King Brown
Club Legend
- Aug 12, 2017
- 2,582
- 3,766
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'd suggest the implication is whatever you thought would bolster your argument, not what you thought was actually true."Shooting the messenger doesn't seem like reasonable redress"
"Being wealthy isn't a crime and nor should it be default make you responsible for other people's crimes."
I'd suggest the implication is fairly clear.
As to the first part - I guess that applies to most discussions. As to the second part - I actually do believe the accuracy of post #48. Been an interesting and considerate discussion. At least between us.I'd suggest the implication is whatever you thought would bolster your argument, not what you thought was actually true.
It wasn't the inference I intended. I try to be very specific about what I say. It's not always easy.As to the first part - I guess that applies to most discussions. As to the second part - I actually do believe the accuracy of post #48. Been an interesting and considerate discussion. At least between us.
I was across your point of view. However, carriers are responsible for content and I believe average Joe's and Jill's should be empowered to seek redress when the circumstances are harsh and unreasonable. As matters stand that isn't available to them. Anyway, as I said, the discussion has been respectful. We just have different perspectives.It wasn't the inference I intended. I try to be very specific about what I say. It's not always easy.
The gist of it is that corporations shouldn't be used as a scape goat and receive the punitive measures that are applicable for the individuals who are actually offending. It doesn't solve anything in the long run, not in the case of carrier services anyway.
Yeah I agree carriers have a responsibility to a certain degree. We obviously disagree how much, that's all.I was across your point of view. However, carriers are responsible for content and I believe average Joe's and Jill's should be empowered to seek redress when the circumstances are harsh and unreasonable. As matters stand that isn't available to them. Anyway, as I said, the discussion has been respectful. We just have different perspectives.
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...acebook-privacy-or-delete-yourself-completely
I am glad i don't use FB anymore.
You think the same servers are not trolling over every word you write here?
You either build a wood cabin unabomber style - preferably without the bombs - or you accept it.
Facebook are a leach. Produce nothing - take everything
I think it's killing itself.
Never mind Santa.This is the reason we've never used Facebook and steer clear of the 'do no evil' crowd. You can't entirely avoid Google as most websites use Google Analytics, but we keep away from Gmail, Chrome and Google search or any of their associated entities.
Isn’t FB and Twitter full of left winged hipsters finding anything to whinge about and be offended over
It's rarely done without criminal, fraudulent action at some point. Usually pretty serious.It seems like you're framing your arguments around the fact that companies like Facebook are wealthy and the disparity in wealth and power between them and victims of cyber bullying etc. All of that might be true, but it doesn't make for justice. Being wealthy isn't a crime
What's rarely done by who? Have lost track of this discussion a bit...It's rarely done without criminal, fraudulent action at some point. Usually pretty serious.
Rupert Corp, case in point.
What's rarely done by who? Have lost track of this discussion a bit...
Seems Bornstein's upset...
Nah the looney left left killed it!I think it's killing itself.