The only fault I can find with this service is that it wasn't around when I was single.

With respect to defamatory postings, I believe the poster, not the website (or website host), should be held liable. And a claimant should be able to subpeona a poster's identity, if the claimant can make a case that he was defamed. This protects the reputation of the man but also, and less obviously, such an assignment of liability protects the integrity of the information posted to the site.

I think the site is petty and mean-spirited, not to mention unreliable by its very nature. There's no guarantee that people aren't posting things out of spite, just like with any other message board/forum on the web. Because of that, it's not a site I would ever visit, and I wouldn't think much of women who make decisions about a guy based on what some anonymouse stated on a bitching site. It's a site that does not deserve to be taken seriously, and I certainly don't admire or think well of the woman who started it. That kind of thing we really don't need more of. It's the tabloid mentality, which runs rampant on the internet just as it does in the mainstream media. No, thanks.

That said, the guy suing them is himself taking that site FAR too seriously. Does he really think every woman he's likely to meet will have read the posts there? The whole situation makes him come off even more pathetic and unlikable than anything that could be posted on that site, because by having his hissy fit, he's basically confirming that he's not a guy any intelligent woman would be caught dead with. Sometimes shutting up and having a little dignity is the best choice.

can you imagine a site that men posted to - with names and other info, detailing sexual acts, body types, personality traits - and whatever, of women they dated - even if the information was allegedly false? I don't think it would play well around here...

I think the dontdatehim site makes the women posters look more ridiculous than the men they post about. It makes them look immature and stupid for putting up with such bad treatment for so long before getting dumped.

Because all women (or men, this could have been an awful male site, but it ain't) are always seeking exactly the same man, without any difference in tastes, perceptions or personality, this site will empower all women to find exactly the same man that they are all seeking.

Um, yeah.

So, is Broadsheet preparing a story on the despicable "Girls Gone Wild" guy? Bring it, that's a sleaze worth analyzing.

Just what our society needs right now -- even MORE opportunities to commit verbal abuse, libel and defamation of character.

These types of sites will spur more and more legislation updating age old laws regarding libel that will bring the internet in line with existing legal case law. Some may hold that truth is the perfect defense against libel; but libel, slander, and defamation of character are serious violations of the law and defending oneself, even if technically in the right, is very expensive. I hope the advertising revenue don'tdatehimgirl.com receives will be sufficient to cover the enormous legal costs they "will" eventually have to deal with.

Is just more proof of how spiteful women can be. These women are pathetic, can't take that their guy wasn't faithful or drank too much so they lash out on website. Maybe these guys should start their own site called the ways these bitches drove me crazy and list all about the zits on their ass, how they pick their nose when no ones looking, how their hair is fake, how they have cellulite and any annoying personality traits. See how they like it.

Why can't some women just realize you picked a bad apple, now go back to the tree and find one that isn't worm filled.

of the women (and I use that term loosely here) who would want to post to such a site.

Let's face it, neither gender has a monopoly on individuals who are sleazy jerks. Men can be a$$holes, so can women. Why are we always so surprised when women do foul, sleazoid things and not surprised when men do?

Secondly, I'm not sure if there are ramifications in saying someone's a slob...but there very well could be if you publicly accuse someone of having a sexuality transmitted disease, being a deadbeat parent (again, not necessarily gender-exclusive behavior), etc.

With employers googling and researching the Web for info on prospective or current employees and even firing employees over MySpace.com entries, such comments could have serious reprecussions for the accused (true or not, that's almost irrelevant).

The site owner should be held accountable for comments along those lines--when in doubt, take it out (before it gets publicly posted).

None of the accusations listed are actionable, with the possible exception of having herpes...if it's untrue then that one would probably qualify. The rest of the accusations fall under 'opinion', and are legal as such.

Generally, only untrue accusations of criminality or gross moral turpitude (love that phrase) are illegal, and it has to be proven that damage has been done or will be done to the social character or professional reputation. Since people insult/bitch about others all the time, and the site is simply for opinions and is not widely read, his suit will likely go nowhere. Again, if she (falsely) accused him of being a child molester or cooking the books at his job, yes, it would be actionable.

As someone mentioned, truth is generally not defamation/libel/slander. He is probably angry at being 'publicly' outed for having herpes, in main. Sooner or later someone will post about a date having HIV - THAT would make for an interesting case. Technically, truth is not defaming, but open knowledge of someone having HIV could cause them harm, so might qualify. Of course, making someone's HIV public would be considered by some as a public service if that person was not telling sex partners of the HIV.

We seem to have made a sport out of being cruel and vicious. What does this say about us as human beings?

Sadly, you see it every day in Salon letters.