That's exactly right. The old newspaperman in me is terrified by folks coming out and posting really controversial stuff, the sort that destroys reputations, an

That's exactly right. The old newspaperman in me is terrified by folks coming out and posting really controversial stuff, the sort that destroys reputations, and probably without the protection of legal oversight. In days of yore such stuff would appear in the media only after having been looked at by lawyers and multiple points checked and necessary evidence and statements were gathered. Now, I know the old media is not very popular any more, and that precisely this gatekeeping behaviour has also led to some of the problems we now have (it's clear that many in the media had a good idea what was happening in Hollywood) but all it takes is an otherwise credible person to have a bit of an 'episode' and somebody's life could be ruined forever -- either the accusee or the accuser, and possibly both. The particular trap referred to in the parent is an easy one to fall into, and it may seem like a good way of avoiding a defamation suit ("I didn't name anyone so how could I have defamed them!) but in UK law it certainly is defamation if there are only a small number of obvious possibilities. If only one person is accused, but there are two identifiable possible offenders, you have defamed one of them for sure. Its not a good look to rush in and presume guilt or innocence either. That's what the courts are for.