You say “if published as is”, not “if published now”. Is what you’re saying in the comment that, if Ben had waited a week and then published the same post, unedited, you would not want to sue? That is not what is conveyed in the email.
Yes, that is what I intended to communicate here, and I was worried people might think I was trying to suppress the article so I bolded this request to ensure people didn’t misunderstand:
For what it’s worth, I also interpreted the “if published as is” as “if you do not edit the post to no longer be libelous” and not “if you do not give us a week to prepare a contemporaneous rebuttal”.
I think if you wanted to reliably communicate that you were not asking for changes to the text of the post, you would have needed to be explicit about that?
You say “if published as is”, not “if published now”. Is what you’re saying in the comment that, if Ben had waited a week and then published the same post, unedited, you would not want to sue? That is not what is conveyed in the email.
Yes, that is what I intended to communicate here, and I was worried people might think I was trying to suppress the article so I bolded this request to ensure people didn’t misunderstand:
For what it’s worth, I also interpreted the “if published as is” as “if you do not edit the post to no longer be libelous” and not “if you do not give us a week to prepare a contemporaneous rebuttal”.
I think if you wanted to reliably communicate that you were not asking for changes to the text of the post, you would have needed to be explicit about that?