On 11/14/2020 at 4:10 AM, Watchful said:

Mark, you have missed the point here. Not only Trip Advisor, but all airlines should notify travelers that if you make negative reviews in Thailand, that your passport could be confiscated and you could be put in jail, EVEN IF YOUR REVIEW IS TOTALLY TRUTHFUL. 

 

The fact that most establishments would NOT do this is irrelevant. It can still happen and those laws should be revoked. They will not be revoked, however, until self interest tips in favor of revocation.

 

Accurate publication of the risks by all travel sites and airlines will show Thais the real downside of such awful laws.

You might be correct when you say "The fact that most establishments would NOT do this is irrelevant" whereas I notice that one hotel did it and it is why it has been , ( I was about to write singled out but no...it did single itself out ) advertised.

On 11/13/2020 at 3:50 PM, CorpusChristie said:

 

   The cost of his room is irrelevant , he didnt want to pay   a corkage fee .

What is relevant is that the hotel had the guest arrested. What is irrelevant is what happened...

23 hours ago, Sujo said:

You made the statement. I asked you what other countries put you in jail for a defamation complaint.

 

You didnt answer. What countries do it?

Why are you so lazy to not go look them up yourself.even in uk upto 2009.All of the middle east for a start.You want me to go research every country. that has changed this law.So i can give you a lazy <deleted> a list.

3 hours ago, alyx said:

Dear CC , we have been through a whole discussion and the problem is that you define jail by being judged or pending judgment where I define jail from the time when someone has been arrested and thrown in a jail, how much  VIP the cell is, not saying it was,  doesn't make any difference.

 

  My point is that he was heil for not having the bail money and he was NOT sentenced to two days in jail by a Court , the Court didnt take the case any further .

  It would be incorrect to state that Thailand jails people for two days if they write bad revues 

12 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  My point is that he was heil for not having the bail money and he was NOT sentenced to two days in jail by a Court , the Court didnt take the case any further .

  It would be incorrect to state that Thailand jails people for two days if they write bad revues 

 

Fact 1  He wrote a 'negative' review

 

Fact 2  Hotel filed for defamation because of 'negative' review

 

Fact 3  Police acted on charges filed by hotel for 'negative' review

 

Fact 4  He spent 2 nights in a cell because hotel filed charges for 'negative' review

 

Really aint that hard is it...

21 minutes ago, mark131v said:

 

Fact 1  He wrote a 'negative' review

 

Fact 2  Hotel filed for defamation because of 'negative' review

 

Fact 3  Police acted on charges filed by hotel for 'negative' review

 

Fact 4  He spent 2 nights in a cell because hotel filed charges for 'negative' review

 

Really aint that hard is it...

 

  It was a bit more than a negative review .

It was not an honest review of his day spent there  , it was a dishonest review to damage the hotel , he attacked the hotel by making false claims, because he was upset about being charged corkage .

   He posted four reviews and the hotel was concerned he would keep up the attack by posting even more reviews and the only way to stop the continued attack was to take legal action  

5 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  It was a bit more than a negative review .

It was not an honest review of his day spent there  , it was a dishonest review to damage the hotel , he attacked the hotel by making false claims, because he was upset about being charged corkage .

   He posted four reviews and the hotel was concerned he would keep up the attack by posting even more reviews and the only way to stop the continued attack was to take legal action  

 

Your boring me now, I can't work out if your a troll or thick...

52 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  My point is that he was heil for not having the bail money and he was NOT sentenced to two days in jail by a Court , the Court didnt take the case any further .

  It would be incorrect to state that Thailand jails people for two days if they write bad revues 

555 we are at it again: arrest= traumatic experience when not suspecting any wrongdoing + jail (or what ever you want to call a cell in police station). There was a settlement so no court. It is correct to say that the hotel had the guy arrested because he wrote "defaming" posts. That is the story.

18 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  It was a bit more than a negative review .

It was not an honest review of his day spent there  , it was a dishonest review to damage the hotel , he attacked the hotel by making false claims, because he was upset about being charged corkage .

   He posted four reviews and the hotel was concerned he would keep up the attack by posting even more reviews and the only way to stop the continued attack was to take legal action  

This has nothing to do with the content, the event or the number of posts (although 4 posts seem quite meager by all accounts). The hotel has a right to reply but they chose to answer in their own personal way.

One thing is sure: at least they will have you (and other posters) as guest I guess. Personally, although it is irrelevant, I would not have chosen this hotel but nothing to do with this particular "defaming" review.

15 minutes ago, mark131v said:

 

Your boring me now, I can't work out if your a troll or thick...

555 Mark, that is the name of the game. Don't get upset, it is quite fun actually (although the matter is rather serious), even if we have to repeat ourselves ????

On 11/12/2020 at 3:25 PM, rupert the bear said:

cheap hotel for sale!this could all have been sorted out by taking the middle way

Definitely. But the hotel had the law on its side so they felt they would have the upper hand, which they would ( point of grammar: is it correct or should have it been "if they would have had")  if the "case" had not been out in the public.

9 minutes ago, alyx said:

555 we are at it again: arrest= traumatic experience when not suspecting any wrongdoing + jail (or what ever you want to call a cell in police station). There was a settlement so no court. It is correct to say that the hotel had the guy arrested because he wrote "defaming" posts. That is the story.

 

   Yes, happens in most Countries , every Country has defamations laws .

   In the UK, you can sue people in Court for twitter posts , a person had to pay over £ 100 000 in compensation for a allegation made on twitter

1 minute ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   Yes, happens in most Countries , every Country has defamations laws .

   In the UK, you can sue people in Court for twitter posts , a person had to pay over £ 100 000 in compensation for a allegation made on twitter

Quite correct and in some cases justified. But definitely not for a hotel comment: slap on the wrist, maybe, yes, but arrest ????? No, for God's sake please 

31 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

he attacked the hotel by making false claims, because he was upset about being charged corkage .

 

He didn't pay any corkage charge, the manager waved it. Maybe should stop spreading false info, there are defamation laws in Thailand

23 minutes ago, alyx said:

555 we are at it again: arrest= traumatic experience when not suspecting any wrongdoing + jail (or what ever you want to call a cell in police station). There was a settlement so no court. It is correct to say that the hotel had the guy arrested because he wrote "defaming" posts. That is the story.

 

   ....................and he was released soon after with no punishment

5 minutes ago, Susco said:

 

He didn't pay any corkage charge, the manager waved it. Maybe should stop spreading false info, there are defamation laws in Thailand

 

  I stated that he got charged corkage , which he did .

I didnt say he paid that charge .

Getting a bill and either paying or not paying that bill are two different things

1 minute ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  I stated that he got charged corkage , which he did .

I didnt say he paid that charge .

Getting a bill and either paying or not paying that bill are two different things

 

 You understand the difference between not paying, and not being charged?

 

Obviously not, because it has been posted many times that he wasn't charged, as the manager waved the charge when he complained.'

 

Ever wonder why you are on mine and many other peoples ignore list, but I'm still forced to see you posting drivel when someone replies to a post of yours?

Please stop feeding the troll, it's painful....

9 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   ....................and he was released soon after with no punishment

and he was arrested before being released....

2 minutes ago, alyx said:

Quite correct and in some cases justified. But definitely not for a hotel comment: slap on the wrist, maybe, yes, but arrest ????? No, for God's sake please 

This is the core point. 1) Thailand’s defamation laws (and other laws related to them) are completely barmy, and if one good thing has emerged from this sorry saga, it is that these Medieval laws have been exposed for the world to see.

2) The hotel completely overreacted to the reviews he wrote. It seems that they sought to take advantage of the draconian Thai laws on defamation to threaten and silence the individual: and they believed, via the eventual agreement , that they had effectively muzzled Tripadvisor as well.

Sadly, for them , their cunning plan has not worked.

1 minute ago, wordchild said:

This is the core point. 1) Thailand’s defamation laws (and other laws related to them) are completely barmy, and if one good thing has emerged from this sorry saga, it is that these Medieval laws have been exposed for the world to see.

2) The hotel completely overreacted to the reviews he wrote. It seems that they sought to take advantage of the draconian Thai laws on defamation to threaten and silence the individual: and they believed, via the eventual agreement , that they had effectively muzzled Tripadvisor as well.

Sadly, for them , their cunning plan has not worked.

Yes

6 minutes ago, Susco said:

 

 You understand the difference between not paying, and not being charged?

 

Obviously not, because it has been posted many times that he wasn't charged, as the manager waved the charge when he complained.'

 

Ever wonder why you are on mine and many other peoples ignore list, but I'm still forced to see you posting drivel when someone replies to a post of yours?

 

   Everyone knows he did not end up paying after he got the corkage bill , he did get charged corkage and after he made a fuss about the charge , it got waived .

5 minutes ago, wordchild said:

This is the core point. 1) Thailand’s defamation laws (and other laws related to them) are completely barmy, and if one good thing has emerged from this sorry saga, it is that these Medieval laws have been exposed for the world to see.

2) The hotel completely overreacted to the reviews he wrote. It seems that they sought to take advantage of the draconian Thai laws on defamation to threaten and silence the individual: and they believed, via the eventual agreement , that they had effectively muzzled Tripadvisor as well.

Sadly, for them , their cunning plan has not worked.

 

   Johhny Depp recently took legal action after being accused of being a wife beater , this hotel took legal action after being accused of having slaves "working" at the hotel .

   Not much difference in the allegations 

is it the koh mak resorts that gets bad reviews even it is for nothing in the story ?

https://g.page/sea-view-resort-koh-mak

 

Please confirm and I will post a good review to support them.

So crazy that people post bad reviews without knowing that it's not the bad resort from Koh chang !!!

 

What could the business owner do when he gets all these bad reviews ?

 

7 minutes ago, sncoem said:

is it the koh mak resorts that gets bad reviews even it is for nothing in the story ?

https://g.page/sea-view-resort-koh-mak

 

Please confirm and I will post a good review to support them.

So crazy that people post bad reviews without knowing that it's not the bad resort from Koh chang !!!

 

What could the business owner do when he gets all these bad reviews ?

 

Out of curiosity ...why would you post a review at all: have you been there? if so, haven't you posted already ?

Why are you asking for confirmation as the name of the resort is in the title of the thread and you can easily check buy yourself by clicking on that place in the Trip Advisor website: if you notice  a banner similar to the original post ( photo) then ....yes it is

And where did you get the fact that people are posting without knowing the resort ?

If you are referring to the (possible) people outraged by the action of the hotel's management, then, you are correct: that is wrong (but not crazy)

A business owner is supposed to reply back and comment every post (positive or negative ) as everyone is supposed to do

 

19 hours ago, alyx said:

Out of curiosity ...why would you post a review at all: have you been there? if so, haven't you posted already ?

Why are you asking for confirmation as the name of the resort is in the title of the thread and you can easily check buy yourself by clicking on that place in the Trip Advisor website: if you notice  a banner similar to the original post ( photo) then ....yes it is

And where did you get the fact that people are posting without knowing the resort ?

If you are referring to the (possible) people outraged by the action of the hotel's management, then, you are correct: that is wrong (but not crazy)

A business owner is supposed to reply back and comment every post (positive or negative ) as everyone is supposed to do

 

 

 

I read on this forum that this resort IS NOT THE CULPRIT ! It's a resort with a similar name that get bad reviews because of idiots who post a review against this koh mak resort which is not the resort that sued a foreigner ! Try to read correctly what is explained to you before commenting ! Yes I have posted a positive review for this resort to support it !

 

 

1 hour ago, sncoem said:

 

 

I read on this forum that this resort IS NOT THE CULPRIT ! It's a resort with a similar name that get bad reviews because of idiots who post a review against this koh mak resort which is not the resort that sued a foreigner ! Try to read correctly what is explained to you before commenting ! Yes I have posted a positive review for this resort to support it !

 

 

Not even worth answering though you’ve got your answer 

23 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   Johhny Depp recently took legal action after being accused of being a wife beater , this hotel took legal action after being accused of having slaves "working" at the hotel .

   Not much difference in the allegations 

Was that a Civil or Criminal case and did his wife spend 2 days in prison lol? unbelievable.
By the way he said treat the staff like "Modern Day Slavery" he didn't mean they were slaves but treated as such.

On 11/17/2020 at 8:50 PM, CorpusChristie said:

 

   Johhny Depp recently took legal action after being accused of being a wife beater , this hotel took legal action after being accused of having slaves "working" at the hotel .

   Not much difference in the allegations 

OMG CC 

As long as you were arguing about the definition of a jail, I could understand it and it was amusing but, really ...?  How can you compare the guest's allegation to a criminal case ?????

Please, come back to your senses

On 11/17/2020 at 3:31 PM, alyx said:

It is exactly what I have been writing all along: it is the right of the hotel, under law, to have some guest arrested for their comments. Although this is the law and that can be used by any hospitality group, only one among tens of thousands of hotels, guest houses etc... has used it ( or at least has been advertised, by themselves incidentally, as maybe, other cases went under the radar): therefore, why should TA slams all of Thailand ?  After all, as you have mentioned, TA has no jurisdiction over Thailand nor over any countries. 

I might add that even if you are objective, I guess that the fact that you have an issue with TA is quite an important factor when you are posting. I, for one, have no biff with either actors of this unfortunate event and, I am not siding at all but my opinion is that the hotel started something it could not control and TA is counting the points.

My "beef" is with ANY body of influence that supports lies in the first instance. It is the lies that created the dispute between the resort and its customer, and it seems two complete strangers on a forum. Lies are what break down trust in all aspects of society or community. Any form of media that is trying to present itself as an "authority" on any subject needs to ensure first it does not get entangled in an issue that a) It has no juristiction over (a social media platform is NOT the law,  and b) defend in anyway directly or indirectly an untruth. Only then can it have an incredibility in it's chosen subject matter.

Edited November 18, 20205 yr by Brollox