That’s a rather dick move on Gorezine’s part.

Just say that the management of the magazine are a bunch of weenie wagging pedophile butthole bandits who can’t spell and sniff their momma’s drawers!

NO cause in your own words your saying it was an opinion.
thats the mucky part of it.it has to cause harm to reputtion as a falsehood

SO you’d take a poll and if the majority said it sucked you could be right.
WHICH is why i dont listen to movie critics

i thought avatar actually sucked.
AND i do not like having to buy 3d googles to watch anyhting or buy into technology that does this irritating bull crap

thats an opinion
NOT saying that they used sub standard actors and sub standard sets and the director is a child molester.
OF which a lot is actually false.

SEE the differance

I’m a little late to the party here, but just wanted to throw my tuppenorth in…

Firstly, a moment of context – I’m a regular GoreZone reader, contributor to the forums (fora? if we’re being sticklers…) on their site, and consider myself friends to several of the staff after meeting them at last year’s filmfest. That said, I am not going to rush unquestioningly to their defence…

Having read both the original blog (plus comments), and the GoreZone management’s open response to the blog, it’s my understanding that something very odd was happening. DangerousJamie discovered that many of the aggressive, apparently pro-GZ posters were all sending their messages from the same IP address, and concluded that they were all staff for the magazine. The trouble is, that several of the claimed IDs from that IP address were not staffers for the magazine, but regular readers and posters to the GZ forums, whose namesake were seemingly being used by person or persons unknown. Bryn Hammond, the editor-in-chief of GZ magazine, has stated categorically that these posts did NOT come from their offices, and can prove that their IP address is quite different. It is because of this defamation of character (posters claiming to be himself and other members of the GZ forums), rather than the original blog, which led to Bryn asking that the whole thing be shut down and removed. And it is because this request has been denied, and the writer of the blog persists in claiming that it was Bryn and fellow staffers who wrote those antagonistic “flames”, that he is seeking legal advice.

Without wishing to sound like I’m teaching anyone here to suck eggs, isn’t it worth checking out both sides of a story – or trying to obtain as many facts as possible – before reporting it as news? It’s somethng I felt I had to do before writing this comment: the last thing I wanted to do was leap to Bryn’s defence if he HAD done something I would consider in bad form.

Anyway, that’s me done. Just felt I needed to redress the balance here and clarify a few points.

Be happy

Jonthecelt