Matt Cooke, did he go there?

[gooner]

Have the two of you read what I posted.

I see it more as precautionary move for now on his part. With what has happened, it has tickled his tummy too much and he deleted the tweets as a result. Coward.

With particular emphasis on the bolded.

I never once said JV threatened him.

It's the precautionary reaction to what has happened. But then you knew that.

Exactly, what has happened? I've not seen anything that would allow public knowledge of "what has happened'. Perhaps you could explain for all of us?

Umm.. the rumours regarding Digger.

So you’re labeling Matt Cooke a ‘coward’ based on rumors?

Good Lord.

Based entirely on the introduction of new twitter rules, what happened to Digger and the then deleting of his tweets.

Just a coincidence.

 

[thehog]

Matt Cooker a ‘coward’ and who ‘lacks courage’ based on internet rumors. ok.

You’ve then managed to incorporate Vaughters into your posts and now you tell us it’s because Twitter has “new rules”. And that is the basis for labeling Matt Cooke a “coward”?

Still not following your logic, do you have anything else to back up your assertion that Matt Cooke is a 'coward'?

 

[gooner]

Matt Cooker a ‘coward’ and who ‘lacks courage’ based on internet rumors. ok.

You’ve then managed to incorporate Vaughters into your posts and now you tell us it’s because Twitter has “new rules”. And that is the basis for labeling Matt Cooke a “coward”?

I referenced some of the things Cooke has tweeted on, something you know very well about. This has been widely discussed on here where Cooke's sudden new found love of being anti-doping has arrived in the last couple of years or so.

Still not following your logic, do you have anything else to back up your assertion that Matt Cooke is a 'coward'?

That was answered.

 

[gooner]

guess we should appreciate the irony.

There's certainly a lot of irony in a guy who all of sudden wants backbone to something said (provided) and who at the same time is one of the most guilty of throwing smears and innuendo on the forum.

I hope we see that in future discussions. Good to see.

 

[thehog]

Matt Cooker a ‘coward’ and who ‘lacks courage’ based on internet rumors. ok.

You’ve then managed to incorporate Vaughters into your posts and now you tell us it’s because Twitter has “new rules”. And that is the basis for labeling Matt Cooke a “coward”?

I referenced some of the things Cooke has tweeted on, something you know very well about. This has been widely discussed on here where Cooke's sudden new found love of being anti-doping has arrived in the last couple of years or so.

Still not following your logic, do you have anything else to back up your assertion that Matt Cooke is a 'coward'?

That was answered.

So nothing "specific" then? You're surmising based on Internet rumour alone.

That's it? Which is why you call someone a 'coward'?

Wow.

 

[MarkvW]

Being prudent does not equate to being a coward, despite what anonymous Internet posters say from the safety of their mother's basement.

 

[gooner]

I can´t find the link, but yesterday or the day before, Twitter put some new strict rules about what you can post or not, with suspensions and profile blocking.

Yes, they did.

 

[gooner]

Re:

Being prudent does not equate to being a coward, despite what anonymous Internet posters say from the safety of their mother's basement.

Yeah Mark, yet he has a go at journalists for not questioning riders for the exact things he says on twitter. Those tweets that he has since deleted.

But you see I don't engage with the "everyone dopes" brigade and the herd mentality that goes with it on here.

Pretty easy for me to stand by what I say when I don't resort to that cowardly baseless tosh.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Being prudent does not equate to being a coward, despite what anonymous Internet posters say from the safety of their mother's basement.

Yeah Mark, yet he has a go at journalists for not questioning riders for the exact things he says on twitter. Those tweets that he has since deleted.

But you see I don't engage with the "everyone dopes" brigade and the herd mentality that goes with it on here.

Pretty easy for me to stand by what I say when I don't resort to that cowardly baseless tosh.

But you see I don't engage with the "everyone dopes" brigade and the herd mentality that goes with it on here.

Its only an observation but you appear to be taking this rather personally. Additionally where is this "everyone dopes" mentality you refer? Or is that an "internet rumor" as well?

 

[MarkvW]

Re: Re:

Being prudent does not equate to being a coward, despite what anonymous Internet posters say from the safety of their mother's basement.

Yeah Mark, yet he has a go at journalists for not questioning riders for the exact things he says on twitter. Those tweets that he has since deleted.

But you see I don't engage with the "everyone dopes" brigade and the herd mentality that goes with it on here.

Pretty easy for me to stand by what I say when I don't resort to that cowardly baseless tosh.

You are asserting that Cooke's deletion of tweets equates to cowardice? Do you have ANY idea how stupid that sounds?

Must a person keep all their thoughts up on a message board (owned by another) for all eternity? How long must an honorable man keep his thoughts available online for the gooners of the world?

The man said his piece. He is accountable for it. He has no need to keep it up, like a billboard, forever.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Being prudent does not equate to being a coward, despite what anonymous Internet posters say from the safety of their mother's basement.

Matt Cooke has neither been to court, judged by his peers in a court or to our knowledge issued a libel notice, however he is deemed a ‘coward’ – guilty as charged, by ‘internet rumour’ according to Gooner. Additionally everyone on this forum believes “everyone dopes” and everyone belongs to the “herd mentality”.

 

[Maxiton]

Hey, gooner: What are you going to do if Matt Cooke sues you for insisting in public that he's a coward? He could, you know. Seriously. You might think it's funny now, but you won't when the summons arrives.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

True.

If the basis is mealy “internet rumor” and not based on fact, then Gooner should remove his posts, that would be appropriate action to take. If Gooner is aware of facts unbeknownst to others and he is using that ‘specific knowledge’ to cause Matt Cooke ‘harm’ then it would be deemed a serious issue as most likely result in compensatory remedy.

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum,formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

One cannot be "charged" with libel. Its a civil tort not criminal.

 

[Night Rider]

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

Who is suing him?

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re: Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

Didn't you earlier claim that Cancellara was using a motor to win races? Are you fearing a summons arriving on your doorstep?

I don't agree with Gooner's opinion on Cooke, but this lawsuit angle isn't really based in reality. I found some of Cooke's tweets interesting, others pretty sophomoric. But, I wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions on why he deleted all his tweets. Sometimes, I feel the like doing the same.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

I don't agree with Gooner's opinion on Cooke, but this lawsuit angle isn't really based in reality. I found some of Cooke's tweets interesting, others pretty sophomoric. But, I wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions on why he deleted all his tweets. Sometimes, I feel the like doing the same.

According to Gooner; Cooke is a "coward" and Cooke has undermined the good work by David Walsh (and others) 'on Lance' - "its an insult", he said.

Hard to work out how Gooner has related David Walsh, to Matt Cooke and turned that into him being a "coward" and an "insulting".

Even Lance somehow gets involved.

Coward.

And if you think that some of the stuff we see with Cooke or in here is the equivalent of the brave work that we saw with Walsh, Ballester, Ressiot, and Rouet on Lance, then you're the one being silly.

It's an insult.

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

Who is suing him?

No one knows for sure.

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

Didn't you earlier claim that Cancellara was using a motor to win races? Are you fearing a summons arriving on your doorstep?

<snip>

Cancellara is a public figure. Accusing a public figure of moto-doping (or using a corked bat) is not quite the same as calling a much less public figure a coward. So, to answer your question, no, I'm not worried about it.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum,formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

One cannot be "charged" with libel. Its a civil tort not criminal.

Good point. Hit with a libel suit.

 

[dwyatt]

Re: Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

To be fair, anyone could bring a libel suit against anyone. It's not like a criminal case where they decide if there is a strong enough case before going to court.

 

[dwyatt]

Re: Re:

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

Who is suing him?

No one knows for sure.

Opinions, especially those expressed in cyberspace, usually are not considered defamatory in courts.

Digger_forum, formerly on Twitter, was just hit with a libel charge, apparently.

Didn't you earlier claim that Cancellara was using a motor to win races? Are you fearing a summons arriving on your doorstep?

<snip>

Cancellara is a public figure. Accusing a public figure of moto-doping (or using a corked bat) is not quite the same as calling a much less public figure a coward. So, to answer your question, no, I'm not worried about it.

Honestly what you said "I can say with certainty that he was using motors on La Ronde and PR" would be a much easier libel case IMHO, as you clearly expressed it as a fact not an opnion. Thus in court you would have to prove it was true.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re: Re:

Cancellara is a public figure. Accusing a public figure of moto-doping (or using a corked bat) is not quite the same as calling a much less public figure a coward. So, to answer your question, no, I'm not worried about it.

Of course, you shouldn't be worried about it. I already told you why opinions in this context are not typically considered defamatory. I think Cooke would also be considered a limited-person public figure in the instance of him commenting on Twitter about cycling. The requirement of 'actual malice' would apply to both Cooke and Cancellara in that event. Saying Gooner might be sued is stretching reality IMO.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

maybe the moderators c/should chime in here.
what if, say, Vaughters' or Cancellara's or Sky's or UCI's lawyers write a letter to the moderators requesting poster xyz's personal data and emailaddress.
what happens?