We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
It seems the S word has been deemed inflammatory?
esmerobbo
Posts: 4,979 Forumite
The word scam has been edited out of all posts on CAG. They state in a court case a Judge has deemed the word inflammatory. Has anybody heard anything about this?
0
Comments
-
That means that Trading Standards are in big trouble. They operate a website called ScambustersWhat part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?0
-
They haven't elaborated on the actual case. I suppose it depends how it was used. like in the way we call PPC invoices Scamvoices?? Or describing the PPC,s ethical business as a scam!!:rotfl:0
-
For some time now pepipoo have preferred posters not to use words such as scam, thief etc.I'd rather be an Optimist and be proved wrong than a Pessimist and be proved right.0
-
The forums on www.thisismoney.co.uk seem to have 'lost' the Scams forum."You were only supposed to blow the bl**dy doors off!!"0
-
Three alternatives:
sham
con
hustle0 -
Case appears to be Designtechnica. More of a non case actually, as the defendant never acknowledged, was not represented and took no part in the proceedings. The award appears not to be enforcable on the US based defendant, which is presumably why he took no part. The case is effectively a judgement in default and as such of no real precedent value.
If this case is why CAG acted, and I have no idea, then it may have acted somewhat in ignorance of the real facts of the case. Or alternatively it may be paranoia which does seem to be rife at CAG.
Alternatives to "scam"? I prefer "fast one". This is neutral enough not to imply fraudulent behaviour. And instead of invoice, begging letter may be more appropriate. To be honest the ones suggested by AlexisV are probably more libellous than "scam", that is if "scam" is libellous in the first place.0 -
i can assure you that there is a good reason why 'scam' has been filtered on CAG and, as far as I know, has nothing to do with the Designtechnica case0
-
pray tell us! Though the amount of times people have screamed 'scam' on sections of this forum when its their own stupidity is quite astoundingone of the famous 5
0 -
geordieracer wrote: »pray tell us! Though the amount of times people have screamed 'scam' on sections of this forum when its their own stupidity is quite astounding
Your a good one to talk :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:0 -
Your a good one to talk :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
You know what Sassy - I have never said anything was a scam once on this forum.. Except when taking the Pis5 out of someone who has fallen foul of perfectly fair T&Cs because they wanted something cheap.
do get all your facts rightone of the famous 5
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards