Xref: utzoo soc.culture.indian:10980 news.groups:7399 news.misc:2609
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!elroy!cit-vax!cataract!kalra
From: kalra@cataract.caltech.edu (Devendra Kalra)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,news.groups,news.misc
Subject: Re: Propreity (sp?) of making specific allegations on the net.
Message-ID: <9550@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: 14 Feb 89 06:53:28 GMT
References: <11491@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <50486@yale-celray.yale.UUCP>
Sender: news@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu
Reply-To: kalra@cataract.UUCP ()
Distribution: soc
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 64

In article <50486@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> Ram-Ashwin@cs.yale.edu (Ashwin Ram) writes:
>In article <11491@watdragon.waterloo.edu>, ankgoel@violet.waterloo.edu (anil k goel) writes:
>> It has been sometime since I posted last and I am really disturbed by a
>> surge of articles making very specific allegations against Indian citizens,
>> institutions,etc. during the recent past. The articles which come to mind
>> concern  the indian "layman",IE/Arun Shourie,Air India,Indian Airlines 
>> among others.
>> 
>Anil,
>
>
>There is no libel when no-one is there to listen to the accusations.
>Similarly, there should be no libel when intelligent people partake in a
>discussion.  For example, if you post accusations about me on the net, what
>should I do?  The law says I can sue you for libel.  However, USENET is based
>on a different philosophy.  According to this, I can reply to your message,
>defend myself, present arguments and evidence, etc., and then let the netters
>at large decide who they wish to believe.  In the worst case, if you are
>truly malicious, you can probably ruin my image, but until it goes that far
>(and few discussions do) I don't think I would take you to a court of law.
>
>I do not believe that there was any libel involving IE or Arun Shourie.  (As
>you can tell, I'm not a lawyer, but then I think most people are too
>trigger-happy when it comes to suing.)  I personally did not agree with
>Hemant's opinions, but I think he has the right to post them.  People argued
>on both sides of the issue.  The readers read both arguments and made up
>their own minds.

    I think it is not right to air accusations in a public forum about 
any individual UNTIL the individual has had a chance to reply to them 
in private. What I mean by this is that if A has some accusations
about B, B should be privately notified by A about these allegations
and given a chance to clarify if possible. If, for example,
any one wishes to accuse me of something, I would prefer 
that he/she send me e-mail say, and give me a chance to explain. 

    If possible, it should not curtail the freedom to express one's opinion.
I know it is a difficult issue to decide when stating one's opinion becomes
accusing another person. However there is obvious difference in

"In my opinion, Arun Shourie did wrong by slandering person X"

and 

"Arun Shourie is the biggest goonda and thug that India has ever seen"

If you post your (usage of you is generic) opinions on the net, you
should put only that much emotion and heat in it that you are willing
to stand up to and defend.

I agree with Ashwin that people are trigger happy when it comes to suing,
but a person should be willing to face the consequences of serious
charges that he makes. Using any medium, USENET or otherwise, as a 
means to shoot off the hip without thinking it out can not 
be condoned. It seems, that we, hiding in the anonymity of 
our consoles and keyboards, sometimes let our imagination, emotions
and fingers go wild. Just notice the epithets that have started appearing
on the net, (s**thead and worse). We revel in returning a public insult
in public.

>-- Ashwin.

Devendra
kalra@csvax.caltech.edu