<<whispers>> Was there ever any clarification about whether the issue with GF was swearing on here?

and given that individual MNetters whould also be held responsible for their posts on the subject, I for one, would not feel secure to enter a discussion of the ideas of someone I know to be prepared to use litigation.

Better by far to protect ourselves and MN from the threat of litigation by stopping all discusison (any discussion I entered would be damn short though since I have never read any of GF's books )

If MN could get into trouble for formally introducing a ban on the discussion of this person and her methods (and right now I believe anything could happen) then I think we as posters should introduce our own self-imposed ban. After all nobody can force us to discuss something if we don't want to.

well why not have an announcement on the home page and in any introducotory emails? "sorry, but due to threat of legal action MNHQ will remove all postings mentioning GF?" Would that be libellous? Seems simplest!

Well, there you go then. It was all fair comment.

\link{http://www.carter-ruck.com/FAQs/Libel%20and%20Slander%20Cases.html\Interesting Q&A on libel and slander cases}

I'll go with that. Seems a shame as newbies must wonder what on earth is the matter and it might put them off. But better that that the alternative law suits!

Better get this thread deleted then!

Total ban particularly in light of Hijackers Demand No. 2: That we [MNHQ]implement a procedure whereby we review postings on a regular basis each day and delete any postings which are derogatory and/or defamatory of Gina Ford.

A headache easily avoided by banning all mention of her entirely.

I agree with total ban, she surely can't sue because we fail to discuss her. New poster can just be told, sorry we can't discuss here, have you tried, e.g. BMc, UKP, Mumsonline (insert name of alternative parenting site).

I thought that it was decided as Mumsnet is a Limited Company, they won't lose lots of money? And I'm pretty sure we'd all agree to pay a subscription if we'd have to! Just looking at it from all angles really, considering everything that has happened, they'd probably be mad to start a new Mumsnet!

No, but I imagine if they have personally lost lots of money, their hearts might not be in it :(

Money?

Even if Mumsnet were pulled, there's nothing stopping the team, if they want to, to start up a new site named Mumsnet2 is there?

To reiterate my post of 6:36:27PM

'And I will be bumping this just now for any members who are in the legal profession or connected to the press. '

I'm leaving the country on Saturday .....

I'm still wondering if banning discussion of her wouldn't also give cause for complaint. Not fair that her method can't compete with other baby gurus methods?

They'll be after you Jools. You have hard copy? Post again quick recalling exactly when you burnt it.

mmm just what i was thinking .... rather dictatorial - what a shame

Crystaltips: you do have to wonder if that isn't the goal?

oh well in that case I'm glad I kept a copy of her post! I'd forgotten - wish I kept the whole thread now!

Interestingly, on that fishy tale case in the states, it looks like the guy suing filed for bankruptcy in the end... \link{http://fins.actwin.com/aquatic-plants/month.200105/msg00211.html\eight separate lawsuits in the end}... bizarre.

beety oops

This isn't going to result in MN having to close down is it ????

I well recall istting in Bettys back garden at the MN summer do coupla yrs back and.... reading thr thread and we all sat there open mouthed

Good lord!

I didn't think, having looked at the definition of defamation, that GF had a strong case tbh. Her claim certainly can't be helped by the fact that there are other websites which she hasn't bothered to erm, bother,