jmckenna1 has reported a post.
Reason:
Post: Nick says: Don’t pay your mortgage?
Forum: General Inspection Discussion
Assigned Moderators: gbeaumont, fmagdefrau, fcarrio, lkage, jvogan, mkyriacou, jmckenna1, rromoser, sgilligan1, iniquette, rmaday, bjones5, jramos, wwilson3
Posted by: pdoane
Original Content:
Agreed,
This thread should not have made it to the MB. I have unapproved this thread and than Jeff V. approved it. Give youself a shake Jeff and resign as a moderator.
Non members should not be able to come in and lie and slander a member at will, with
no accountability. Jeff V. would not want people doing this to him. The moderators
agreed to follow certain guide lines. We made a promise to keep those rules when we
accepted the job as a moderator of non member post.
By censoring the critic you add credibility to his charge.
The link he posted is public for all to see and now…thanks to him…so is Nick’s rebuttal and explanation. While Mr. Doane may have had other intentions, his post allowed Nick to explain away something that he otherwise would not be able to. Thus, Mr. Doane’s post served a good (although unintended) purpose.
There is no slander where there is no lie. He backed up his post with a link.
If you were to ask Nick, himself, he would agree with me.
Censorship is wrong.
(P.S. — Please save the “Moderator’s Honor Code” for some other forum where people with more than one active brain cell can read it…and, perhaps, believe it. It don’t fly, here)
The forum rules and the duties of a moderator are spelled out already.
Slander and lies break those rules. You do not write the rules.
If we follow your logic, we should invite all the lies and slander we can
get, because it does so much good. NOT. :roll:
How many years should Nick have to keep explaining something that
has already been gone over many times before? That is not
showing proper consideration for a fellow member.
Moderators made a promise to abide by the rules… and that is an
honorable thing… to keep a promise.
If the ESOP committee receives a complaint of proven lies and slander
that are causing a fellow member harm, then they judge it by the rules
that are in place, to protect a fellow member. I have seen you enforce
those very rules more than once.
Should the ESOP committee now say that slandering fellowing members
with lies and seeking to do harm is a good thing? NO.
When non members break the rules, they get corrected. Simple.
It doesn’t make you right.
That is why your itchy delete finger has to go through this process…so that the membership can see how you think and how you prefer to control what we read and think.
I do not respect your judgment and have no desire to have you filter out things you find objectionable for me to read.
Mr. Doane did not slander anyone, for he did not publish a lie.
He published an article from a television station and allowed Nick to respond to it.
Your nonsensical approach is to allow the article to remain on the internet…and NOT let Nick respond to it, thinking this performs a service.
That is why you are unfit to moderate.
OK… I guess we should allow everyone to publish all the bad
things people have ever said about Nick, over and over… so
he can keep defending himself, over and over. That is really
helping everyone and who cares about Nick’s rights as a member?
If a person wants to give Nick (or any member) a fair trial, then
why not go to him in private? People who go public with rumors
on the internet are seeking to cause harm, especially if they already
know it is a lie. Nick told the man he already knew the truth
and yet the man published it anyway.
Intent to cause harm to a fellow member is the crime. That’s
why lies and slander are against the forum rules, especially for
non members.
You, Mr Bushart, do not write the forum rules. In this case, a clear
violation of the rules has happened.
If I repeat a lie, even though I know it is a lie, does that make me
less guilty? The intent to cause harm is the crime.
Your opinion of me personally is irrelevant. The rules were broken.
Seeking to harm a fellow member with a known lie is not a good
thing, even if you think it is.
You sure change your tune when it comes to issuing an ESOP
ruling about breaking the rules.
In all fairness this thread, Nick says: Don’t pay your mortgage?
should never have been posted by Nick in the first place. Recommending peolple to not pay their mortgage while being the leader of one the largest home inspector organizations.
As far as I know to Nick there is no bad press, he lives by the creed that all press is good, that is why he posts things like that, ask him yourself.
There are no rules broken.
The poster references a thread where Nick advises homeowners to withhold payment on the mortgages until such time that the bank produces original loan papers, which is true.
He then provides a link to a television station that reports that Nick owest them money.
Where is the slander? Where is the libel?
There has to be a lie…a knowingly false statement made by someone with malicious intent in order to be slander or libel.
Referencing unflattering published reports is not slander or libel.
Where do you feel you have the right to censor this post?
So you’re all for censoring Nick? :roll::roll:
Ya see kenny there is hope for your little pipe dream yet! 
I am not even sure if this post will make it to the message board…as it appears I have been thrown out as a member…I no longer have access to the members only message areas…but I will post here in hopes that you can see it.
Peter’s post did NOT violate any of the forum message board rules. I quote them:
“Remember, debate is not only welcomed it is encouraged. Personal attacks for reasons of race, religion, sexual orientation, et cetera, or postings, which are profane or are meant to defame our membership, will not be tolerated”.
Peter’s post was not a personal attack for reason of religion, sexual orientation, or whatever else. It was not profane, and was in fact backed up by a link to a major newpaper who did an article on that very topic, which included Nick. Why wasn’t the newspaper sued??
I don’t know the entire story about the $14K fine, as NONE of us probably know the WHOLE truth about it, but someone shouldn’t be censored just because you don’t like the post.
I can tell you that I don’t think Peter’s post needed to be censored as much as Nick’s irresponsible post advising to people to go bad on their mortgages and try to weasel out of it. I believe THAT post is much more potentially damaging to someone who actually follows his advise and loses their home.
Oh, but we don’t censor members, right? We just kick them out if they are moderators and don’t insulate Nick from any posts other than the “Thanks Nick” posts…I wonder if someone who lost their home would post a thank you to him for that advice?
Gee joey, I seem to have forgotten what it was, can you fill me in?
Jeff,
Were you thrown out of NACHI for this silly nonsense that ain’t even worthy for the joke section? If so it is a sad day for NACHI indeed, and it proves the fact that no good deed goes unpunished. Now WTF in their right mind (besides kenny) would volunteer to be a m-derator? Like I said in the beginning… Not for Bags O’ Cash.
Jeff, we’re all adults here, just because Nick says something, does not mean someone should do it. If you are smart enough to do inspections, then it must be assumed that you are smart enough to handle your own financial affairs.
Kenny, that ditch weed you smoke will do it to you everytime. :p:mrgreen:
You being thrown Out is ****ing nuts, but par for the course.
Everyone really knows this is why Nick finally approved to moderate this board, to help cover his butt when he immediately throws members out for disagreeing with him, like he did a few weeks ago.
Be honest Chris…how long would you let someone trash you on your own organization BB? You know as well as Jeff and Peter that’s all the post was meant to do!