Hear Hear I could not agree more.
I think if it is in the interest of model safety "Naming & Shaming"
should be allowed.
Cheers CC.
Rip Off Photographer!!
Re: Rip Off Photographer!!
Naming and shaming is not allowed
1. to avoid false and malicious naming and shaming
2. to avoid libellous posts
3. to try to keep the forum relatively peaceful.
I am not saying that the post in this thread was malicious or false.
Experience has shown that the best way of preventing a large number of a particular type of post, is not to allow ANY of that type of post. Malicious people tend to have barrack-room lawyer tendencies and justify themselves with pleas like 'You let [such and such] a post stand, why have you deleted mine?'
1. to avoid false and malicious naming and shaming
2. to avoid libellous posts
3. to try to keep the forum relatively peaceful.
I am not saying that the post in this thread was malicious or false.
Experience has shown that the best way of preventing a large number of a particular type of post, is not to allow ANY of that type of post. Malicious people tend to have barrack-room lawyer tendencies and justify themselves with pleas like 'You let [such and such] a post stand, why have you deleted mine?'
Re: Rip Off Photographer!!
Plus we've left enough information here so that anyone can understand exactly what is being alleged. It isn't too difficult for anyone wanting more information to e-mail Crome.
Please remember we have no way of knowing the full details behind any such allegation. It's all too easy for folk to shout that naming and shaming should be allowed when they aren't the ones who risk being in bother should the allegations be misplaced or false.
Please remember we have no way of knowing the full details behind any such allegation. It's all too easy for folk to shout that naming and shaming should be allowed when they aren't the ones who risk being in bother should the allegations be misplaced or false.
Re: Rip Off Photographer!! - IMPORTANT NOTICE
www.channelsix.net wish to make it known that they have no knowledge of, or association with, the individual or his actions as recounted in the message posted by 'Big Daddy Chrome 2' (10-01-03):