harming that entity's reputation is considered to be defamation.

Online defamation is the publication of such statements made on any Internet based media including blogs, forums, websites, and social networks.

While many Internet users believe that they are free to say and do as they like while on the Internet, this is untrue and the same defamation laws and regulations stand for online defamation as they do in any form of media.

The longer this thread remains, the more damage will occur.  Again, I have ask that you remove this thread.  I hope you will consider this seriously and take action.  Thank you.

unbearable lightness wrote:

Just so everyone who has commented here knows and for the benefit of those who have the power to remove this thread, here is the legal definition of actionable defamation:

The publication or broadcast of any libelous or slanderous statement about an individual or business that can be proven to be false and published with the intention of harming that entity's reputation is considered to be defamation.

Online defamation is the publication of such statements made on any Internet based media including blogs, forums, websites, and social networks.

While many Internet users believe that they are free to say and do as they like while on the Internet, this is untrue and the same defamation laws and regulations stand for online defamation as they do in any form of media.

The longer this thread remains, the more damage will occur.  Again, I have ask that you remove this thread.  I hope you will consider this seriously and take action.  Thank you.

Actually the longer this thread remains the less damage will occur.  Without this warning even more people may unwittingly buy subscriptions the magazine is selling despite the lack of a product.  At least this is giving them fair warning, isn't that a good thing?  Or is Miss Leigh's reputation the only important thing?

John Horwitz wrote:
while the definition is mostly correct, an OPINION may not be considered to be defamatory "In my OPINION Rush Limbaugh is a stupid cow." - is different than saying he IS one...we ( or at least this person )  has expressed OPINIONS!

I did not see in your original posting that these wwere your "opinions"... I must go back and maybe have my eyes checked...

unbearable lightness wrote:

Just so everyone who has commented here knows and for the benefit of those who have the power to remove this thread, here is the legal definition of actionable defamation:

The publication or broadcast of any libelous or slanderous statement about an individual or business that can be proven to be false and published with the intention of harming that entity's reputation is considered to be defamation.

Online defamation is the publication of such statements made on any Internet based media including blogs, forums, websites, and social networks.

While many Internet users believe that they are free to say and do as they like while on the Internet, this is untrue and the same defamation laws and regulations stand for online defamation as they do in any form of media.

The longer this thread remains, the more damage will occur.  Again, I have ask that you remove this thread.  I hope you will consider this seriously and take action.  Thank you.

As indicated in your definition of Slander/Libel you need to prove what is said is false, I think you or Ms Lee would have a hard time proving what has been said about taking money and not providing a service is false, I on the other hand would have a very easy time proving that I paid money for a subscription I never received.

Joel Adams wrote:
This thread has become a slanderous train wreck, the removal of a post pointing out the slanderous statements and slights to Carrie Leigh is unconscionable. Of interest to note here, is that Model Mayhem's parent corporation is located in Los Angels. Carrie Leigh is represented by 2 law firms in Los Angeles both of which are listed as super lawyers in the US, one of which holds the title of California trial lawyer of the year. It would be very interesting to see what would happen in a slander litigation here.

NOt sure where the slander comes from?  Doesn't the webpage linked actually admit that the wrongdoing is occuring and that they are sorry for it?

Yes, it does.......

Stephen Thorne wrote:
as we sought alternative printing methods but to no avail. It is simply unaffordable in today’s world.

"Over the course of the next few months, our accountants will review any outstanding orders and give compensation where due.

K E E L I N G wrote:
Actually the longer this thread remains the less damage will occur.  Without this warning even more people may unwittingly buy subscriptions the magazine is selling despite the lack of a product.  At least this is giving them fair warning, isn't that a good thing?  Or is Miss Leigh's reputation the only important thing?

Keeling.... Go to the website and try and buy a subscription.... Why do people not do the research before they speak?!?!? It has been down ever since Carrie announced the closing of the magazine!

Joel Adams wrote:
This thread has become a slanderous train wreck, the removal of a post pointing out the slanderous statements and slights to Carrie Leigh is unconscionable. Of interest to note here, is that Model Mayhem's parent corporation is located in Los Angels. Carrie Leigh is represented by 2 law firms in Los Angeles both of which are listed as super lawyers in the US, one of which holds the title of California trial lawyer of the year. It would be very interesting to see what would happen in a slander litigation here.

What does the fact that MM and Ms Leigh are in the same  city have to do with anything. Should she get preferential treatment from MM because they are almost neighbors?

Joel Adams wrote:
Keeling.... Go to the website and try and buy a subscription.... Why do people not do the research before they speak?!?!? It has been down ever since Carrie announced the closing of the magazine!

Then why are so many people complaining about having bought subscriptions recently?  Or are you talking about they closed it down since yesterday when this thread brought their questionable actions to light?

I'm just asking.  Do you support their actions?  Do you feel it was proper to continue selling subscriptions to a magazine that hasn't existed in close to 2 years?

Or are you just trying to protect Miss Leigh's reputation also?  If she's your friend and that's what you are trying to do then fine, I understand.  But there's a bigger picture here.

K E E L I N G wrote:
NOt sure where the slander comes from?  Doesn't the webpage linked actually admit that the wrongdoing is occuring and that they are sorry for it?

Yes, it does.......

Grrrrrrrrr.. And people wonder why I resort to insults....

There was no wrong doing.. The decision to close the magazine was recent. The 'intent' was to continue publishing!

Joel Adams wrote:

Keeling.... Go to the website and try and buy a subscription.... Why do people not do the research before they speak?!?!? It has been down ever since Carrie announced the closing of the magazine!

What the day after this thread started?

K E E L I N G wrote:

Actually the longer this thread remains the less damage will occur.  Without this warning even more people may unwittingly buy subscriptions the magazine is selling despite the lack of a product.  At least this is giving them fair warning, isn't that a good thing?  Or is Miss Leigh's reputation the only important thing?

Joel Adams wrote:

Grrrrrrrrr.. And people wonder why I resort to insults....

There was no wrong doing.. The decision to close the magazine was recent. The 'intent' was to continue publishing!

You resort to insults because it's your nature, no other reason. 

Yes, the decision to close the magazine was recent, I have my doubts that the decision was made last night, but I admit it may have been recent.  However the decision to stop making magazines was made almost 2 years ago.  Unfortunately the decision to stop taking money for the magazines they weren't making came years later.

My guess is Miss Leigh would be better advised to keep a very low profile instead of drawing attention to herself by filing slander lawsuits.

Joel Adams wrote:
Grrrrrrrrr.. And people wonder why I resort to insults....

There was no wrong doing.. The decision to close the magazine was recent. The 'intent' was to continue publishing!

So....you speak for the magazine management? How do you KNOW what the intent was? The only person with magazine cred here is the 'editor' who spoke earlier!


THIS:
"My guess is Miss Leigh would be better advised to keep a very low profile instead of drawing attention to herself by filing slander lawsuits."

John Horwitz wrote:
Joel, getting a judgment is easy - getting paid...not so much. Do you think these 'super-duper' people are going to actually collect from anyone on mm?

Hey John.. No-one is looking to collect anything from anyone 'on' Model Mayhem. According to California Law.. MM's parent company is responsible for everything written in this thread.

It is all being screen saved in case Carrie is interested in recourse.

John Horwitz wrote:
And for the record Joel - I will not accept your apology!

Apologize for what????

Joel Adams wrote:

Apologize for what????

NOT ACCEPTED!!!

John Horwitz wrote:
So....you speak for the magazine management? How do you KNOW what the intent was? The only person with magazine cred here is the 'editor' who spoke earlier!

THIS:
"My guess is Miss Leigh would be better advised to keep a very low profile instead of drawing attention to herself by filing slander lawsuits."

That Editor can vouch for my 'credibility'.

Carrie has done nothing to keep a low profile for.