Re: [Fsfe-uk] BBC slander

[P.L.Hayes]

On Saturday 07 February 2004 15:12, Alex Hudson wrote:

> On Fri, 2004-02-06 at 12:33, P.L.Hayes wrote:
> > I replied to this nonsense of course and so did a lot of others but
> > there has been no further response.
>
> Which part of the response do you think is unjustified? I read the
> original story and the response, and I don't see the commotion
> personally. Given it's under the "State$ide" byline, and that there is
> evidence to back up the main assertion (as in, "open source hackers"
> have attacked and brought down the SCO website before) I'm not sure
> there is much ground for complaint. (Just playing devil's advocate for
> you ;)

Indeed -  thanks ;) and if I did get such a response from the PCU or whoever, 
it would hardly be difficult to provide a substantial counter-response; What 
evidence? Where does it appear in the article? Which open source projects 
were these attackers members of? How does the response address the issues of 
accuracy and language raised by the original article? The article smears a 
whole community rather than isolated individuals who may or may not have 
dubious claim to membership of that community - how is that justified by the 
response? How does Evans know the identity(s) and affiliations of the as yet 
unknown attackers? etc. etc.

> > Just now I've looked at the ofcom site but they don't actually make it
> > clear whether they'll handle this sort of thing or not so I've
> > contacted them to ask if they do.
>
> Unless something has changed recently, OfCOM do not regulate the BBC.
>

On the complaint site there is actually a link to OfCOM (IIRC) but I've a 
feeling you're right anyway and that would leave only the Governors after the 
PCU.

Cheers, 

Paul.