If the injunction specifically prevents anyone from suggesting they audition for The Voice then I'm buggered

It's a tricky one, technically TiBB is publishing everything we say if it's allowed to stay up.

I got legal threats from the author of a "baby training" child abuse manual when people were "slandering" her on the forum I used to run. Nothing tends to come of it, though.

Don't put the name on here. Or put up clues, which is the same thing.

I already had to delete one thread about it.

Oh. :laugh: Can't bloody breathe these days.

Oh someone PM me so I can be against the law, thanks :)

:laugh: It is boring, I agree.

I hope its not billy boy - I remember him so clearly holding up his hand and saying - I did not have sexual relations with miss mionica L :shrug:

Neh, the only risk of that is if the Admin is contacted by the person involved / their legal representatives and told to remove the comments and then they fail to or refuse to do it...

These injunctions are pretty meaningless in the digital age, because they can't reasonably expect every blog / forum / social media site to monitor every single comment, or to be aware of every single injunction or piece of potential slander in the first place. The celeb sections (and probably the debates section) of TiBB are both chock full of comments that could be considered slanderous, but forum owners aren't expected to remove them UNLESS requested by someone with the authority to make such a request.

In the case of my forum back in the day, the reason we ended up being asked to remove a thread was, due to a large discussion using relevant keywords and (if I do say so myself) some pretty darn fine search optimisation... we ended up being the top google result for both the phrases "Is [person's name]'s advice dangerous?" and also simply "[person's name] dangerous"... with the content of said thread being rather, err, scathing of said individual :joker:.

Also, injunctions don't apply globally and so anyone who wants the info can just google it and it'll be on any non-UK news site :shrug:. I don't know why celebs bother taking them out in the first place these days. It's like they think it's still the 80's and banning it from paper print will mean no one knows :joker:.

tl;dr - there's no real risk in leaving any comment up including names so long as you keep a close eye on your admin inbox and a finger on the delete key.

The national Enquirer latest issue has it front page just Google ha

All of this really is a joke - who really bloody cares - not me , they can all shag each other to death for all i care - joke

Who seriously gives a **** about this stuff.

Meanwhile there's been massive ongoing rallys in England calling for Cameron to resign and not one bit of it has had any media courage at all.

Yes a few thousand.
Not enough to get a Big Reaction.

the story is not really about the 3 some but about the silly fact its been hidden, that is the story

Thats it LT



Bang On Right

Idk why he's bothered blocking it at all - it was never going to stay hidden by just stopping English papers from reporting about it.

If anything he's made things worse by doing this

Yep, drawn attention to it so that it becomes ongoing gossip rather than something people would have seen in the paper one morning, and forget about the next.

No tea no shade but why would anyone want a threesome with them

Thanks for the PM, not who I thought it was at first.

The injuction has now been lifted

150,000 to be exact.
Personally I'm much more interested in that than who some old singer is getting his rocks off with :idc:

It's lifted but pending appeal so it's still not allowed just yet :nono:

UPDATE: On April 18, Court of Appeal judges ruled that the injunction will be lifted but said media in England/Wales can’t identify the couple involved pending appeal.

Oh fgs dont tell the couple of members on here that were so prissy that they wanted people on here banned for bringing up the subject :joker::joker::joker:

Yes Strange Judge

Go Ahead Punk.........

Can someone PM it to me.