This was an anonymously submitted contribution from a new member who avoided giving his name, using what appeared to be a 'made for the purpose' hotmail address and contained an accusation of illegal activity by a member of Fethiye Belediye. It is not acceptable to "name names" while hiding your own, John. This is cowardly and dangerous. The post was potentially libellous (not slanderous) and libel from people who remain anonymous cannot be accepted on this forum. If it is, we'll end up in anarchy. I wonder if your view would change if you were the subject of libel, which we allowed to stay in the public domain even though you were at the complete disadvantage of not knowing who your accuser even is.
I thought I dealt with the situation very fairly indeed. I asked the author to add his name and a more reliable email address to his details in order that we could allow his contribution to stay. From my 'Ivory tower' I watched the author return to the topic, read it and leave - deciding not to divulge his identity as requested. It was this, not dates or times, that caused the topic to be deleted.
A few points of order to clarify. Members originally didn't have to give their full name when joining CBF, but they do now. This changed about 6 months ago and was again due to this type of cowardly activity. Acceptable email addresses have to include Hotmail/Yahoo types due to the large proportion of members based in Turkey where it is the easiest option. Personally I am not too interested in people's full names and of course it is very easy to make one up. This really isn't important unless and until a potentially libellous post is made by that member.
I have had to fight invisible attackers in the past and it isn't nice and more so it isn't fair to expect someone to. The member concerned has now returned and given his details and if he wishes to resubmit I have no problem with that. When the gentleman from Fethiye Belediye comes looking for someone to sue I will pass on the details. Without the author to sue, the responsibility ends with me and I'm not taking the flak for any anonymously contributed accusations. It is perhaps interesting that now we have his name he has so far chosen not to repeat his allegations against the gentleman. In reply to the returning member, I stated that his subject is most valid, the activities of A1 and other dishonest developers should not be allowed to fade as the years pass. I am sure the financial hardship and sad memory of those who paid in full for their properties and lost them don't fade over time.
We are not censorers on CBF John, we are campaigners and fighters for justice in many, many different areas of life. We also come and explain why we do what we do.
