That's a fair point. It's implied to be defamatory but not explicitly cited as legally defamatory. If that's so, then I completely agree with you. I'm going to

That's a fair point. It's implied to be defamatory but not explicitly cited as legally defamatory. If that's so, then I completely agree with you. I'm going to try to search around and see if there's more information about this. For example, did the man in question try to sue the website and get it removed? (I realize this isn't always possible.)