Doug Swinskey wrote:
the ball is in chris's court..

King of the Letter L wrote:
No, it's not. The ball is in your court to sue, for libel, whomever said something libelous about you, if you feel that such a statement has been made.

chris..if you not going to do anything..well that would be your response...
you would be correct then, the next move is mine...

Doug Swinskey wrote:
someone with what appears to be no legal background suggested all i had to gain was a lighter pocketbook pursing a legal remedy...

my suggestion was that...everyone stands to lose...for no good reason..it just may cost me less..

for sport ..never...for my right to be left alone sure.....

1. You know what my background is?
2. You used the word sport not me....You made a strong implication that the suit would be for sport because it would cost you nothing.

Feral Oneiric wrote:

Some people like drama.

Yes they do... and they should grow up

Doug Swinskey wrote:

i did PM you asking if the website registrant was you..i demanded that my name be removed and suggested that if it weren't i would start proceeding..

yes, in my sarcastic manner..but i didnt curse..and a threat exisited only if you took no action..

Saying, "I love you dearly, but if you don't make spaghetti for dinner, I'm going to kill you" is hardly my idea of hearts and flowers. Clearly the registrant is me - it's got my name on it, and I've been here talking about it for a week. I never accused you of cursing. You threatened to sue me for doing something completely legal if I did not cease. I consider that a threat, don't you?

Doug Swinskey wrote:
if myspace was unable to remedy the situation, i would close my account...once again..i agreed to be on myspace

I picked MySpace out of a hat, I didn't know you had an account there.
What if you did NOT have a MySpace account & hadn't agreed to be there?

Even if you had & you removed your account, would you then demand they remove your name?

And on what grounds?  Because someone exercised their first amendment rights to say they think you're a jerk?

(and please not, I'm not saying you are)

Viktoria wrote:
damn... i can't believe that such a well intended idea can be a source of a fight and a lawsuit....
can't wait to see how this all turns out...

if everyones thoughts were well intentioned..we would never see the rants about models and photograrhers that we see herre in the forums..

chris's this website provides a conduit to further the ill intentions of the unprofessionals that polute this website...

if we were all honest brokers..there would be no issue...

well we arent...so there is an issue...

Doug Swinskey wrote:

if everyones thoughts were well intentioned..we would never see the rants about models and photograrhers that we see herre in the forums..

chris's this website provides a conduit to further the ill intentions of the unprofessionals that polute this website...

if we were all honest brokers..there would be no issue...

well we arent...so there is an issue...

Fine. I'll tell you what - you get every conduit to shut down, and I'll shut down, too.

I'd hate to promote a double-standard.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
if everyones thoughts were well intentioned..we would never see the rants about models and photograrhers that we see herre in the forums..

chris's this website provides a conduit to further the ill intentions of the unprofessionals that polute this website...

if we were all honest brokers..there would be no issue...

well we arent...so there is an issue...

i'm not taking sides here... i don't really understand everything about either your view point or Chris', so i have no idea which one of you is right here.  But i do know that he did a lot of work, for no reason other than to try to create a better system for everybody on mm.  I can't imagine he would have an alterior motive to do it....

King of the Letter L wrote:
Saying, "I love you dearly, but if you don't make spaghetti for dinner, I'm going to kill you" is hardly my idea of hearts and flowers. Clearly the registrant is me - it's got my name on it, and I've been here talking about it for a week. I never accused you of cursing. You threatened to sue me for doing something completely legal if I did not cease. I consider that a threat, don't you?

chris, just becasue its legal...doesnt make it right...

my stance:

i dont want any association with your site...

i dont want anyone thinking i endorse your site..

if you dont remove my name from your site, for the reason i provided, i will be forced to seek some sort of remedy...

ok, sure its a threat...but only if you do nothing...

Viktoria wrote:
I can't imagine he would have an alterior motive to do it....

i dont belive chris has poor intentions....the professionals here dont need a feedback system..we talk to each other...he is inadvertantly catering to the unprofessionals....who are just the people to abuse the system...

Viktoria wrote:
I can't imagine he would have an alterior motive to do it....

I made a policy statement on this earlier in the thread.

I don't believe Chris has an ulterior motive either, and I don't believe Doug thinks he does.  Doug's concern (one I share) is that other people have done some pretty horrible things on websites whose purpose was not all that dissimilar to Chris' site.  Unlike Doug (whose reservations I can certainly understand), I'm willing to see if the site design and implementation overcome the natural tendency of such sites to be cesspools.

King of the Letter L wrote:

Fine. I'll tell you what - you get every conduit to shut down, and I'll shut down, too.

I'd hate to promote a double-standard.

That was my point regarding him telling everyone to take down any attribution anywhere.

Doug Swinskey wrote:

i dont belive chris has poor intentions....the professionals here dont need a feedback system..we talk to each other...he is inadvertantly catering to the unprofessionals....who are just the people to abuse the system...

i'm sure if you ask Roger to remove you, he will.  why make a point of asking Chris?

King of the Letter L wrote:
Fine. I'll tell you what - you get every conduit to shut down, and I'll shut down, too. I'd hate to promote a double-standard.

i have agrgued against these types of sites for four years..i have argued against features here on mayhem that do the same thing...

if they exist, i dont want to be a part of it...

Doug Swinskey wrote:
If they exist, i dont want to be a part of it...

Then do not create an account. What others choose to say, within the law, is their business, and is protected by law.

Indeed, did you see the recent BBB report on Suicide Girls. They never signed up for the BBB's service, and the BBB report was scathing. They've not sued, nor do I expect they will.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
chris, just becasue its legal...doesnt make it right...

I agree, just because something is legal does not necessarily make it right. In this case, I'm not convinced of your argument, but I'm willing to listen.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
i dont want any association with your site...

i dont want anyone thinking i endorse your site..

You have no association nor is there any endorsement, either implied or expressed. I'm glad I could clear that up.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
if you dont remove my name from your site, for the reason i provided, i will be forced to seek some sort of remedy...

ok, sure its a threat...but only if you do nothing...

And there you go, again. Threatening legal action may be actionable in and of itself. Indeed, vexatious or frivolous threats of litigation are no joking matter, nor are counterclaims of such.

But, you know, in the face of a threat of legal action, and on advice of council after a quick phone call, I suspect my best course of action would be to not discuss the issue with you any further.

Doug Swinskey wrote:

chris, just becasue its legal...doesnt make it right...

my stance:

i dont want any association with your site...

i dont want anyone thinking i endorse your site..

if you dont remove my name from your site, for the reason i provided, i will be forced to seek some sort of remedy...

ok, sure its a threat...but only if you do nothing...

Doug, you have yet to answer me regarding whether you have & would pursue this sort of thing elsewhere.

Would you make similar arguments to the owners of other sites where you did not have accounts?

What about someone's personal website?

And as long as what they said didn't cross the line in to slander or libel what would give you the right to demand their free speech and the venues in which they could exercise it?

Doug Swinskey wrote:
just becasue its legal...doesnt make it right...

But if it is legal then right or wrong means nothing as far as you filing a suit. If the law is in favor of the site owner and you obviously know that it is based on this statement, then why even bother with legal action that you know you will lose?

Oh, thats right, because you can do it for sport and  it wont cost you anything.

Grow up

Doug Swinskey wrote:

i have agrgued against these types of sites for four years..i have argued against features here on mayhem that do the same thing...

if they exist, i dont want to be a part of it...

Considering that models and photographers can say any negative thing they want on their profile page, doesn't that make Model Mayhem "one of those sites?"

Doug Swinskey wrote:

i dont belive chris has poor intentions....the professionals here dont need a feedback system..we talk to each other...he is inadvertantly catering to the unprofessionals....who are just the people to abuse the system...

So what about the new people who might want to work with you that aren't professionals & don't know who to talk to?

rssphoto wrote:
Grow up

how pathetic of you to tell me to "grow up" because i stand up for what i belive is right....

SLE Photography wrote:

So what about the new people who might want to work with you that aren't professionals & don't know who to talk to?

or people from a different city, state or even country

Jim Ball wrote:
Considering that models and photographers can say any negative thing they want on their profile page, doesn't that make Model Mayhem "one of those sites?"

i agreed to be on mayhem..i didnt agree to be on chris's site...

King of the Letter L wrote:

Doug Swinskey wrote:
If they exist, i dont want to be a part of it...

Then do not create an account. What others choose to say, within the law, is their business, and is protected by law.

Indeed, did you see the recent BBB report on Suicide Girls. They never signed up for the BBB's service, and the BBB report was scathing. They've not sued, nor do I expect they will.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
chris, just becasue its legal...doesnt make it right...

I agree, just because something is legal does not necessarily make it right. In this case, I'm not convinced of your argument, but I'm willing to listen.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
i dont want any association with your site...

i dont want anyone thinking i endorse your site..

You have no association nor is there any endorsement, either implied or expressed. I'm glad I could clear that up.


And there you go, again. Threatening legal action may be actionable in and of itself. Indeed, vexatious or frivolous threats of litigation are no joking matter, nor are counterclaims of such.

But, you know, in the face of a threat of legal action, and on advice of council after a quick phone call, I suspect my best course of action would be to not discuss the issue with you any further.

Put it in the FAQ that "Doug Swinskey is neither associated nor endorses this website."

Make it BOLD.

TXPhotog wrote:

I made a policy statement on this earlier in the thread.

I don't believe Chris has an ulterior motive either, and I don't believe Doug thinks he does.  Doug's concern (one I share) is that other people have done some pretty horrible things on websites whose purpose was not all that dissimilar to Chris' site.  Unlike Doug (whose reservations I can certainly understand), I'm willing to see if the site design and implementation overcome the natural tendency of such sites to be cesspools.

i'm missing something here
(remember you are talking to a model)
... how can this site become a cess pool?

Viktoria wrote:
i'm sure if you ask Roger to remove you, he will.  why make a point of asking Chris?

Doug, Viktoria is correct.  I currently have you on my "vouched for" list, because I didn't see that it would hurt anything, and might help you.  However, just say the word and I will take you off.

Doug Swinskey wrote:

i agreed to be on mayhem..i didnt agree to be on chris's site...

You probably didn't agree to be on Google either.

Gonna threaten to sue them also?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&qo … gle+Search

Doug Swinskey wrote:
i agreed to be on mayhem..i didnt agree to be on chris's site...

I think you're missing (edit*- or avoiding) the point entirely.

Say I have a profile on imamodelikickass.com (yes, I made that up right now), of which you are not a member.

If I put your name on my profile saying that I worked with you or talked with you or seen you somewhere, and you had no affiliation with the site whatsoever, what could/would you really do about it? Does it mean that you endorse me simply because I mentioned your name?

SLE Photography wrote:
So what about the new people who might want to work with you that aren't professionals & don't know who to talk to?

i have a presence and reputation in my market...if they cant find me, they arent anyone i am marketing to anyway..

Doug Swinskey wrote:

i agreed to be on mayhem..i didnt agree to be on chris's site...

Duh, if I understand correctly, you are not a member of that site.  Are you a member of Deviant Art?  I am, and could post something complimenting you there.  Do you expect every site on the internet to bow down and obey your wishes if someone posts something about you on a site you do not like?

Doug Swinskey wrote:

how pathetic of you to tell me to "grow up" because i stand up for what i belive is right....

I didnt say you need to grow up because you stand up for what you believe... I said you need to grow up because of the childish way you have chosen to do it.... Thats not pathetic...thats reality

Viktoria wrote:
... how can this site become a cess pool?

Currently I don't think it can.  The near term planned implementation doesn't allow for any very serious personal vendettas to be worked out.  The worst that could happen, as near as I can tell, is that someone could create a "worked with" file and choose not to recommend someone after a (claimed) shoot.

That's not good, but it's not terrible, nor actionable either.

However, Chris has mentioned putting in the ability to have negative comments of some undefined form allowed later.  Enter the potential for a cesspool.

Jim Ball wrote:
Considering that models and photographers can say any negative thing they want on their profile page, doesn't that make Model Mayhem "one of those sites?"

we have remedies here at mayhem...tylers dad asked me to remove something i had on my page..it had nothing to do with him, but there was an implication..so i removed it..i am sure if icalled tyler and said someone had something posted about me that i didnt want posted, it would be addressed...

SLE Photography wrote:
All I can do (and what I have done) is to post disclaimers that I am not affiliated with them in any way.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
and thats acceptable to you?

It is to me unless they are making claims that are not true.  Simply saying they would or would not work with me is what I encourage them to do now.

EDIT:  Shootnotes.com simply consolidates the effort.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
i agreed to be on mayhem..i didnt agree to be on chris's site...

Jim Ball wrote:
Duh, if I understand correctly, you are not a member of that site.  Are you a member of Deviant Art?  I am, and could post something complimenting you there.  Do you expect every site on the internet to bow down and obey your wishes if someone posts something about you on a site you do not like?

do you fight for yourself or do you just do what you are told?

it the potential abuse.....thats what i am concerned with...thats what you are all missing...

i am also concerned with peole thinking i endorse the site

you wont be concerned with it unitl someone points a finger at you...then you'll be wanting to sue someone..

markcomp wrote:
It is to me unless they are making claims that are not true.  Simply saying they would or would not work with me is what I encourage them to do now.

EDIT:  Shootnotes.com simply consolidates the effort.

What he said....