WatchitGrdon!!!!

Submitted by Havok on Wed, 01/14/2009 - 2:10pm

He. on one of the podcasts, Gordon said that e complains on yelp for fun! that will be many lawsuits from angered web 2.0 people!

 

 

OMGWTFBBQ

Login or register to post comments

I really think that even

Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 1:37pm

I really think that even though I don't agree with everything they do both parties want to fullfill their oath to the best of their abilities. I also believe that both parties want what is best for the country and the American People. I hated Clinton but I believe now in my heart that he did what he believed was best for America. Sorry Canada and Mexico when I say America I mean just the USA.

Don't forget there are honest people on both sides of the isle that will stand up against crap legislation. They listen to their consience and do what they know in their heart is the right thing to do in order to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. There are Libs and Conservatives that hold the Constitution as a sacred document that is not to be messed with. I can count on these individuals to keep the Constitution safe from being destroyed. What I mean is that you will not have your guns taken away. Freedom of speach will be protected and the fairness doctrine will not survive as it is. 

Don't lose faith in your fellow man just yet. 

I had a conversation with a liberal friend and he talked with the same anger and hatred I used to talk with when Clinton was in office so I realised that Clinton wasn't all that bad. 

My advice is to not lose yourself to anger at every word. Don't immediately think the worst about everything the other side has to say and do. I listen to Rush and it's not as bad as he claims it to be. Rush had me believing the world was coming to an end and ten years later we are still here.

 

Login or register to post comments

"Ya ain't seen nuttin' yet, boys and girls!"

Submitted by MyMojo on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 12:36pm

Just wait until our new 'wonderful' president and his cohorts in Washington reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine! (http://www.heritage.org/research/regulation/em368.cfm) You’re going to see a major gagging of the 1st Amendment. Or, what about a Constitutional Convention? Nearly every American has no idea that we are only TWO state votes away from one. The Liberal wackos in D.C. are DEFINITELY licking their treasonous chops on this one! (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83364)

   If humans evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

Login or register to post comments

Will, Gordon, Paul everyone

Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 11:36am

Will, Gordon, Paul everyone at MPC magazine this means if the doctor is successfull you can be sued for providing a negative review of a product. It's just freaking crazy. I thought we had freedom of speech? I thought our oppinions were protected by the 1st ammendment.

So Gordon if you label a product with a 1 piece of crap award you can probably get sued successfully because the manufacturer doesn't agree with your assessment. You would be found libel. I say someone needs to just beat this doctor up because he isn't going to back down. His lawyer has the taste for cash in his mouth and got the doctor thinking he's going to get rich. It's money. 

I'm being sued right now myself. I was working employed driving the city bus. The brakes got very weak and the pedal went to the floor but the bus was only slowing a little. I froze as I was a very new driver at the time. I turned the wheel but wasn't quick enough and I hit a car at about 3-5mph.

The man and woman inside the car claimed they were alright. The police arrived and the male driver sat down with his back to a building and started moaning. He left on a back board. The woman claimed she was ok. 

I'm being sued for $60,000 from each. That's $120,000. They served me, my wife, my children, the city, and my employer. It makes me sick but the only way for the lawsuit to disappear is for the plaintiffs to disappear. 

I'm supposed to be protected as I was on duty at the time. Only the company is allowed to get sued so the judge is supposed to thow the case out. The lawyers know this but they sued me any how. This is crazy and stressfull and I emplore you to reconsider if you ever decide to sue. 

I hope that website sticks to their guns.

 

Login or register to post comments

It all depends.

Submitted by Muerte on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 11:00am

It depends on the wording of the comments.  If he said that in his opinion.....blah blah blah.  It will be much harder for the doctor. 

 If however he said such and such is an unethical, lieing, quack.

The doc might have a case.  The patient would have to have proof the doc is a lieing unethical quack, because these are no longer opinions but allegations that could damage the docs reputation.

I'm not a lawyer, don't even play one on TV but that is my take on libel.

:)

Login or register to post comments

So is his name Norberg or

Submitted by VoodooChicken on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 10:11am

So is his name Norberg or Norbert? That might actually help his case if they can't establish identity :)

 

----------------------------------------------------------

Look behind you! A THREE-headed monkey!!!!!!!!

Login or register to post comments

It depends on what kind of terms he used in his complaining...

Submitted by Wildebeast on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 9:41am

Ironically, simple flaming, laced with swear words would probably not have had any reaction, just because everyone would ignore it.  (Maybe the site wouldn't allow that.)

There is a very basic reason why Doctors really need malpractice insurance.  They're as human as the rest of us, and even if they only err 0.01% of the time, that's still a human being they've done that to.   

Beyond that, any Doctor's real problem is that there can be 50 or 100 people who feel they've had poor care --when they really haven't-- for every real mistake.

It's not legal to slander someone. 

I've never looked at Yelp, but it seems to me anyone should be free to say "I feel Dr. _____ gave me poor or sub-standard care for my sore _____."---assuming they've actually been to that Doctor for treatment.

I'm not a doctor, or related to any doctors in any way (that I know of).  I do classify chiropracters, acupunturists, and psychologists at the "fortune-teller" end of the spectrum as far as credibility, though.

That quote from the attorney is hilarious!

 

Login or register to post comments

Messed up system

Submitted by kc7wbq on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 8:45am

What kind of messed up legal system do we have where fundamental decisions like this can be decided by who has the most money to buy the sleaziest lawyer?

Login or register to post comments

..

Submitted by neo1piv14 on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 8:29am

This is probably one of those cases where the chiropractor is really doing himself more of a disservice by being an ass than one negative review ever could do.

Login or register to post comments

Not a lawyer, but according

Submitted by Velcrow on Tue, 01/13/2009 - 8:11am

Not a lawyer, but according to the link it looks like the DR will have a hard time winning if Norberg really believes he was treated dishonestly of unethically, and thus it'll be protected because it's for the public good. What's interesting is that the DR lost no referals through Yelp until AFTER filing the lawsuit. He still got the same amount even with the negative review. Oops. lol

Login or register to post comments