Is my negative comment on Craigslist libel

The Internet is a complex vehicle in the law of defamation.  An action for defamation requires a person to prove four things under Nevada law: (1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) an unprivileged publication to a third person; (3) fault, amounting to at least negligence; and (4) actual or presumed damages.  A statement is defamatory when it would tend to lower the subject in the estimation of the community, excite derogatory opinions about the subject, and hold the subject up to contempt. Lubin v. Kunin, 117 Nev. 107, 111, 17 P.3d 422, 425 (2001). The first element is often the hardest to prove, which is that the statement was a false statement of fact.  Truth is a defense to defamation.  Secondarily, only false statements of fact, as opposed to opinion, are actionable.  Miller v. Jones, 114 Nev. 1291, 1296, 970 P.2d 571, 575 (1998).  The first element therefore becomes whether the pool company can prove what you stated was a false statement of fact, as opposed to your opinion regarding the quality of the company's services.  While intent has been diluted under defamation, a fact finder in determining the credibility of the witnesses is going to weigh what this person's motivation would be to lie about the incident (or lack thereof) versus the company's self-serving interest in quelling bad reviews against the company. With that being stated, the question becomes one for you to decide how much you want to spend defending truthful opinions should the company decide to pursue you for stating a truthful account of what occurred to you.