4 ms·
Perhaps you should read the article to the end before commenting: "Glassdoor.com, which posts anonymous employee comments about companies to inform job-seekers
by cft 10y ago
Perhaps you should read the article to the end before commenting:
"Glassdoor.com, which posts anonymous employee comments about companies to inform job-seekers about working conditions, says the ruling began to show up in letters demanding the removal of comments and disclosure of users’ identities almost immediately after it was handed down."
- twblalock 10y agoThis supports my point that sites can be held accountable for users' posts. It certainly does not undermine my point in any way. And I did read the entire article, and I understood it, thank you very much. You should apologize for suggesting that I did not. EDIT: nevermind, the response was in the wrong part of the thread.
- cft 10y agoOops sorry. I commented at the wrong level: this was meant to be a response to kjksf above in the thread, trying to support your point...
- twblalock 10y agoIn that case, I apologize to you.
- sharemywin 10y agoNo problem you can just sue and get the judge compel HN to publish the apology.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- cmiles74 10y agoI'm pretty confident that Glassdoor received these sorts of letter both before and after this case was publicized. In all cases, they need not take any action unless it happens to be a court order. I don't think being compelled to remove a post that has been judged unlawful in court effects Yelp's "immunity"; no one is holding Yelp accountable for the unlawful posts.