http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699 At our ethics board meeting last week, we discussed how far we should go to protect the identity of someone who blogs or posts on our site. The issue came up because one motivated poster has repeatedly tried to identify Michael Ratcliff's accuser. As our policy states, we want to respect the privacy of those using VictoriaAdvocate.com and not share their e-mail addresses or identity without their permission. In many cases, we don't even know the identity of those posting. We make no effort to track people down through their IP addresses or any other cybersleuthing. However, board members agreed we probably wouldn't go to court to defend those who break the law or libel someone. The courts have held that people posting to the Web are the publishers of their own comments, meaning they are legally responsible for their words. This has allowed newspapers to open up their Web sites in a way that wasn't possible with a traditional opinion page. Of course, such freedom isn't without its own challenges. The Ratcliff poster may be breaking the law against identifying those under the age of 17 who report sexual assaults. I don't know whether the law applies in this case because Ratcliff's accuser is now an adult.  We deleted the offending posts as soon as they've been reported. Board members agreed we're not going to fight a court order seeking information about someone accused of a crime. We hope we don't get placed in that situation and encourage everyone to act responsibly on the Web.  Freedom isn't free. At our ethics board meeting last week, we discussed how far we should go to protect the identity of someone who blogs or posts on our site. The issue came up because one motivated poster has repeatedly tried to identify Michael Ratcliff's accuser. As our policy states, we want to respect the privacy of those using VictoriaAdvocate.com and not share their e-mail addresses or identity without their permission. In many cases, we don't even know the identity of those posting. We make no effort to track people down through their IP addresses or any other cybersleuthing. However, board members agreed we probably wouldn't go to court to defend those who break the law or libel someone. The courts have held that people posting to the Web are the publishers of their own comments, meaning they are legally responsible for their words. This has allowed newspapers to open up their Web sites in a way that wasn't possible with a traditional opinion page. Of course, such freedom isn't without its own challenges. The Ratcliff poster may be breaking the law against identifying those under the age of 17 who report sexual assaults. I don't know whether the law applies in this case because Ratcliff's accuser is now an adult.  We deleted the offending posts as soon as they've been reported. Board members agreed we're not going to fight a court order seeking information about someone accused of a crime. We hope we don't get placed in that situation and encourage everyone to act responsibly on the Web.  Freedom isn't free. en-us Thanks Mr.Cobbler for deleting those posts.It's a shame how one will do almost anything just to TRY and make things right for those whom are wrong. http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24010 http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24010 Thanks Mr.Cobbler for deleting those posts.It's a shame how one will do almost anything just to TRY and make things right for those whom are wrong. Chris, Thanks for sharing this information.  It's been extemely upsetting to see some of the postings on the topic of Mr. Ratcliff's alleged crime.  Especially from one or two particular posters who were determined to discredit the accuser.  Thanks for your prompt action in deleting the comments.  http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24014 http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24014 Chris, Thanks for sharing this information.  It's been extemely upsetting to see some of the postings on the topic of Mr. Ratcliff's alleged crime.  Especially from one or two particular posters who were determined to discredit the accuser.  Thanks for your prompt action in deleting the comments.  This is perhaps the stupidest post I've ever read on the internet ! ! How can a newspaper start a blog and then even discuss threatening to expose the anonymity of its forum members ? What I see happening here is alot of people stating what they are too afraid to state in real life......which is part of the beauty of the internet. You can join a website forum and discuss topics and (hopefully) expose truths that would otherwise be unsaid. I haven't been chasing the Ratcliff case nor do I give a shit about it. There are ethics that I agree should be followed but come on people........it's the internet. And people will unfortunately be people. I initially joined to respond to the cardiology crisis in Victoria and now I have to stomach some gun toting perv getting blowjobs on taxpayer's money. Maybe he should run for president. LOL.............. In all reality, your ethics committee should cease and decist. There are no ethics on the internet. Don't scare the public into sheepish behavior after you have tapped a great resource to let small town BS be exposed. Why don't you discuss the ethics of finding some good stories once in a while. If it weren't for cheerleaders, peeping toms and school issues you wouldn't have shit to write about and then have to resort to AP regurgitation. http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24119 http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24119 This is perhaps the stupidest post I've ever read on the internet ! ! How can a newspaper start a blog and then even discuss threatening to expose the anonymity of its forum members ? What I see happening here is alot of people stating what they are too afraid to state in real life......which is part of the beauty of the internet. You can join a website forum and discuss topics and (hopefully) expose truths that would otherwise be unsaid. I haven't been chasing the Ratcliff case nor do I give a shit about it. There are ethics that I agree should be followed but come on people........it's the internet. And people will unfortunately be people. I initially joined to respond to the cardiology crisis in Victoria and now I have to stomach some gun toting perv getting blowjobs on taxpayer's money. Maybe he should run for president. LOL.............. In all reality, your ethics committee should cease and decist. There are no ethics on the internet. Don't scare the public into sheepish behavior after you have tapped a great resource to let small town BS be exposed. Why don't you discuss the ethics of finding some good stories once in a while. If it weren't for cheerleaders, peeping toms and school issues you wouldn't have shit to write about and then have to resort to AP regurgitation. To be clear, we're not threatening to expose anyone. I don't know of any newspaper that would go to court to keep secret the identity of someone doing something illegal or libeling someone. I checked with a few media lawyers on this point. Perhaps other newspapers don't warn you, but you might want to look more into how safe and hidden you really are on the Internet. It's great people can get involved on the Internet. We want to encourage readers to do so and think they can while still being aware that free speech carries legal risks. http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24161 http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24161 To be clear, we're not threatening to expose anyone. I don't know of any newspaper that would go to court to keep secret the identity of someone doing something illegal or libeling someone. I checked with a few media lawyers on this point. Perhaps other newspapers don't warn you, but you might want to look more into how safe and hidden you really are on the Internet. It's great people can get involved on the Internet. We want to encourage readers to do so and think they can while still being aware that free speech carries legal risks. Well said Chris. I don't plan on breaking any rules or committing any crimes so I'm not worried. Free speech does carry a certain responsibility, but people need to stop sugare coating topics that hit home. "OOOhhh you can't say THAT" all goes away on an internet forum, adn public officials might take notice as the people speak freely. Yet like the old saying goes....you can't yell FIRE in a movie theatre and call it free speech. I just get the feeling from this forum that Victoria just broke into the internet forum era that is already 10+ years old and doesn't know how to act. Typically like most trends, Victoria is about 10 years behind on average. Legally we all know we can be found. Any good PC guru could find any one of us bloggers here. My point is that for pure entertainment purposes, being anonymous tears down barriers so that people can speak freely without fear of political or unjust "real life" scrutiny in small town America. Victoria is a glorified small town and we all know that. The newspaper might actually learn something from the comments being posted and may give leads to new stories through internet contacts. Take note.....the people are speaking. Key words again: NEW STORIES. NEW TOPICS. Get it ? What you are reading on this forum are the inside thoughts of every mind that holds the newspaper and laughs, cries, makes fun of it, whatever on each and every turn of the page. It gives the people a chance to get it out. Which is what we all need these days.....to be HEARD. http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24173 http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24173 Well said Chris. I don't plan on breaking any rules or committing any crimes so I'm not worried. Free speech does carry a certain responsibility, but people need to stop sugare coating topics that hit home. "OOOhhh you can't say THAT" all goes away on an internet forum, adn public officials might take notice as the people speak freely. Yet like the old saying goes....you can't yell FIRE in a movie theatre and call it free speech. I just get the feeling from this forum that Victoria just broke into the internet forum era that is already 10+ years old and doesn't know how to act. Typically like most trends, Victoria is about 10 years behind on average. Legally we all know we can be found. Any good PC guru could find any one of us bloggers here. My point is that for pure entertainment purposes, being anonymous tears down barriers so that people can speak freely without fear of political or unjust "real life" scrutiny in small town America. Victoria is a glorified small town and we all know that. The newspaper might actually learn something from the comments being posted and may give leads to new stories through internet contacts. Take note.....the people are speaking. Key words again: NEW STORIES. NEW TOPICS. Get it ? What you are reading on this forum are the inside thoughts of every mind that holds the newspaper and laughs, cries, makes fun of it, whatever on each and every turn of the page. It gives the people a chance to get it out. Which is what we all need these days.....to be HEARD. An indictment of course can be issued under seal as well with a judicial gag order if the bench determines it is appropriate. If the grand jury can lawfully protect the accuser the term minor child is used in stead of the name to insure anonymity. Once placed into the public domain it is a matter of good taste and common sense. To liable someone requires the statement to be untrue " An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community." if the statement has a scintilla of truth or is mere opinion it is protected speech. http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24177 http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/Blog/ChrisCobler/5699/#c_24177 An indictment of course can be issued under seal as well with a judicial gag order if the bench determines it is appropriate. If the grand jury can lawfully protect the accuser the term minor child is used in stead of the name to insure anonymity. Once placed into the public domain it is a matter of good taste and common sense. To liable someone requires the statement to be untrue " An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community." if the statement has a scintilla of truth or is mere opinion it is protected speech.