Sex Offender Gets New Hearing After Hearing Officer Rants Against Arial Font

stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 07:22 · Score: 5, Interesting

.... most American legal jurisdictions have Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure, that specify the format legal pleadings are supposed to take. They're usually quite specific on the allowable fonts, font sizes, line spacing, the format they expect for the numbering of paragraphs, and so on. Lawyers and pro-say litigants ignore these rules at their own peril, as doing so is liable to get your case dismissed outright and at the very least will seriously annoy the Judge. Of course, most Judges don't take this annoyance, combine it with a bunch of other rants, then post it on Facebook....

It does amuse me that so-called higher educated professionals just as liable to open mouth and insert foot on Facebook as the immature uneducated brats (I was, like, at work, and like, you know that patient, like, from the other day? He's, like, a total asshole.) I have the misfortune of calling co-workers.

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.

Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:35 · Score: 1

It's "pro se", btw.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 07:43 · Score: 1

Thank you, I hosed that one. :(

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by hawguy · 2013-11-26 07:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

.... most American legal jurisdictions have Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure, that specify the format legal pleadings are supposed to take. They're usually quite specific on the allowable fonts, font sizes, line spacing, the format they expect for the numbering of paragraphs, and so on. Lawyers and pro-say litigants ignore these rules at their own peril, as doing so is liable to get your case dismissed outright and at the very least will seriously annoy the Judge. Of course, most Judges don't take this annoyance, combine it with a bunch of other rants, then post it on Facebook....
It does amuse me that so-called higher educated professionals just as liable to open mouth and insert foot on Facebook as the immature uneducated brats (I was, like, at work, and like, you know that patient, like, from the other day? He's, like, a total asshole.) I have the misfortune of calling co-workers.
It's not clear that the hearing officer was ranting about a formal legal document. He called it a "letter", so it could just be some letter that the defendant was required to write without any specific formatting requirements.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by JWSmythe · 2013-11-26 07:50 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yes, I've seen some of the specifications. IANAL, but I've worked with a few, and they've described some of the rules, and then shown me the spec to explain it to them. :)
To the best of my knowledge, the courts never had to deal with it. The Clerk of Court office would simply refuse them, and instruct the person filing of why they were refused. Like "Really, you can't use Comic Sans. Use Arial, Helvetica, or Times New Roman.
I'm guessing since he did receive filed papers with the Arial font, that it is accepted in that jurisdiction, and the guy bitching about it was just a dick. Admitting bias based on anything is absolutely stupid for an officer of the court.
This one (IMHO) is worse, âoelikes taking motions under advisement, but gets greater satisfaction denying themâ. Ok, so you just like refusing motions. It doesn't matter if there's justification for them? That's not how the judicial system is suppose to work. I guess it's good that he outed himself. He's just removed himself from the judicial system entirely. So much for those great career plans.

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by catfood · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yes and no. When I had a case in the Ohio Court of Appeals, I looked all over the rules for information on font sizes and such. Couldn't find any. Called the Clerk's office. The person who answered the phone there said, "Look, most of our filings are from inmates and they're handwritten. We're happy that your brief is typed at all."
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Stormy+Dragon · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 1

Some judges need to get over themselves. They're ultimately there to serve the public, and for what we're paying them they can deal with the public not knowing their favorite font selections.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 07:53 · Score: 1

I hope you're right that it was something he was required to write for the proceeding, because if he's trying to wing it without a lawyer he's already screwed up. Letters from litigants carry very little weight with most courts, even those (small claims/traffic court) that primarily deal with matters that aren't usually worth hiring a lawyer for. Litigants are expected to know how to draft a pleading and obey the rules of procedure.

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by ModernGeek · 2013-11-26 08:01 · Score: 1

Century Schoolbook 12pt font is good enough for The Supreme Court of the United States, it should be good enough for any of them. Lazy attorneys use Times New Roman.

I am not a lawyer, and more importantly I am not your lawyer. This is not legal advise; if you require such advise, contact a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

--
Sig: I stole this sig.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Will.Woodhull · 2013-11-26 08:01 · Score: 3, Interesting

It does amuse me that so-called higher educated professionals just as liable to open mouth and insert foot on Facebook as the immature uneducated brats
Some persons are educated beyond the level of their intelligence. In the USA, that seems to be increasingly common in the last decade or so.

--
Will
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 08:05 · Score: 1

To the best of my knowledge, the courts never had to deal with it. The Clerk of Court office would simply refuse them, and instruct the person filing of why they were refused. Like "Really, you can't use Comic Sans. Use Arial, Helvetica, or Times New Roman.
I guess it depends on the court, when I did the pleadings in my divorce the Prothonotary didn't even look at them. They had my address wrong, I corrected it in the first page of my answer, asked her to make sure this was reflected in their system, at which point she goes "Is that in here?" All those hours wasted reading pleadings from other cases, the PA Rules of Civil Procedure, and tweaking the formatting of my documents until they were proper..... Heck, they didn't ask me for ID, not for the filing or when I asked them to notarize something. Gotta love small town America....
Another point to consider, a lot of courts also have electronic filing nowadays, so the Clerk may not even see your pleadings at all. Unless of course they have to print them for a technically challenged Judge. :)

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by interkin3tic · 2013-11-26 08:06 · Score: 2

So, uh... WHY are there rules on fonts? Seems about as important as powdered wigs. I find some of those font restrictions are just an excuse to lazily reduce workloads. "You used form TP-27, not TP-27.1, so we threw it out. No they're not the same, TP-27.1 has a dot and then a number after it!"
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 08:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

So, uh... WHY are there rules on fonts?
Readability. The same reason they usually mandate double spacing, the numbering of paragraphs, and so on.
You'd appreciate the same if your job primarily consisted of reading documents on paper. Didn't your professors/instructors at school have similar requirements?

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by jythie · 2013-11-26 08:15 · Score: 1

Though it sounded like in this case there was no specific format or procedure, just one person's personal opinion.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-11-26 08:22 · Score: 2

"It's not clear that the hearing officer was ranting about a formal legal document. He called it a "letter", so it could just be some letter that the defendant was required to write without any specific formatting requirements."
More than that: the wording was that he "can't trust anyone who..." This would seem to indicate that it's a personal bias, and not some kind of technical requirement.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Rob+the+Bold · 2013-11-26 08:24 · Score: 2

It's "pro se", btw.
Gesundheit.

--
I am not a crackpot.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Hognoxious · 2013-11-26 08:30 · Score: 1

Didn't your professors/instructors at school have similar requirements?
Final thesis & each year's "mini-dissertation" had to be typed. Everything else just had to be legible; if your handwriting was neat enough that was acceptable.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:32 · Score: 0

"Didn't your professors/instructors at school have similar requirements?"
Well you see, professors/instructors are in "schools" where they deal with "kids".
Rules laid out by professors/instructors do not carry over into the adult world - how you do things in class is not how they should be done outside of class.
Part of what is so ridiculous about this is you have an adult behaving as if they were a professor/instructor in class and not an adult in the world.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Tanktalus · 2013-11-26 08:38 · Score: 3, Funny

"Legible" may be sufficient at Podunk University/College/Pub, but in the Ivy League, you better have everything perfectly pristine using ink made of virgin's blood on 30lb paper stock with a brightness rating of no less than 110.
Personally, my professors were fine with chicken scratch, and bonus points for chicken blood, too.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Deep+Esophagus · 2013-11-26 08:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

This would seem to indicate that it's a personal bias, and not some kind of technical requirement.
We were defending pro se in a civil suit -- couldn't afford a lawyer -- and got the decision against us overturned because the judge made remarks like "Since you can't be bothered getting a real lawyer..." Even better, the judge was a golfing buddy with the plaintiff's attorney, and they made no attempt to disguise their familiarity and friendship during the pretrial hearing. No surprise he ruled against us on the spot with a summary judgement, never bothered to look at our defense brief.
Still had to go through it all again with a new judge, but at least the jerkass decision didn't stick.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Kierthos · 2013-11-26 08:47 · Score: 1

Because judges don't want to try and read briefs written in Wingdings because the plaintiff or defendant feels like being a jackass.

--
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by mendax · 2013-11-26 08:48 · Score: 1

Lawyers and pro-say litigants ignore these rules at their own peril, as doing so is liable to get your case dismissed outright and at the very least will seriously annoy the Judge.
This is not quite true. The general rule of courts is to expect attorneys to follow the court's rules regarding legal pleadings. An in pro se or in pro per (that's someone filing a pleading on his own behalf without an attorney) is generally given more latitude because he or she is not an attorney in the interest of justice. The court's expectation there is that the document be readable, it make rational and logical legal arguments, and that they be properly cited. In California and in federal courts, successful habeas corpus petitions written on toilet paper have been filed by prisoners.

--
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Cito · 2013-11-26 09:15 · Score: 1

“Wingardium Leviosa!” he shouted, waving his long arms like a windmill.
“You’re saying it wrong,” Harry heard Hermione snap. “It’s Wing-gar-dium Levi-o-sa, make the ‘gar’ nice and long.”
“You do it, then, if you’re so clever,” Ron snarled.”
Re:stupid coments, but.... by realityimpaired · 2013-11-26 09:27 · Score: 0

Rules laid out by professors/instructors do not carry over into the adult world - how you do things in class is not how they should be done outside of class.
One of my coworkers just got dinged a couple hours ago for using comic sans in an official e-mail....
He deserved it. Comic sans must die.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by guttentag · 2013-11-26 09:28 · Score: 1

More than that: the wording was that he "can't trust anyone who..." This would seem to indicate that it's a personal bias, and not some kind of technical requirement.
Perhaps there was some dark paperwork incident in his past of which we're unaware:

I've never trusted Arial documents, and I never will. I could never forgive them for the death of my boy.

Careless words like that in a personal log can earn you a one-way ticket to Rura Penthe.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:33 · Score: 0

advice - noun
advise - verb
The more you know.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by kelemvor4 · 2013-11-26 09:34 · Score: 4, Informative

I hope you're right that it was something he was required to write for the proceeding, because if he's trying to wing it without a lawyer he's already screwed up. Letters from litigants carry very little weight with most courts, even those (small claims/traffic court) that primarily deal with matters that aren't usually worth hiring a lawyer for. Litigants are expected to know how to draft a pleading and obey the rules of procedure.
Funny, but I thought citizens were guaranteed rights to a fair trial. If you have to hire a lawyer to get a fair trial then that means only those who can afford lawyers these rights.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Just+Some+Guy · 2013-11-26 09:35 · Score: 3, Insightful

This would seem to indicate that it's a personal bias, and not some kind of technical requirement.
Maybe, maybe not. It was certainly unprofessional; I won't argue that. But it's also the kind of thing I might say as a joke to a friend afterward without attaching any real meaning to it at all.
Suppose I interview an engineer and it goes badly. We have an up-or-down vote after his series of interviews and decide not to hire him. At that point, I could see telling jokes like "...and I'd never hire someone with Perl on their resume, anyway." We'd all laugh and move on to the next person. In fact, though, if the candidate was good then it would never come up again. It absolutely would *not* prevent us from hiring someone and wouldn't even remotely be a weighted factor.
I suspect it was a similar throwaway comment that didn't actually reflect the judge's true feeling, but was meant as something his coworkers would find amusing (even as they understood it was utterly lighthearted). It was obviously a bad idea to joke about it somewhere as public as Facebook, but doubt that it truly reflected any personal biases.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-11-26 09:35 · Score: 1

A judge like that would tempt me to draw up my own legal papers in comic sans.

Our legal system is supposed to be about the substance, not the form. If they start making a big deal about the form, you know something has gone wrong.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:43 · Score: 0, Troll

Suppose I interview an engineer and it goes badly. We have an up-or-down vote after his series of interviews and decide not to hire him. At that point, I could see telling jokes like "...and I'd never hire someone who was black, anyway." We'd all laugh and move on to the next person. In fact, though, if the candidate was good then it would never come up again. It absolutely would *not* prevent us from hiring someone and wouldn't even remotely be a weighted factor.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-11-26 09:44 · Score: 2

"But it's also the kind of thing I might say as a joke to a friend afterward without attaching any real meaning to it at all."
I'd go further than "unprofessional". If you're making jokes about your hiring practices -- particularly after you just did not hire somebody -- you're setting yourself up for a lawsuit.

This topic is a good example. How do we know he was joking? Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. But somebody could claim he wasn't joking, and maybe even convince a judge or jury.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by arth1 · 2013-11-26 09:57 · Score: 1

So, uh... WHY are there rules on fonts?
Because the average government employee is undereducated and can't read fonts like Fette Fraktur, despite them being found in plenty of older documents.
Heck, most of them probably wouldn't be able to read the handwriting of the constitution either.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Just+Some+Guy · 2013-11-26 10:20 · Score: 2

If you're making jokes about your hiring practices -- particularly after you just did not hire somebody -- you're setting yourself up for a lawsuit.
By the books: of course you're right.
By reality: I'm walking to coffee with my coworker and saying outside the earshot of anyone else. People tell inappropriate jokes under these circumstances. And often times those jokes are self-deprecating, like "ewww, she went to a state school" (just like I did) or "what kind of nerd wears [same kind of glasses he and I both have]?" They're jokes, they're intended as jokes, and everyone does this.

This topic is a good example. How do we know he was joking? Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. But somebody could claim he wasn't joking, and maybe even convince a judge or jury.
There's a time and place for everything. Laughing with a close coworker about something you both understand is not meant seriously is a world apart from shouting it from your Facebook timeline. The former is clearly OK, but the latter is an obvious lapse of, well, judgement.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:stupid coments, but.... by interkin3tic · 2013-11-26 10:30 · Score: 2

No. And Arial, the font in question, seems readable.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 11:17 · Score: 1

Final thesis & each year's "mini-dissertation" had to be typed. Everything else just had to be legible; if your handwriting was neat enough that was acceptable.
You're either really old or live in a unique part of the United States. The middle schools around these parts won't even accept handwritten book reports, everything is expected to be typed. Personally, I think that's rather unfair for low income students that may not have a PC at home, but that's neither here nor there.....

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Wovel · 2013-11-26 11:20 · Score: 1

But, he didn't make a joke to his staff. He made a public remark about someone that appeared before him.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 11:20 · Score: 1

The only gripe I would make about Arial is that it isn't fixed space. That's not a deal-breaker for me, depending on the document in question (personal letter good, code snippet bad....), but it's worth noting that the Rules of Civil/Criminal procedure in a lot of jurisdictions mandate fixed space fonts.

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by dalias · 2013-11-26 11:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

There's a simple principle I go by for jokes: something is a legitimate joke when you're making fun of yourself or of [someone in] power. When you're making fun of someone you hold power over, that's not called a joke. It's called being an asshole.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by mjpaci · 2013-11-26 11:23 · Score: 1

Imagine a budget spreadsheet in Comic Sans. I've seen it and it made me cry.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-11-26 11:34 · Score: 1

"There's a time and place for everything. Laughing with a close coworker about something you both understand is not meant seriously is a world apart from shouting it from your Facebook timeline. The former is clearly OK, but the latter is an obvious lapse of, well, judgement."
Haha. Clearly.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by hawguy · 2013-11-26 11:39 · Score: 2

If you're making jokes about your hiring practices -- particularly after you just did not hire somebody -- you're setting yourself up for a lawsuit.
By the books: of course you're right.
By reality: I'm walking to coffee with my coworker and saying outside the earshot of anyone else. People tell inappropriate jokes under these circumstances. And often times those jokes are self-deprecating, like "ewww, she went to a state school" (just like I did) or "what kind of nerd wears [same kind of glasses he and I both have]?" They're jokes, they're intended as jokes, and everyone does this.
These days, unless you're using the cones of silence, you're *never* out of earshot or someone that may post your "private" comment to the world:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/03/22/was-it-appropriate-for-adria-richards-to-tweet-a-photo-of-two-men-at-pycon-and-accuse-them-of-being-sexist/
And be careful even around coworkers, one of them may notice that you made the same "perl" joke about the last 3 female candidates, but you didn't make the same observation about the male candidates. Whether you meant it or not, your words may come back to bite you some day.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by UnknownSoldier · 2013-11-26 11:53 · Score: 1

Only in America does Form over Function get placed on higher precedence then Justice.
Only an lawyer would argue over form and waste everyone's time and money over bullshit non-issues (as long as it was readable.)
And we wonder why Fundamentalist's who favor the Literal over the Intent get a bad rap ...
--
Defiance is a shitty Borderlands MMO-type grind fest.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 12:25 · Score: 0

So, uh... WHY are there rules on fonts?
Readability. The same reason they usually mandate double spacing, the numbering of paragraphs, and so on.
Yes, readability is nice, but legal cases handle the future of a human being and denying a legal pleading based on font selection is just dickish.
The correct response to such a denial is to write the next legal pleading by hand. (Always legal and if only one version was allowed the machine written one would have to go.)
Re:stupid coments, but.... by jmac_the_man · 2013-11-26 12:29 · Score: 1

Funny, but I thought citizens were guaranteed rights to a fair trial. If you have to hire a lawyer to get a fair trial then that means only those who can afford lawyers these rights.
Criminal defendants in the US aren't just guaranteed the right to an attorney. They are guaranteed the services of an attorney, at government expense if necessary. Two of the Miranda rights are "You have the right to an attorney" and "If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you."
As a sex offender, this guy has an attorney, which means if the guy wrote it himself, it wasn't a legal pleading or anything like that. If it's not a legal pleading with a defined format, there's no reason for whoever reading it to get upset because he used a sans serif font.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by wonkey_monkey · 2013-11-26 12:36 · Score: 1

Lavate las manos!

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by metamatic · 2013-11-26 13:03 · Score: 1

Funny, but I thought citizens were guaranteed rights to a fair trial.
What a quaintly pre-9/11 notion.

--
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Cederic · 2013-11-26 13:04 · Score: 1

The irony being that non-fixed-space fonts are more popular because for most people, they are more readable.
Me, I'm still cursing Randall for teaching me about kerning. Bastard.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Shakrai · 2013-11-26 13:18 · Score: 1

Six of one, half a dozen of the other, said this poster who is a diagnosed dyslexic.....
My (slight) preference for fixed space fonts stems from my geek background, growing up with ASCII art, and being a programmer by trade. That said, I don't write my printed correspondence in Courier New, but my e-mail does tend to go out without formatting (no HTML here....), and I have been known to cut and paste received documents into a text editor......

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Re: stupid coments, but.... by nbritton · 2013-11-26 13:21 · Score: 1

Actually it's in propria persona, pro se is the shorthand.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Cederic · 2013-11-26 14:06 · Score: 1

Yeah, I use plain text for email, and I am incapable of reading code in a font that isn't fixed space.
For general use though I prefer proportional spacing.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by RightwingNutjob · 2013-11-26 14:08 · Score: 1

Idunno. It might not be a bad idea to take legal papers drafted in purple crayon less seriously that those typed out in the proper format.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-11-26 14:35 · Score: 2

"I dunno. It might not be a bad idea to take legal papers drafted in purple crayon less seriously that those typed out in the proper format."
Generally speaking, I agree. But these things should be taken on a case-by-case basis. Maybe the authorities have somebody falsely locked up in solitary as "dangerous" and won't let him have sharp pencils. That doesn't mean he should not have recourse to the same legal remedies as everybody else.

Not a likely scenario, I admit. But possible.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by kelemvor4 · 2013-11-26 15:48 · Score: 1

Funny, but I thought citizens were guaranteed rights to a fair trial.
What a quaintly pre-9/11 notion.
Point taken.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by HiThere · 2013-11-26 16:30 · Score: 1

Mod parent up. It's not a troll, but rather an insightful paraphrase of the grandparent post. You may not think a particular term is abusive, but someone else may. He demonstrated this by replacing a reference to Perl with a reference to race. This isn't totally valid, because race has explicit legal protection, but it's still a valid point.

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by HiThere · 2013-11-26 16:37 · Score: 1

If it's in a spreadsheet, can't you just change the font?

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by HiThere · 2013-11-26 16:42 · Score: 1

Yeah. But there's no requirement that the counsel be any good.

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by mjwx · 2013-11-26 16:43 · Score: 1

So, uh... WHY are there rules on fonts? Seems about as important as powdered wigs. I find some of those font restrictions are just an excuse to lazily reduce workloads. "You used form TP-27, not TP-27.1, so we threw it out. No they're not the same, TP-27.1 has a dot and then a number after it!"
To ensure that it's legible, for example:

Il|

Tell me which one is the upper case "i", lower case "L" and which is the vertical bar without changing it from Slashdot's default font.

Sure you can argue that it's easy to change it to Courier or another font that will show the difference but when you read documents for most of the day fixing up the mistakes of others is tedious, well to be frank, it's a pain in the arse.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 17:26 · Score: 0

Generally speaking, I agree. But these things should be taken on a case-by-case basis. Maybe the authorities have somebody falsely locked up in solitary as "dangerous" and won't let him have sharp pencils. That doesn't mean he should not have recourse to the same legal remedies as everybody else.

In a criminal case such as you describe, you are at least entitled to a public defender who can properly draft the court documents.
The poster we're talking about was representing himself in a civil case, he wasn't in jail. So aside from a lawyer, there was no lack of access to materials or documentation.
It's more likely that the poster committed one or more obvious procedural errors, and the judge was referring to that with his comment about a "real lawyer". Since the poster refused to supply the actual court documents (public record) I can only assume that the case got tossed in a summary judgement because of some failure on his part.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 17:59 · Score: 0

Not meant seriously? If you actually believe in the judicial system, then why the hell would you be making comments about the satisfaction gained from denying motions? There should not BE any sort of emotional gratification, or gratification, PERIOD. This automatically makes you a partial observer with a bias. And yes, all humans have bias--the CIA published a whole book about this, entitled The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. But, you should at least have enough respect for the system to consider things based on their merits with respect to the law--not on how it makes you feel. Gaining satisfaction from a particular action might override your better judgement, just like accepting a bribe.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by sjames · 2013-11-26 18:11 · Score: 1

If you RTFA you'll see that the comment about fonts was one of many questionable comments he made many of which hinted of bias and a guilty until proven innocent attitude.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Z00L00K · 2013-11-26 18:22 · Score: 1

So unless I fix the stamps on my typewriter my case won't be heard?

--
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 20:30 · Score: 0

You could be satisfied by a job well done rather than the result; For instance you could be satisfied that you acted appropriatly and with skill.
I do agree that its something to watch carefully though
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 20:47 · Score: 0

I'm so old I got in trouble for printing my work rather than it being done with pen and paper. They did have rules about fountain pens & biros though...
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Hognoxious · 2013-11-26 21:07 · Score: 1

You're either really old or live in a unique part of the United States.
Wrong.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 21:20 · Score: 0

This is not legal advise

I see English isn't a requirement for being a lawyer.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Joce640k · 2013-11-26 21:25 · Score: 1

So, uh... WHY are there rules on fonts?

...says somebody who doesn't spend all his days reading paper documents.
Arial on paper is about as inappropriate as Times Roman on screen.

--
No sig today...
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-11-26 22:32 · Score: 1

Same here. I summarise as, "Attack only upwards or inwards."
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-27 01:19 · Score: 0

Still had to go through it all again with a new judge, but at least the jerkass decision didn't stick.

What bugs me the most about this is there are no consequences for the judge. Why is it when stuff like this happens in professions of power, such as police rights abuses, rape in the military, et al, the default action is to stick together and cover up, rather than call out their asshat peer for giving their profession a bad name. There just is no shame.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by X0563511 · 2013-11-27 04:48 · Score: 1

OCR support as well - if you mandate a certain font or set of fonts, you can tune your OCR systems for archival to handle them well.
If you had to accept everything from Courier to Windings then it's going to have to be loosely set, which might cause transcription errors.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:stupid coments, but.... by X0563511 · 2013-11-27 04:51 · Score: 1

I'm educated and I can't read either of those things either.
Being educated and being able to decipher archaic glyphs have nothing to do with each other, unless one is educated in a field relating to such.;

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Just+Some+Guy · 2013-11-27 05:36 · Score: 1

If you're seriously equating race (and the reasons it's a protected class distinguisher) from choice of programming languages, you're fucked in the head. It's not even a matter of degree: they're totally different.
In most US states, you can fire someone for any non-protected reason. Don't like their shirt color? Best of luck with the job hunt! Joking about someone's technology decisions is in no way discriminatory in the same way that joking about someone's race would be.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Just+Some+Guy · 2013-11-27 05:42 · Score: 1

Those comments were infinitely more damning and indicative of actual bias. I really have no idea why people think I'm defending him when I'm absolutely not. My opening paragraph stated that he was unprofessional. When regarding a judge, that's pretty damning; we're supposed to hold them up as the epitome of professionality.
My whole point stopped at "joking about their font choice isn't necessarily prejudicial". The comments he made about the "pervs" are strong evidence supporting the case against him. Being flippant about Arial - in isolation - isn't.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:stupid coments, but.... by HiThere · 2013-11-27 08:57 · Score: 1

There is a big difference between "equating" and "drawing an analogy". Yes, your argument may mean that it was legal. But it's still analogus to an illegal action, and should be so recognized.

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-27 09:50 · Score: 0

Meanwhile capable people are undereducated. These are both symptoms of the same disease. Merit takes a backseat to pompous class rigidity. You wouldn't dare criticize me or actually try to do something that does not serve my pleasure. Look at all the credentials i have. I heard a radio commentary where a fellow said that no person with less than a masters degree should be allowed to work in day care. People gain a bit of position with education and use the position to abuse their neighbors. Everyone ends up wanting to play the sick game because the consequences of not playing are so harsh. Fundamental human respect and dignity are discarded in the process.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by AIphaWolf_HK · 2013-11-29 05:14 · Score: 1

Readability.
What's readable to you is not necessarily readable to me, and vice versa. It's subjective.

Didn't your professors/instructors at school have similar requirements?
Yes, and they were absurd. "Follow my directions exactly or suffer" is not something I'd expect from an educational environment.
Re:stupid coments, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-01 22:30 · Score: 0

No, the scenario is not that unlikely. It's more common-place than anything.
As similar example involved a hacker in the 90s who wasn't allowed to have his legal paperwork because it was 'in excess' of what was allowed. This is tantamount to disallowing a person to defend themselves in court. However the jail house rules being an unreasonably arbitrary and long, and randomly enforced made it impossible to know or follow. Failing to follow them though would result in such treatment. The system is designed to f' anybody caught up in it. Short of having serious financial resources anyway...

Priorities much? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2013-11-26 07:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you spend your time dealing with sex offenders, and your rants are about Arial, is it possible that you might have your priorities in poor order?

Re:Priorities much? by KingSkippus · 2013-11-26 07:35 · Score: 5, Informative

Not surprisingly, the submitter grossly misrepresented what was said. In TFA, the Arial font thing was just a couple of lines in a much more troubling string of rants, stuff like:
- "it’s always awkward when I see one of my pervs in the parking lot after a hearing"
- he (the hearing examiner) “likes taking motions under advisement, but gets greater satisfaction denying them”
- On November 20, 2008, the day of the plaintiff’s hearing, the following comment was posted during working hours: “it’s always a mistake when people testify, because they get destroyed in cross examination”
- On that same day, the day of the plaintiff’s hearing, the hearing examiner also posted the following (apparently with reference to a different sex offender): he (the examiner) “hopes this guy doesn’t show up!!” which was followed up with “Tyson Lynch says yay!! He didn’t show up!”
...And so on. This is someone who is supposed to be fair and impartial, and the guy clearly has issues with the people he has a duty to work with.
So yeah, if I had a hearing before the guy that went south, I'd be trying to have it overturned also. I hope that the guy is fired and the people who did have hearings before him get new hearings.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:40 · Score: 1

Maybe he meant to talk about areolas instead.
Re:Priorities much? by Altus · 2013-11-26 07:43 · Score: 5, Insightful

What is more disturbing is the thought that there have been and always will be people like this in power and most of them are not stupid enough to post this shit publicly... they just quietly sit there and do a really half assed job and determine the course of peoples lives.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:Priorities much? by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2013-11-26 07:43 · Score: 1

If you spend your time dealing with sex offenders, and your rants are about Arial, is it possible that you might have your priorities in poor order?
I always thought the only people who used the Arial font were sex offenders. :)

--
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
Re:Priorities much? by NatasRevol · 2013-11-26 07:44 · Score: 1

Maybe all the newly freed pervs can go to his house for Thanksgiving.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:Priorities much? by odigity · 2013-11-26 07:44 · Score: 1, Interesting

Firing the guy, ignoring the fact that it's likely impossible, isn't going to solve the problem.
The problem is human beings shouldn't be allowed to have power over other human beings.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by nctritech · 2013-11-26 07:56 · Score: 5, Funny

You should get the opinion of the county serif. *snork*
Re:Priorities much? by Antipater · 2013-11-26 08:01 · Score: 5, Funny

How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?
Replace the humans with turtles.

--
Everything is better with chainsaws.
Re:Priorities much? by i+kan+reed · 2013-11-26 08:04 · Score: 1

That is an obvious and totally incorrect solution. We don't have magic software(or any other non-human decision maker) that can make responsible judgements about people. It doesn't exist. Humans are our best option.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:09 · Score: 0

How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?
I believe what the GP was mentioning was the classic sociopolitical study conducted by a Mr. P. Pan, wherein it is shown that if everyone claps their hands and believes hard enough, fairies will appear and convert all of humanity into and endless hippy drum circle of togetherness and understanding, and nobody will ever have any dreams, ideas, or initiative that isn't shared or approved by the rest of the commune.
Re:Priorities much? by Sardaukar86 · 2013-11-26 08:14 · Score: 1

How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?
Perhaps he means no individual should have power over other humans. Although Joe and Jane Sixpack are usually idiots, I'd still be very glad of their presence as jurors if I was on trial myself.
Until we have cryptographically-verified software making the bulk of these decisions in a provably-unbiased manner, we're just going to have to get by with more checks and balances. These measures do work but the additional overhead significantly slows the process, potentially causing frustration and a desire to throw the whole lot out again.

--
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Re:Priorities much? by msauve · 2013-11-26 08:15 · Score: 1

But then the world would be turtles dancing on a human's back.

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:23 · Score: 0

“it’s always a mistake when people testify, because they get destroyed in cross examination”
This one is actually true, at least in most cases. Not defending him, but I can't fault this statement.
Re:Priorities much? by Drethon · 2013-11-26 08:31 · Score: 1

This is bad how?
Re:Priorities much? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2013-11-26 08:34 · Score: 1

How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?
A simple engineering problem.
Re:Priorities much? by Luckyo · 2013-11-26 08:42 · Score: 1

I find it quite disturbing that this was not caught on sooner. Shouldn't they take a look at his past cases to see if his fairly obvious bias impacted them as well?
Re:Priorities much? by webmistressrachel · 2013-11-26 08:56 · Score: 1

Finally someone asks this here, where it was always supposed to have been asked, eventually...
The answer has been waiting for you for a long time, although I'm surprised your UID is so high (I expected some wizard to finally make room for me to say this!)
By having computers having power over humans, and making them perfect!

--
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
Re:Priorities much? by foobar+bazbot · 2013-11-26 09:13 · Score: 4, Funny

By having computers having power over humans, and making them perfect.
This won't work, because some hammy starship captain will show up and talk the computer to death (likely death of a mildly explosive nature). Happens. Every. Time.
So long as starship captains, or the possibility of a starship captain, exists, computers cannot have power over humans.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 09:23 · Score: 1

See The Evitable Conflict by Issac Asimov. The trouble (discussed but not resolved by Asimov) is that it makes no difference if those harmed for the greater good are selected by human creations or humans themselves. Those unfortunates are oppressed regardless, and the counter-factual in which they are not oppressed defies observation. Human morality ultimately resides in feelings of good or bad which arise in specific situations and cannot be totally contained in general principles; any moral decision thus admits the possibility of error, even for a perfect machine implementation of humanistic morality.
As to my UID, I didn't use what became my general use name when I first registered on /. in high school. Eventually I bit the bullet and switched to that (this) user name.

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:26 · Score: 0

Turtle power.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 09:27 · Score: 1

The summary says the AI has "sinister motives," but to me the more interesting case is that of The Evitable Conflict by Asimov.
There, "The Machines," massive positronic brains designed to manage the global economy and governed by the Three Laws of Robotics, have apparently undertook to harm certain sets of individual humans for the good of humanity as a whole. Yet, the correctness of these decisions cannot be evaluated as counter-factual histories cannot be observed.

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:28 · Score: 0, Troll

What is more disturbing is the thought that there have been and always will be people like this in power and most of them are not stupid enough to post this shit publicly... they just quietly sit there and do a really half assed job and determine the course of peoples lives.
These are the types of people the gun nuts should go shoot, not random kids.
Re:Priorities much? by Cloudy+Wheat+Beer · 2013-11-26 09:29 · Score: 0

How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?
Robots.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 09:30 · Score: 2

I think majority rule with checks and balances is the only alternative to tyranny. Essentially moral decisions (including economic ones; recall that the classical economists called themselves moral philosophers) must be biased.
Humanistic morality implies a bias. (as a humanist, I am biased towards this bias).

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 09:31 · Score: 4, Funny

Yes, all the way down.

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by lightknight · 2013-11-26 09:55 · Score: 1

Just plant a micro-explosive in their heads, and tell them to be nice. That'll work (some sarcasm here).
Long story short, humans like to act on evil impulses; perhaps the concept of what is and what is not evil should be re-examined.

--
I am John Hurt.
Re:Priorities much? by lightknight · 2013-11-26 09:56 · Score: 1

Thus proving The Machines inferiority. They were incapable of designing a better version of themselves that could mitigate such 'needs'.

--
I am John Hurt.
Re:Priorities much? by lightknight · 2013-11-26 09:57 · Score: 1

My Nipples. Humor, mostly. Enough humor prevents the worst from happening, IMHO.

--
I am John Hurt.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:57 · Score: 1

Isn't most of the text on slashdot in Arial?
Re:Priorities much? by Sardaukar86 · 2013-11-26 10:07 · Score: 1

I think majority rule with checks and balances is the only alternative to tyranny
Which is supposedly where we are now, however I would argue that in many western countries (my native NZ included) the democratic process has been effectively poisoned by monied interests. I don't blame the many people who don't bother voting; although I still vote myself, the act is losing significance for me.
For now, the only thing we can do is demand reform and new procedures with published and accessible results. The real solution lies in crystal-clear software; a completely transparent daemon programmed according to the whim of the people. There are certainly challenges with such an idea but the talent required to build a secure system like this is already in plenty of companies and universities around the world.
When our decisions as voters are encoded in the daemon's ruleset for all to see, confidence in our ability to effect change in our own future will grow and democracy may have some new life breathed into it.

Humanistic morality implies a bias. (as a humanist, I am biased towards this bias).
Absolutely, any system we come up with must be designed with a focus on improving everyone's lot. If you see that as a bias towards humanistic morality that's a reasonable position IMHO.
I would of course suggest that building a system such as the one I propose (which itself is no doubt a very old idea) will be difficult but if designed from the beginning with security as its first operating principle, it may in time earn trust. Certainly it couldn't be too difficult to prove itself better than a politician!

--
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Re:Priorities much? by DriedClexler · 2013-11-26 10:16 · Score: 1

The bit about being destroyed in cross-examination doesn't seem troubling -- it's standard lawyer advice.

--
Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
Re:Priorities much? by Lotana · 2013-11-26 10:36 · Score: 1

Ah yes... The frequently romanticized vigilante justice. Alas in the real world it is generally a very bad thing to have a mob be the judge, jury and executioner.
Please tell us how in your mind you see gun nuts being able to tell between an honest judicial worker being smeared and one of those incompetent but well-hidden officials?
Re:Priorities much? by Safety+Cap · 2013-11-26 11:11 · Score: 2

~ newly freed pervs ~

Not all SOs are perverts.
Take a leak in an alley when you're 15? You can get on the list.
Get a little drunk at a football game your freshman year and decide to streak across the field? You can get on the list.

--
Yeah, right.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:21 · Score: 0

The system is called anarchy, which is directly translated to "without rulers" A system I support, a system of rules sans rulers. This is a good primer if you're interested.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0972819649
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:28 · Score: 0

Ah yes... The frequently romanticized vigilante justice. Alas in the real world it is generally a very bad thing to have a mob be the judge, jury and executioner.
Please tell us how in your mind you see gun nuts being able to tell between an honest judicial worker being smeared and one of those incompetent but well-hidden officials?
How did I romanticize it? I merely suggested a better than random distribution for the target of their attention. As for the example I ACTUALLY gave, the guy is on record with a a wide slew of transcribed nuttiness.
Re:Priorities much? by XcepticZP · 2013-11-26 11:41 · Score: 1

You give each human the right to prevent others having power over him only, in whatever way he chooses. If he chooses to exert "power" over another, then that other individual is free to pursue whatever means is required to mitigate such power imposition.
Re:Priorities much? by XcepticZP · 2013-11-26 11:48 · Score: 1

Sounds like you're advocating some sort of technologically-implemented direct-democracy. Being a libertarian myself, the bare minimum moral alternative to our current society would be a direct-democracy, similar to what you advocate.

However, let's be honest. It will never happen. An entire ecosystem, with copious amounts of momentum, has grown around our current implementation of governance. The system was designed to be a job-program, to divvy up work at every level by adding administrative overhead, and slicing the pie in as many pieces as possible. The entire fabric of society will have to change in order to accommodate a truly pure democratic government, of which direct-democracy is the only type.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:52 · Score: 0

Only slightly less disturbing than thinking someone can be exposed to the horrid realities of human degradation and not be moved by it. (Or that people can be perfect and hold others up to that standard.)
Re:Priorities much? by Sardaukar86 · 2013-11-26 12:37 · Score: 1

The entire fabric of society will have to change in order to accommodate a truly pure democratic government, of which direct-democracy is the only type.
..such as the coming mass-unemployment as society rapidly moves to automate all work that needs doing?
You are right of course, nothing short of a gigantic upheaval like the robot revolution or a popular revolt will change the status quo, there's too much monied interest in keeping things the way they are.

--
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 14:06 · Score: 0

He deserves to be fired for not knowing the difference between a font and a typeface.
Re:Priorities much? by RightwingNutjob · 2013-11-26 14:20 · Score: 1

And humans all the way down? Turtles all the way up? Where does the Elephant fit into this theory?
Re:Priorities much? by Pfhorrest · 2013-11-26 19:27 · Score: 1

The problem is human beings shouldn't be allowed to have power over other human beings.
How can humans be prevented from having power over other humans if there aren't any humans with power over other humans to prevent the humans from having power over other humans?
All humans always have power over other humans; and on a social scale, most of that power comes from the support and acceptance of other humans.
The problem is not people having power over each other, but abusing that power. Which is generally to say, using it against each other for reasons other than to prevent each other from using it against each other.
The trick then is in convincing enough of those humans both not to abuse their power, but also to use their power to prevent other humans from abusing their power.
In other words, we can only have justice if enough people support and accept only just exercises of power, and oppose or undermine any unjust exercises of it.

--
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 20:24 · Score: 0

Are you calling Dave Bowman, err, I mean Keir Dullea, "hammy"?
Well,sir, I take umbrage at your remarks!
Re:Priorities much? by myowntrueself · 2013-11-26 20:38 · Score: 1

And humans all the way down? Turtles all the way up? Where does the Elephant fit into this theory?
Elephants are turtle/human hybrids?

--
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 21:26 · Score: 0

Is that "until" as in "until pigs fly" or as in "until we reach nirvana"?
There are very good reasons we don't use machines to determine legal questions, aside from the fact it's beyond our current level of technology. The main reason being the ridiculous posts you see every day here on /. which treat the law like a binary decision system and try to create loopholes that a machine might pass but which any human employing common sense can spot immediately. Look at the comments on the article about the hidden compartment arrest. It's full of smartasses who think they can make outlandish claims and if those claims aren't provably false they think they get away with it (like Hans Reiser did *cough*).
Even your "provably unbiased" concept is sailing very close to the wind here. This isn't "bias" in the sense of statistics. Bias in the sense of statistics lets you make every individual decision precisely wrong (so the weighted average is still zero). The systems we're talking about are trivially Godellian and hence we expect inconsistencies or incompletenesses, and since the system has to be complete (a judgement ultimately has to be made) it is necessarily inconsistent. You can't flaunt that - these things are inherently unprovable/non-halting/inconsistent.
We don't "get by" with checks and balances. Checks and balances are all we have. The correct way to improve the system is not to replace the components with even worse components, but to look at the linkages and control mechanisms and enhance the checks and balances towards their theoretical optimums, under the assumption that every component makes mistakes and introduces biases on a continuous basis.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 22:34 · Score: 0

You really don't have a clue. The British Navy had a habit of press-ganging. You can pursue whatever means you like against the power of your fellow-creatures, but it takes just a handful of people to send you on a long sea voyage. Tell the bosun about your rights, if you like.
More to the point, a single human is just as much a meaningless abstraction as a single atom. It is a special case. That proponents of the rights of the individual exist is right and proper, but they err in reasoning as if that animal existed. Laws are not for the benefit of the individual, but for the benefit of society. They are our agreements to restrict certain activities deemed harmful to the group. We go a very long way towards ensuring that, although the power of violence may not be withheld per se, it is a common understanding that we have collectively delegated this ability to specialists.
And you, what, want to revert back to anarchy and barbarism because you think that there's some sort of optimum point that is achieved when every man has the right to cause every other man harm? Do you imagine that out of this martial anarchy there would emerge no specialists?
Governments are inevitable. Not only that, but they are the best solution to the problem of violence: one body, with a strict monopoly, with as many barriers as possible towards its exercise. Anyone claiming to be an anarchist ought to be jailed until they discovered the problem with that idea.
Re:Priorities much? by XcepticZP · 2013-11-26 22:43 · Score: 1

And you, what, want to revert back to anarchy and barbarism because you think that there's some sort of optimum point that is achieved when every man has the right to cause every other man harm? Do you imagine that out of this martial anarchy there would emerge no specialists?
No man has the right to cause harm to anyone besides himself. I'm sorry, you sound like you're well-speaking and want to have a meaningful discussion on the topic. But as long as you think that I believe that any individual has a right to harm another, then you don't deserve a response.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 23:11 · Score: 1

I sometimes imagine a technologically powered direct democracy in which random samples of the population vote in secrets ballots on issues of governance down to fairly low level decisions (within reason...most likely there would be government employees with some level of initiative). The sample sizes could be chosen in order to obtain a p-value proportional to the importance of the issue.

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 23:25 · Score: 1

the democratic process has been effectively poisoned by monied interests
There are certainly many forces of corruption at work upon our democracies, yet in the present day we appear to have the most democratic - and least violent - of any previous civilization.
In the past three years in California I have voted in popular referenda which have created an open primary election system, allowed a committee of citizens to redraw gerrymandered legislative districts (this survived three elections), placed fixed term limits on legislators and eliminated "three strikes" sentencing requirements for non-violent crimes.

The real solution lies in crystal-clear software
I sort of gave my version of that in a comment below.

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 23:28 · Score: 1

The point is that even if The Machines supposedly act in the interest of humanity, there is still no basis for selecting certain people to be oppressed "for the greater good," which is what the counter-intuitive actions of The Machines amount to (pretty sinister).

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
Re:Priorities much? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-27 02:11 · Score: 0

Go ahead, tell me where you explicitly ruled out violence in your proposal

You give each human the right to prevent others having power over him only, in whatever way he chooses. If he chooses to exert "power" over another, then that other individual is free to pursue whatever means is required to mitigate such power imposition.
Tell me what other definition of "power" and "mitigate" you had in mind. Go ahead, your naivete is quite funny. The United States Constitution preserves a strong right to violence in the form of the Second Amendment, but the canonical example is violence in defense of your own life. Another right of revolutionary violence is commonly held to be preserved. Finally we may say that anything one may not take from you, you have some inherent right to, and your ability to do harm to your fellow creature is only subject to so much limitation.
You deserve the response, but it seems you came unprepared to the discussion. I don't think you're going to do yourself any credit in explaining yourself, but you've blundered this far in the discussion, you may as well make your position clear.
Re:Priorities much? by Sardaukar86 · 2013-11-27 07:36 · Score: 1

Thanks for an interesting reply.
I don't for a second believe this would be an easy task but I do think it is quite doable with our current level of technology. I also don't see this as a cure-all that will magically fix our bureaucratic problems in one sweep.
The main benefit I see with a software-controlled system such as the one I propose is the potential for complete transparency. I'm imagining a way by which every citizen could log into a website to see what decisions were being made at the time, see the current levels of resources available to the society and most importantly, have the facility to browse a log of all activities and decisions (with a powerful filter for ease of use). Yes, this is difficult to do securely but I believe it is quite achievable.
As regards your checks and balances comment I do agree and suggest that with our current tools we can actually verify the correctness of the system and its decisions. There are some jolly smart people out there when it comes to proofs and crypto and whilst I'm not one of them I'm sure the concept is feasible.

--
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Re:Priorities much? by XcepticZP · 2013-11-27 12:10 · Score: 1

Tell me what other definition of "power" and "mitigate" you had in mind. Go ahead, your naivete is quite funny.
I don't have a definition of "power" in the context I was using it as I was re-using the terms of the person I responded to. But if you want to be pedantic, I suppose I was referring to some sort of physical force, intimidation or property-right violation.

Go ahead, tell me where you explicitly ruled out violence in your proposal [...]The United States Constitution preserves a strong right to violence in the form of the Second Amendment, but the canonical example is violence in defense of your own life. Another right of revolutionary violence is commonly held to be preserved. Finally we may say that anything one may not take from you, you have some inherent right to, and your ability to do harm to your fellow creature is only subject to so much limitation.
Captain pedantic, eh. You're trying to point out some sort of contradiction between "not having a right to harm another" and "self defense" which I implied when I said "mitigate such power imposition". "No man has the right to cause harm to anyone besides himself" is what I said. Now if you want to argue that I didn't include an exception for "harm" to cater for self defense, then sure, knock yourself out. But it won't lead this conversation anywhere... And your childish remarks regarding my supposed naivety aren't helping, either.
Re:Priorities much? by Macgrrl · 2013-11-27 13:48 · Score: 1

Provided they're small turtles, it would probably only tickle.

--
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World

I have to agree by east+coast · 2013-11-26 07:26 · Score: 1

All government documents should be in a fixed-width font. Anything else is just crazy.

--
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.

Re:I have to agree by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:29 · Score: 0

All [...] documents should be in a fixed-width font. Anything else is just crazy.
Fixed that for you.
Re:I have to agree by jfdavis668 · 2013-11-26 07:33 · Score: 1

And they should be printed on 8 x 10.5 government size paper.
Re:I have to agree by gandhi_2 · 2013-11-26 07:33 · Score: 1

Fixed that for you.

--
THL phish sticks
Re:I have to agree by tag · 2013-11-26 07:34 · Score: 3, Funny

| | All [...] documents should be in a fixed-width font. Anything else is just crazy. | | Fixed that for you. FTFY
Re:I have to agree by olsmeister · 2013-11-26 07:41 · Score: 1

Either that, or Comic Sans MS.
Re:I have to agree by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:46 · Score: 0

Fixed that for you. -- THL phish sticks [techhelplist.com] Reply to This Parent Share
Re:I have to agree by reve_etrange · 2013-11-26 07:52 · Score: 1

I know, variable width fonts let the proles guess what the redacted blocks actually say.

--
.: Semper Absurda :.
RE: I HAVE TO AGREE by rwa2 · 2013-11-26 08:12 · Score: 2

FIXED THAT FOR YOU FULLSTOP
Re:I have to agree by rwa2 · 2013-11-26 08:15 · Score: 1

... that wouldn't be legal. 8 1/2" x 14" is.
Re:I have to agree by jonbryce · 2013-11-26 08:39 · Score: 1

You should join the rest of the world in using A4 - 21cm x 29.7cm. If you fold it in half, the dimensions are in the same proportion.
Re:I have to agree by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-11-26 09:02 · Score: 1

You should join the rest of the world in using A4 - 21cm x 29.7cm. If you fold it in half, the dimensions are in the same proportion.
And this is important why?
Not razzing you, I really don't see the attraction to that aspect of letter paper.

--
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Re:I have to agree by magic+maverick+ · 2013-11-26 09:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

That might not be important for you. But other aspects of the system could be. E.g. take an A3, you can put two A4 pages exactly on it. Also, you can blow up an A4 page, to A3 and keep the exact dimensions. Or, blow down an A4 page to A5, and keep the exact dimensions. There are so many benefits from the system, even if you don't use them all.
I like printing two pages to a sheet, it saves paper. Because I use A4 size sheets, I can fit exactly two pages of a document. Nice.

--
HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
Re:I have to agree by foobar+bazbot · 2013-11-26 09:30 · Score: 2

It's not a compelling property for a single paper size, but it's pretty nifty when constructing a series of paper sizes.
Both the "normal" US paper sizes (A, B, C, etc., where A=letter) and the ISO A-series (A4 etc.) follow the same rule for relationship between adjacent sizes: Each size is the same as two of the next smaller size, joined along their long edge. (Or put another way: splitting a sheet in half with a cut parallel to the short edge yields two sheets of the next size down.) This has some fairly obvious reasons to make sense.
That rule means that a series will alternate between two aspect ratios, so e.g. A=8.5x11 has the same aspect ratio as C=17x22, while B=11x17 has the same aspect ratio as D=22x34. However, there's no guarantee that those two aspect ratios are the same, and in fact in the US system they're not. This means that enlarging or reducing by 2 steps always works nicely, but going up or down a single step doesn't -- you end up enlarging margins in one direction, or cropping in the other, to make up for the difference in aspect ratio. The ISO system, on the other hand, does make that guarantee (by making the aspect ratio sqrt(2) ), so that you can scale between any two sizes in the same series.
Another application, which is basically the inverse of scaling to a smaller sheet, is scaling to fit multiple pages on one sheet, particularly for the case of printing two logical pages on each sheet -- the US system requires large margins to make this work, while the ISO system uses paper much more optimally.
Re:I have to agree by jonbryce · 2013-11-26 09:42 · Score: 1

I can shrink the A4 documents to A5 and put two of them on one page. Or I can print them two to a page on A3, and fold them over into a book format.
Re:I have to agree by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-11-26 09:56 · Score: 1

But I often print PDFs two pages to a sheet, and there isn't really a problem. There may be a small extra amount of white space along the top or side edge, but it's just whitespace anyway.
So, although I still don't see the big advantage, I'm glad that you are happy with your pages.

--
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Re:I have to agree by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:32 · Score: 0

If you're at a company that uses lean you'll need to get lots of A3 pieces of paper.
Re:I have to agree by formfeed · 2013-11-26 18:26 · Score: 1

That might not be important for you. But other aspects of the system could be. E.g. take an A3, you can put two A4 pages exactly on it. Also, you can blow up an A4 page,...
While serious /.-ers share their Libertarian insights about fixing the gahve'ment all you can do is talking about blowing stuff up???
Re:I have to agree by magic+maverick+ · 2013-11-26 22:37 · Score: 1

What can I say, I'm an anarchist. I believe you can blow up a social relationship. Just put all the politicians and business "leaders" in a room together, and blow it (and them) up.

--
HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!

Huh by Ultra64 · 2013-11-26 07:26 · Score: 5, Funny

"a sex offender overturned the decision of a hearing officer"

I'm not sure it's a good idea to let the defendant be in charge of the judicial process.

Re:Huh by erroneus · 2013-11-26 07:34 · Score: 1, Insightful

You would prefer that defendants be defenseless? In the US legal system, everything is on trial. The law, the defense, the prosecution, the evidence and witnesses are all open to scrutiny and testing. If something in the prosecution's case is not right, then the prosecution is potentially not right. I wouldn't have the system any other way.
Re:Huh by Ultra64 · 2013-11-26 07:36 · Score: 3, Informative

>You would prefer that defendants be defenseless?
What are you talking about? There is no legal system that would allow the defendant to overturn anything. That is the judge's job.
I was just making fun of the typo in the summary.
Re:Huh by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:38 · Score: 1

You misunderstand. Ultra64 was making fun of the wording--there's no way that overturning the decision was actually the defendant's action!
Re:Huh by gstoddart · 2013-11-26 07:45 · Score: 2

I'm not sure it's a good idea to let the defendant be in charge of the judicial process.
They aren't.
But when the judicial process is demonstrated to be biased against one group of people, things get tossed out.
In this case, the people that determine what threat people pose as sex offenders were clearly acting in a way that was biased against the people in there. (You can become a 'sex offender' for the damnedest things, like peeing in public.)
And, quite frankly, if you're posting the details (even in the broad strokes) of cases you're adjudicating and indicating how you hate these people ... congratulations, you have demonstrated bias and have possibly tainted the outcomes.

Due to Lynch's apparent bias, the court vacated the registry board's ruling against Doe and granted Doe another hearing. That resolution should be just the tip of the iceberg because every other case Lynch heard could be susceptible to similar claims of bias. Not only would any biased rulings by Lynch have potentially ruined people's lives, but it take years and enormous amounts of tax dollars to resolve the many likely bias claims from Lynch's prior cases.
That's not the defendant being in charge of the judicial process. That's the judicial process suffering a huge failure.
And if a judge went onto Facebook and said he hated all of the black defendants in his courtroom, then you could well expect a lot of his decisions to be reviewed very closely.
When your judicial system loses its objectivity, you are pretty much fucked unless you're prepared to correct it.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Huh by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:58 · Score: 0

This is a hilarious reaction to someone making fun of the claim that a defendant overturned a decision.
Re:Huh by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-11-26 09:17 · Score: 1

It's like last year when I was on a general forum, and we were discussing the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case. One guy, otherwise very smart and literate, kept posting comments like "the police refused to prosecute" or "the judge should press charges". Not just once, but several times over a week or two.
Finally I pointed out to him that the police don't prosecute, and the judge certainly doesn't bring charges against someone. (Imagine being the judge over a trial of a man you personally brought charges against. No bias claim there, I'm sure.) He was getting the role of the prosecutor all mixed up with other parts of the legal/judicial process.
Maybe somewhere in the Wild West of the 1890's you had the sheriff press charges and the judge held the trial when he was passing through town. But I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen anymore in any modern jurisdiction.

--
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Re:Huh by lightknight · 2013-11-26 10:00 · Score: 1

Not anymore. They changed things...jury nullification supposedly gets you bounced for even mentioning it. And we don't have a justice system, or even a legal system...we have an adversarial system.

--
I am John Hurt.
Re:Huh by lightknight · 2013-11-26 10:01 · Score: 1

Judge has to be smart enough to know when the law needs to be overturned. Limited thinking patterns are, well, the mark of a 'perfect' but stagnant society.

--
I am John Hurt.
Re:Huh by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 21:31 · Score: 0

The summary doesn't say anything about the defendant. Maybe the sex offender is the judge.

Asshats by hduff · 2013-11-26 07:26 · Score: 1

People can have opinions, but those who feel the need to rant about such things are simply being asshats when they hold a position of public trust. They can reign it in or find a private sector job.

--
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert

Re:Asshats by Altus · 2013-11-26 07:44 · Score: 2

The rant doesn't bother me... its the decision based on factors that have no legal bearing that bothers me

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

Ranting against Arial is just insane... by QilessQi · 2013-11-26 07:26 · Score: 5, Funny

...now if it were Comic Sans, I would TOTALLY agree.

--
Koans and fables for the software engineer

Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:44 · Score: 0

Best post is best.
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by sharknado · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 2

...now if it were Comic Sans, I would TOTALLY agree.
How about Wingdings?
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by kmahan · 2013-11-26 07:52 · Score: 1

I assumed it was already codified in law that using Comic Sans got you the death penalty.

--
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by ninlilizi · 2013-11-26 08:01 · Score: 1

Comic Sans is appealing to children.
Ergo. Comic Sans comes with a mandatory conviction of child abuse. Even if the defendent is only on trial for shop lifting or being fabulous without due care and attention,
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by Stewie241 · 2013-11-26 08:15 · Score: 1

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/im-comic-sans-asshole
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by Hsien-Ko · 2013-11-26 08:21 · Score: 1

if it were one of those aliens in Gazillionaire.... maybe.
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by Defenestrar · 2013-11-26 08:26 · Score: 1

Doesn't even qualify for a fair trial. No need to find the average weight of a duck (or very small rocks) in this case.
Re:Ranting against Arial is just insane... by steelfood · 2013-11-26 18:13 · Score: 1

We all know Arial is a wannabe Helvetica.
Nobody likes a wannabe. Not even cops.

--
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

Summary confusing by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:27 · Score: 0

" a sex offender overturned the decision of a hearing officer "

What?

Re:Summary confusing by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:30 · Score: 0

I heard the herring officer was a biased cold fish.
Re:Summary confusing by lightknight · 2013-11-26 10:06 · Score: 1

Two ways to read that. 1.) A sex offender (stopped reading) overturned the decision of a hearing officer, and 2.) a sex offender overturned the decision of a hearing officer.
In the first case, the whole sex offender thing creates an opinion before anything else happens; the second way, judgement is suspended until all information is read.

--
I am John Hurt.
Re:Summary confusing by foobar+bazbot · 2013-11-26 10:18 · Score: 1

Two ways to read that. 1.) A sex offender (stopped reading) overturned the decision of a hearing officer, and 2.) a sex offender overturned the decision of a hearing officer.
In the first case, the whole sex offender thing creates an opinion before anything else happens; the second way, judgement is suspended until all information is read.
What GP characterised as confusing was the notion that the sex offender overturned anything -- what actually happens in such a case is that a judge overturns the decision. Since you apparently missed the civics fail and went off on something unrelated, we're left to assume you read it in way "1. )".
Re:Summary confusing by wonkey_monkey · 2013-11-26 12:40 · Score: 1

1.) A sex offender (stopped reading) overturned the decision of a hearing officer
Comment on summary confusing! Maybe I'm just tired but I can't grasp the meaning of "(stopped reading)"
Hey, are you parodying my sig? :p

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.

Sounds like Comic Sans by JWSmythe · 2013-11-26 07:28 · Score: 1

He sounds like he must write everything in Comic Sans, or Canterbury.

{sigh}

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.

Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:29 · Score: 0

At least in my browser.

Re:Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by TheResilientFarter · 2013-11-26 07:33 · Score: 1

Also, spreadsheets. I find I dislike spreadsheets that use mono-space fonts, Times New Roman, or Calibri. Arial just seems the natural font for spreadsheets.
Re:Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:41 · Score: 0

I find I dislike spreadsheets that use mono-space fonts
WTF? You want information placed in orderly rows and columns, but then you dislike it when all those numerical columns line up because a fixed width font was used?
Re:Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:46 · Score: 1

Arial looks better to me on low-resolution displays (almost every computer monitor), because serifs look ugly and anti-aliasing usually makes things worse. On high resolution displays (a lot of tablets and smartphones) and print on real paper, the original reason for serifs holds: they lead the eye and improve reading speed.
Re:Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by Alan+Shutko · 2013-11-26 08:25 · Score: 1

Almost every font in use has fixed-width digits, including Arial. There are fonts out there designed mostly for display work that only have proportional digits, or as part of larger family which has options for both. But in general, unless you try very hard, all those numerical columns will line up.
Re:Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by jonbryce · 2013-11-26 08:41 · Score: 1

Calilbri or Verdana are better though because they have a larger x-height.
Re:Oooh No. Most of /. is Arial font by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 22:26 · Score: 0

Arial on my computer doesn't seem to have fixed width digits (try doing a load of zeros then a load on ones underneath)

But the guy who drafts the letter... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:29 · Score: 1

...in Comic Sans MS is an alright dude.

Cool Story Bro Time by CB-in-Tokyo · 2013-11-26 07:31 · Score: 5, Funny

Back in the 90s, I had a job teaching MS Office to people. One class I was hired for was to teach a bunch of local judges how to use Word.

While discussing how to change fonts, one of the judges says, "Huh! Anal font, what the hell is an ANAL font!"

Maybe it is the same judge!

Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:40 · Score: 0

It's pretty clear what was on his mind.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-11-26 07:43 · Score: 1

Font is the same root word as fountain (use in typesetting derives from foundaries that cast type letter blocks, the font of molten iron.)
I am not really interested in learning details of an ANAL FONT.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2013-11-26 07:49 · Score: 4, Funny

I am really interested in learning details of an ANAL FONT.
The Details of an ANAL FONT

--
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:49 · Score: 0

"Huh! Anal font, what the hell is an ANAL font!"
Typically something that happens after consuming Taco Bell.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:00 · Score: 0

"Am Not A Lawyer" font.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Nyder · 2013-11-26 08:13 · Score: 1

Back in the 90s, I had a job teaching MS Office to people. One class I was hired for was to teach a bunch of local judges how to use Word.
While discussing how to change fonts, one of the judges says, "Huh! Anal font, what the hell is an ANAL font!"
Maybe it is the same judge!
Wait till that judge discovers the goatse font...

--
Be seeing you...
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by wcrowe · 2013-11-26 08:27 · Score: 1

Well, justice is supposed to be blind...

--
Proverbs 21:19
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by NoImNotNineVolt · 2013-11-26 08:39 · Score: 1

You, sir, are a veritable font of knowledge!

--
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by freeze128 · 2013-11-26 08:40 · Score: 1

I wonder if they would accept a signed confession in WINGDINGS.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:14 · Score: 0

Eye bleach! Quick, someone hand me the eye bleach!!!
(Does /. have a content sensitive captcha? Mine is chlorine, although I wouldn't actually suggest putting that in your eye.)
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:43 · Score: 0

Another victirn of keming.
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by grep+-v+'.*'+* · 2013-11-26 12:41 · Score: 1

The Details of an ANAL FONT

Go here instead -- it's meta and safe.

I went there to see if it was the real tubgirl, or a clone of goatse, or what. Tubgirl seems to have changed position a little from when I saw her last decade. Hopefully it'll be another decade or three before I see here again. Now I'll have to start drinking heavily again just to get that out of my head -- sigh...

The iGOOGLES! They do NOTHING!

--
If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by gmhowell · 2013-11-26 13:10 · Score: 1

Well, justice is supposed to be blind...
But how is justice supposed to consider my twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back
of each one if he's blind?

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 21:59 · Score: 0

If anyone doesn't know what "tubgirl" is, before you click that link to find out you should know it's NSFW and also not safe for your brain...
Re:Cool Story Bro Time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 23:05 · Score: 0

Yeah. Let's put a new spin on big O notation...

Reminds me of Word Perfect by erroneus · 2013-11-26 07:31 · Score: 2

I recall when I was first confronted with the reason Word Perfect was still (at the time) preferred for legal documents and especially court documents. That formatting absolutely needed to look a certain way even if it was ugly and primitive looking. Word Perfect could do it, MS Word not so much. I thought it was ridiculous, but perhaps not as ridiculous as this story.

Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:45 · Score: 1

Not ridiculous at all. WP used codes for formatting that were clear and precise. Word uses both codes and style sheets, a confusing mess that bedevils most people even today.
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:54 · Score: 2, Informative

I recall when I was first confronted with the reason Word Perfect was still (at the time) preferred for legal documents and especially court documents. That formatting absolutely needed to look a certain way even if it was ugly and primitive looking. Word Perfect could do it, MS Word not so much. I thought it was ridiculous, but perhaps not as ridiculous as this story.
Honestly this is still an issue to some degree, although not so many people care anymore. It's not ugly formatting vs pretty formatting, though. It's WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get). With WP, what you see onscreen is absolutely, definitely what you'll get when printed out on paper. With Word, there is a very small chance that the printed form will be ever-so-slightly different in a way that's legally significant (e.g. a word gets wrapped from the end of one line to the beginning of the next line). Page, line, and word numbers are very significant in certain legal contexts, and if it's not consistent, there's trouble. Also, I believe this is truly fixed now, but Word's word count feature at one point did not count the words in a document in the way that is proper for legal documents, and WordPerfect does. Thus for filings that have to be fewer than X words long, it was a critical distinction.
These days I suspect the usage of WP in legal areas is mostly just legacy carryover from the days when it was really required, but it was a real requirement with valid reasons, not so very long ago.
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by guanxi · 2013-11-26 08:22 · Score: 1

WP used codes for formatting that were clear and precise. Word uses both codes and style sheets
Word did not use formatting codes or the same stream-oriented format as WP at all. Word was and is object-oriented.
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:32 · Score: 0

I cannot tell what is ridiculous: was it that Word was less advanced than Word Perfect at the time (and for some reason they though moving to Word was a good idea), or you claiming that the style guidelines were ridiculous?
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by lgw · 2013-11-26 08:42 · Score: 1

And after WordPerfect had sold copies to all 12 geeks who love "codes" in a word process, the company went under. Meanwhile, the concept of specifying formatting using style sheets seems to have cascaded over to other media and become quite popular.

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by NJRoadfan · 2013-11-26 09:02 · Score: 1

Corel still holds significant market share in the legal market, including government contracts.
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by foobar+bazbot · 2013-11-26 10:50 · Score: 1

There's nothing wrong with codes.
There's nothing wrong with style sheets.
There's everything wrong with an opaque hodgepodge of both, which is the MS Word system. I'm not saying it's wrong to have both (particularly, there's very good arguments for style-based systems to include simple stuff like italics and bold, for use in verbatim quotes if nothing else), but Word makes it not only non-obvious why a particular piece of text is formatted as it is (which is bad enough) but very hard to find out at all.
Re:Reminds me of Word Perfect by lgw · 2013-11-26 11:34 · Score: 1

If you compose documents in draft view in Word, and in your opions you set "style area pane width" to 1" or so, all will become clear. Word makes a ton more sense (to my geeky perspective) when the style that is applied to each paragraph is explicitly called out in the margin.
No that it matters any more, other than the legal world (always stuck in the previous century), why would you ever print a document? And if it won't be printed ever, why are you using a word processor?

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.

Comic Sans, on the other hand by sandbagger · 2013-11-26 07:32 · Score: 1

That should be a shooting offence. I recall working for a company who had a new director of marketing. She did everything -- everything -- in PPT, even memos. Her preferred font was Comic Sans and the concept of a colour space for documents was basically science fiction to her.

Yeah, the company went under. How did you guess?

--
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.

Re:Comic Sans, on the other hand by hawguy · 2013-11-26 07:45 · Score: 4, Funny

That should be a shooting offence. I recall working for a company who had a new director of marketing. She did everything -- everything -- in PPT, even memos. Her preferred font was Comic Sans and the concept of a colour space for documents was basically science fiction to her.
Yeah, the company went under. How did you guess?
I guessed it went under because if the company went on to be wildly successful, then this anecdote wouldn't confirm your belief that the marketing director's memo style was a sign that the company was doomed to fail so you wouldn't have told it.
Re:Comic Sans, on the other hand by Courageous · 2013-11-26 08:35 · Score: 1

I have to say, you rather got him there.

The court of public opinion by jader3rd · 2013-11-26 07:33 · Score: 1

You'll never get hired for what you say on Twitter, but you may get fired for what you say on Twitter.

Re:The court of public opinion by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:55 · Score: 1

"Too many tweets might make a twat" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3Mrfut-FSw

pssh rejection by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:33 · Score: 0

Rejection over arial font? He got off easy...anyone using arial font should be fried immediately on the spot.

"Social media rants"? by denzacar · 2013-11-26 07:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

social media rants by government workers are causing problems for the workers

Seems to me more like "social media helps to uncover insane asshats among government workers".
Seriously, this guy apparently prejudiced against someone in a sexual assault case based on a font - he just gave everyone with whose cases he was involved a cause to ask for a retrial.
What are the chances an innocent person went to jail cause he didn't like their font or their hair style?

Once again this just proves that if you give asshats enough rope, they will eventually hang themselves with it.
I say "thumbs up" for the social media.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens

Re:"Social media rants"? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:04 · Score: 0

And if you RTFA, you'd find the judge discriminating against fonts to be the least of people's worries. This man isn't qualified to give his opinion outside the People's Court.
Re:"Social media rants"? by Hognoxious · 2013-11-27 06:15 · Score: 1

What are the chances an innocent person went to jail cause he didn't like their font or their hair style?
Zero. Do you know what a jury is?

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

What font did they want him to use? by jfdavis668 · 2013-11-26 07:37 · Score: 1

Most people write with the default font of whatever word processor they use.

Re:What font did they want him to use? by jandrese · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 1

Seriously, maybe the guy is totally hung up on serifs? Ariel is basically a clone of Helvetica, one of the most common fonts in use today. It's hard to imagine someone with a burning passionate hatred of Helvetica. When I look at Ariel, the one thing I don't think is "unprofessional". Boring, and overused, sure, but definitely not unprofessional.

--

I read the internet for the articles.
Re:What font did they want him to use? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:58 · Score: 0

Wrong on all counts - Ariel was a mermaid, you clod!
Re:What font did they want him to use? by danlip · 2013-11-26 08:40 · Score: 1

I have a passionate hatred of all san-serif fonts.
Re:What font did they want him to use? by NJRoadfan · 2013-11-26 09:06 · Score: 1

It would be funny if the font was actually the Word 2007+ default of Calibri and not Arial. Most people can't tell the difference. If anything you know the person is using a newer version of Word since Microsoft is determined to banish serifed fonts like Times New Roman.

Should shut up and be glad.... by TheCarp · 2013-11-26 07:37 · Score: 3, Funny

I just this past week had the opportunity to read some legal filings in the case between a friend of mine and his former wife over custody. Since he can't afford a lawyer, he fills out forms the court gives him and does it.... BY HAND.

Give me some arial any day of the week.

--
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"

Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2013-11-26 07:50 · Score: 2

There is this archaic bit of technology, called a typewriter. They can commonly be found in a thrift store for just a few bucks. The best thing about a typewriter is that you can use it to fill in an existing form, neatly.
You might want to suggest it to your friend. Or just pick one up, and give it to him.

--
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by viperidaenz · 2013-11-26 07:59 · Score: 1

The best thing about a typewriter is that you can use it to fill in an existing form, neatly
Unless the existing form requires you to enter letters in boxes, then the typewriter must be aligned for every key stroke.
Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by nctritech · 2013-11-26 08:18 · Score: 1

Some people would have difficulty carrying some typewriters. The IBM Selectric is something grand, but damn if it isn't a heavy bastard.
Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by danlip · 2013-11-26 08:41 · Score: 1

I think you would be hard pressed to find a typewriter in a thrift store today. Maybe in an antique store.
Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by TheCarp · 2013-11-26 09:06 · Score: 1

That's not a bad idea at all, actually, I wonder if we still have a couple stashed away somewhere? I may need to check that out for him. Of course, they are a bit unwieldly to lug around, I believe he does a lot of this at the courthouse.

--
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by Capt.DrumkenBum · 2013-11-26 09:18 · Score: 1

I bought one in a thrift store 6 months ago, for $5.00
It even works.

--
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
Re:Should shut up and be glad.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 17:43 · Score: 0

Well aren't you just the coolest hipster around.

Fixating on a tiny aspect... by Junta · 2013-11-26 07:37 · Score: 3

There were several comments which seemed not to really be supporting claims of bias (Arial font, hating the word lascivious), together with some things that are as likely to be just being inconvenienced (e.g. a police report in spanish I suspect is included to imply racism, but is just as likely to be complaining much in the same way I might complain if someone gave me something in German).

But the vast majority of comments were more cut and dry 'I hate the people who I'm called upon to conduct hearings for', which would be the more relevant serious half of this.

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.

Re:Fixating on a tiny aspect... by viperidaenz · 2013-11-26 08:03 · Score: 1

But the vast majority of comments were more cut and dry 'I hate the people who I'm called upon to conduct hearings for', which would be the more relevant serious half of this.
This guy deals with convicted criminals. He's not a judge.
Do you like convicted sex offenders?
The guy he was dealing with was trying to get away with not being listed as a sex offender, despite being one.

social media rant was the SYMPTOM not the problem by Gothmolly · 2013-11-26 07:38 · Score: 1

Raving on Facebook about a font means you're irrational and unstable. But you're irrational and unstable whether you rave about fonts on social media or not. Social media is just a handy and free barometer of already existing conditions. If anything, it should be considered a useful tool - people self-identify.

--
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.

HAHA by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:41 · Score: 0

Anal font - the font that's always a surprise.

Re:HAHA by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:49 · Score: 0

It can be stretched to any size.

Mass Legal System is Horrid by ScottCooperDotNet · 2013-11-26 07:42 · Score: 1

This from a State where the data sharing laws are so ancient they cannot provide electronic files but only paper printouts, at 50 cents a page. And where our State Stormtroopers speed around illegally in unmarked cruisers, writing tickets for the same laws they are violating. Why am I not surprised that in Massachusetts' halls of justice, the only justice is in the halls?

I don't know... by Junta · 2013-11-26 07:42 · Score: 2

You can at least be more likely to know what you are getting when a public official rants stupidly in public. The people who never ever rant publicly likely harbor as bad if not worse sentiments privately, and the populace is none the wiser.

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.

Re:I don't know... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 22:02 · Score: 0

Well at least they've passed the competence test of keeping their mouth shut on the internet
--Incompetence ,)

He knows how stuff gets done by PhrostyMcByte · 2013-11-26 07:44 · Score: 1

I've never met someone who picked Myriad over Arial that I couldn't trust. Clearly he's discovered this secret.

In all seriousness, dealing with criminals as a profession doesn't mean you can't have a personal life. Maybe he's into typography and felt like ranting on his personal time. I've said similar things jokingly, though perhaps court workers need higher standards.

Re:He knows how stuff gets done by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:26 · Score: 0

No, you have to be careful talking about work on social media no matter who you work for. I've never worked at a company that would not can someone for that kind of disclosure on social media.
Re:He knows how stuff gets done by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 10:56 · Score: 0

dealing with criminals
He deals with people who may or may not be criminals. And no, when a person's job involves deciding the fate of others, it is supremely important that they are free from bias, and when possible bias surfaces, it has to be taken very seriously, not just brushed off as a joke.

Power trip by sl4shd0rk · 2013-11-26 07:44 · Score: 1

Don't know that I'd fault social media for an asshat on a power trip.

--
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!

30 comments in, 4 Comic Sans references by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:45 · Score: 0

There must be some kind of shit brown ratio this matches.

This makes me so angry that by WillAffleckUW · 2013-11-26 07:47 · Score: 2

i'm going to write a strong letter using Helvetica Narrow

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

Not the rant by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:50 · Score: 0

I don't think the rant is what caused the problem, but the passionate bias. We should applaud social media for showing us how narrow minded our government officials are, and keep them in check.

Do you really want to be judged by someone on the font your word processor defaults to?

In general, I think this is a very good part of freedom of speech. Even when it is disgusting, hateful speech, it helps us know that someone is a disgusting, hateful person.

Re:social media rant was the SYMPTOM not the probl by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 0

wtf??? facebook is an israeli espionage tool (israelis run akamai, fb`s CMS)
who gives two shits in a hat wtf ppl Right on their fb?
much better to give the shit back to the shitters here on /. ......
anyone heard back about the israeli-excstacy-drug testing at inter-zionnazional IT firms?

Thanks by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 0

Such blessings should never cease!

What if the font was Kidprint? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:51 · Score: 0

Would that font be considered relevant to the courts?

I'm llling rnore - is that RN or M? by scorp1us · 2013-11-26 07:53 · Score: 1

I can't take Arial seriously because I can't read it.

rn (RN) looks like m (M)
Il (IL) look like LL or II, L still don't know which.

--
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.

The sex offender overturned? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:54 · Score: 0

I didn't know the accused was the judge. Fucking wow.

state default here... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 07:54 · Score: 0

I'm a civil servant (teacher) in Germany, and all letters from superior authorities use Arial... I think it's the default for every letter from the "land" of Baden-Württemberg. The school uses Frutiger, as it's the city's "corporate identity" font. But, being a teacher, I'm still exposed to a LOT of, well, you know, "the" friendly, "child-appropriate" typeface...

Isn't it the default? by mosb1000 · 2013-11-26 07:55 · Score: 1

I could be wrong, but shouldn't the Windows default font be considered a reasonable choice? Not everybody is inclined to change the font. And even if they were, what is wrong with Arial?

Re:Isn't it the default? by foobar+bazbot · 2013-11-26 10:59 · Score: 1

what is wrong with Arial?
Sir, it is a damnable cheap knockoff of the fine font Helvetica, and I will not countenance its use!
Re:Isn't it the default? by Gunstick · 2013-11-26 22:39 · Score: 1

what is wrong?
lf you don't know that, you cIearIly never have checked if your URL has the right letters for i and L
Maybe use a pipe symbo| instead.
Ok, it quite obvious here, but anyway, who designs a font with a word which renders like this: Illogical
What about lIIl|I|llII|Il ?

--
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.

Re:social media rant was the SYMPTOM not the probl by tinkerton · 2013-11-26 07:56 · Score: 2

Sure there will be such cases, but mostly the conflict is between old style prejudices that date from a time when things weren't as public and there weren't as many opportunities for moral outrage , with a modern time that offers a flood of information that makes your private thoughts suddenly a lot more public.

A more realist reaction would be to be a lot more tolerant towards inappropriate thoughts.

Wait a minute by viperidaenz · 2013-11-26 07:56 · Score: 1

Someone blurts out they are biased and the problem is the rant was heard?
Isn't the real problem the fact the hearing officer admitted he was biased?

On another note, I'm currently at a government office and I just checked the default font in MS Word, its "Arial Maori".

Dumb article summary by DogDude · 2013-11-26 08:05 · Score: 2

"This is just the latest example of how social media rants by government workers are causing problems for the workers — and the people they deal with.""

No, this is just the latest example of how people posting stupid shit online come back to bite them in the ass.

I'm still amazed that 20 years in, most people still have no idea how to act like rational, civil human beings online.

--
I don't respond to AC's.

Oh sod off. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:07 · Score: 0

It would be WORSE if they had had the prejudice and kept quiet about it and still let it affect their decision.

FAR worse.

Solution to inefficient governments. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:07 · Score: 0

The kind of compete showcased here can easily be reproduced by automatically making all administration decisions with a cheap RNG.

Sex offender using social media? by mendax · 2013-11-26 08:07 · Score: 1

This is interesting because web sites like Facebook ban sex offenders from using it in its terms of service (or so I'm told as I've never read them) and some jurisdictions ban paroled or probationed sex offenders from using social networking sites. And there have been some jurisdictions (California for one) that have tried to force all registered sex offenders to register with the government their e-mail addresses and their social media logins, thereby making them public record and allowing the Facebooks and Twitters of the world to easily find them.

This case is an advertisement for why everyone should have access to the Internet without restriction regardless of their current status. It seems that this guy was not on some kind of supervised release, for if he was he'd likely never find out about these biased comments by the hearing officer.

This case is also the reason why I don't blog or express too many of my more private thoughts online but instead sequester them in a paper diary. (No one reads Slashdot comments so this place doesn't count.) No one is going to stumble across my more biased ramblings and opinions through an unfortunate Google search.

--
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.

Re:Sex offender using social media? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 12:59 · Score: 1

Well I really don't care people knowing m'y thoughts because I'm not an arrogant ass-hole like this guy. He says: "it’s always awkward when I see one of my pervs in the parking lot after a hearing", like if a human beings were his pets, his "pervs", he owns them like puppies. And I think it's annoying how TFA says "a sex offender", like if the guy was *just* that... He is not a human anymore, he's a Sex Offender. Just like Julian Assange right ?

Salient Points by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:08 · Score: 0

The headline might as well read, "Sex Offender Get New Hearing After Hearing Officer Rants About Overcooked Eggs." The font or discussion thereof seems to have no bearing on the decision to grant another hearing, i.e. attempt to have an unbiased legal proceeding.

Ok, How about this one:

Sex Offender Gets New Hearing After Hearing Officer Boasts Biases on Facebook

Another social media "oops"... by ErichTheRed · 2013-11-26 08:09 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, people still don't understand the concept of the totally public nature of social media. Even if this person didn't understand the privacy settings, sharing with "friends" doesn't necessarily mean those friends won't tell their friends who have their entire lives posted on Facebook.

I have no idea about the facts of the case, but I know I wouldn't want someone who was willing to post things like that on a public forum making a determination that meant I would never get a job, never be able to rent an apartment, etc. without difficulty again. I would want at least a shot at an impartial hearing, which it doesn't sound like this person is capable of giving. I'm sure people who deal with this stuff every day get jaded, kind of like veteran police detectives after 20 years of non-stop criminals. But, those same people expose their beliefs online and think it won't come back to bite them. When your job is to hand out the electronic Scarlet Letters, you shouldn't post/tweet that you're not going to give people a fair shot.

This is going to be interesting over the next decade. Either people will really start getting themselves into bad situations with their oversharing, or the next generation of MBAs/politicians will roll in and expect 100% posting of your life online. Public figures (teachers, judges, police, etc.) are under a lot more scrutiny than the average citizen also...and they should realize that.

Submit it in Comic Sans next time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:12 · Score: 0

Because nothing says trustworthy like a sex offender writing in a font intended to appeal to children.

Here's an idea. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:16 · Score: 0

Rather than more tolerance toward inappropriate thoughts, how about more tolerance for "inappropriate" *FONTS*?

Re:Here's an idea. by tinkerton · 2013-11-26 09:46 · Score: 1

That would go too far.

The problem is not him telling by Opportunist · 2013-11-26 08:18 · Score: 2

The problem WAS earlier, before people were stupid enough to post such things online, that such bias STILL existed, STILL influenced decisions, but could not be identified and rectified.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Re:stupid comments, but.... by rwa2 · 2013-11-26 08:19 · Score: 2

Where are all the slashdot typesetting snobs proclaiming "if it doesn't have proper ligatures, it's an abhorrence!" ?!

motions? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:21 · Score: 0

what's all this talk about motion? does the examiner want slow motion or fast motion?

anyways, i like Arial font too.

Invalid fonts on a ballot measure? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2013-11-26 08:27 · Score: 1

But fonts are important. Michigan secretary of state invalidated signatures collected for a ballot measure because it did not have the right font or right point size. http://www.eclectablog.com/2012/07/michigan-sec-of-state-johnson-if-pa-4-repeal-petition-font-is-wrong-all-other-ballot-initiatives-are-disqualified-too.html

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

Other famous gaffes that affected public opinion by Bosconian · 2013-11-26 08:28 · Score: 1

Or Klingon opinion, anyway:

"Captain's log, stardate 9522.6. I've never trusted Klingons, and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy. It seems to me our mission to escort the Chancellor of the Klingon High Council to a peace summit is problematic at best. Spock says this could be an historic occasion and I'd like to believe him. But how on Earth can history get past people like me?"

--
Scarce, scared, scarred, sacred... -Col. Bruce Hampton

Re:stupid comments, but.... by lgw · 2013-11-26 08:34 · Score: 1

Don't forget good kerning! Though with a schoolbook font (love those) it doesn't matter quite as much.

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.

Imbecile by Hognoxious · 2013-11-26 08:37 · Score: 1

Was the username retarded already taken?

I guess IHaveNoReadingComprehensionSkills was too long...

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

motions 2 by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:43 · Score: 0

i pressed the post button before I could finish my thought. my fault.

still don't understand what physics has to do with a sex offender unless the dude was walking or in a car. the motion takes a long time? doesn't he mean hearing? so they are two different things?

Motion is a change in position of an object with respect to time and its reference point. Motion is typically described in terms of displacement, direction, velocity, acceleration, and time. I wonder if Newtons laws applies to the hearing. I'm confused.

force = mass * acceleration

Re:I'm llling rnore - is that RN or M? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 08:46 · Score: 0

I can't take Arial seriously because I can't read it.

rn (RN) looks like m (M)
Il (IL) look like LL or II, L still don't know which.

Yeah I can't tell you how many times I have confused pom poms with porn porns, and Chicago, il with Chicago II (son to Chicago, Sr) or Chicago ll cool j. We really should just start writing everything with the hex character set so that 7468657265206973206E6F207269736B206F6620616D62696775697479.

Re:stupid comments, but.... by Macgrrl · 2013-11-26 09:14 · Score: 1

We should make there read all pleadings in blackletter, that will give them a headache, I generally find it much harder to read any length of text in a font of that class than schoolhouse or an italic.

--
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World

Little doubt by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:15 · Score: 0

This was a law caused by a smartassed lawyer, and passed by someone who used to be a smartassed lawyer. One more reason it's just insane to even imagine you could represent yourself.

Arial is the official font for some organizations by Alan426 · 2013-11-26 09:40 · Score: 1

It's painful to watch, but US Army just made Arial the required typeface for all official correspondence. Arial is now a weapon system.

hmmm by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 09:48 · Score: 0

wasn't his type anyways

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2013-11-26 09:53 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:I'm llling rnore - is that RN or M? by oobayly · 2013-11-26 09:59 · Score: 0

Hex is all well and good, but you can still get 0 & O mixed up.

Could have been worse by Megane · 2013-11-26 10:45 · Score: 1

It could have turned into a Helvetica Scenario.

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }

Sex Offenders don't use Arial, by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 10:48 · Score: 0

they use comic-sans

God, I don't care. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:06 · Score: 0

Just so long as it isn't Comic Sans, let it be.

Re:I'm llling rnore - is that RN or M? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:50 · Score: 0

Yeah, 30 and 4f look rather similar.

Why was SGML created? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 11:57 · Score: 0

Amazing to me that nobody bothers to note that the origin of SGML was, as I understand it, as an electronic document format standardization method for the lawyers to use in the 9th district federal court system.
Stranger and stranger that most of the technology development is done for the government bureaucrats who are the least capable of justifying why any sane person would attempt to use it, usually, in my experience, because THEY refuse to use it.
Hmmmm, proprietary crap OS and applications at the root of the problem?

How many sex offenders are there in the USA? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 12:07 · Score: 0

It seems like everyone is a sex offender. I mean look at all the kids being born in this country. In order to have a kid, my understanding is that you have to have sex. I know my mom is a sex offender. She took an extremely embarrassing picture of me but naked sitting on the toilet when I was only 3 years old. She thinks it is cute. But to me it is embarrassing. I know that if she took the picture today she would be rounded up and sent to the goolag. I have mixed feelings about this since on one hand I don't like the picture, but on the other hand I wound't really want her to be sent to prison and have been raised by child protective services. See despite this one incident of pedophilia, she is otherwise a good mother.

This makes me kind of ambivalent about the whole lets prosecute sex offenders to the maximum extent of the law thing.
The more laws you make the more criminals you will find.

If so, still grounds for a new hearing by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · 2013-11-26 13:25 · Score: 1

The legal system can't afford to lose any more public confidence and still continue to function. A new hearing shows a willingness to take their jobs seriously.

Re:If so, still grounds for a new hearing by Just+Some+Guy · 2013-11-27 05:48 · Score: 1

I agree wholeheartedly, and that's compatible with my original position. There's nothing to be lost (other than a little time) by re-hearing the requests he denied, and everything to be gained by saying "let's play it safe and review these to see whether he acted properly".
Even if he hadn't made other comments that more clearly displayed a bias against the people in front of him, joking about any of it in public shows poor judgement on his part. That alone is enough to justify double-checking.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?

Re: Alternative Theory by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 13:36 · Score: 0

i bet if this was about the proper font or indentations to use in programming you would hear different opinions from most.

pro se by Etherwalk · 2013-11-26 15:40 · Score: 1

Pro se means that it was done by the individual rather than by a lawyer for the individual. Usually that means by someone without a legal education, so they often do small things wrong (e.g. arial font) or make arguments that have little chance of winning. It is a tricky job to try and deal with pleadings, complaints, or other documents filed by pro se individuals because the court has to find the line in terms of how far out of its way it should go to interpret their arguments to see if there's a legal argument buried somewhere in there.

Of course someone should look past the font in a pro se piece, but skepticism because of the font is understandable and shouldn't really disqualify someone from evaluating the paper. That being said, once you have a public admission of skepticism in the font it undermines confidence in the judicial process (i.e. looks bad), even though it's just being honest and human, so maybe reassignment on appeal is reasonable.

Re:pro se by Alioth · 2013-11-27 00:06 · Score: 1

No. It's only understandable if he had used MS Comic Sans.

--
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows

It wasn't even Comic Sans by formfeed · 2013-11-26 18:20 · Score: 1

If you spend your time dealing with sex offenders, and your rants are about Arial, is it possible that you might have your priorities in poor order?

Writing a letter in a Sans-serif doesn't make you a sex-offender, just a sociopath.

Injustice system by fyngyrz · 2013-11-26 18:38 · Score: 2

but skepticism because of the font is understandable

No. It isn't. It's an insanely trivial matter of absolutely no merit.

Justice is about facts and the most fact-related evaluation of guilt possible. Making judgements based on a font is sheer incompetence unless the font is so unreadable as to make reading impossible. And in which case the reaction needs to be "prepare this again, this time using a font I can read" and nothing else.

maybe reassignment on appeal is reasonable.

Firing the hearing officer would also be eminently reasonable, as would formally re-evaluating every judgement they've made in pursuit of their job. Due to the profoundly obvious fact that said hearing officer is an incompetent boob who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near decisions that affect other people's lives.

And frankly, if slashdot would allow me to, I'd have written this entire post in comic sans.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.

Incarcerate Both Of Them by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 19:40 · Score: 0

Anyone who drafts a letter in a font deserves to remain in prison indefinitely as far as I'm concerned. Textual information is exchanged in 80-column 7-bit ASCII.

Re:Incarcerate Both Of Them by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 22:40 · Score: 0

I prefer Baudit

Re: Alternative Theory by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 20:59 · Score: 0

Which may indicate that legal procedings and programming are not the same...

but... by Tom · 2013-11-26 21:20 · Score: 1

...he's right! If you use Arial, you are quite obviously a stupid windows user who doesn't give a 2nd thought about font choice, so you're unlikely to think about anything else in your life.

Arial, think about it! The Wannabe-Helvetica used because Microsoft was too cheap to buy a Helvetica license.

Seriously, I'm right there with him. People who use Arial can't be trusted. People who use Arial in a letter rightfully deserve to get everything they ask in it denied.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org

Re:social media rant was the SYMPTOM not the probl by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-26 22:11 · Score: 0

No but please provide details of how to join, this sounds like one work scheme I could come to like :)

| think ARlAL shou|d be I|legaI by Gunstick · 2013-11-26 22:34 · Score: 1

because one cannot distinguish between several characters which are just vertical bars

--
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.

Hearing aid by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-27 00:10 · Score: 0

Hearing officer? So he can, like, differentiate fonts by just listening to them?

Too much time watching "The Little Mermaid"? by mwooldri · 2013-11-27 01:19 · Score: 1

... oh he said Arial... not Ariel... now if it was a rant against Ariel.... said hearing officer has more problems than just about fonts...

what the hell is wrong with Arial? by slashmydots · 2013-11-27 02:37 · Score: 1

Arial is the best font ever made. It's readable from the farthest distance and at the highest speed. Serifs are just bullshit that get in the way. Times New Roman is for idiots who don't know how to change the default font in their software. All websites I design and all documentation I make are in Arial. This guy should be fired just on the basis of how wrong he is.

Re:stupid comments, but.... by X0563511 · 2013-11-27 04:41 · Score: 1

Dejavu sans (or serif, if printed) or get of my damn lawn.

Times (and helvetica etc) are so damn ugly.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...

Re:stupid comments, but.... by lgw · 2013-11-27 07:11 · Score: 1

Newspaper fonts were optimized for totally different goals than making it pleasant to read hours worth of text. If the goal is to minimize fatigue when reading for hours, the result of that optimization is a good book font.

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.

Ooh! I know this one! by denzacar · 2013-11-28 03:22 · Score: 1

A bunch of people, uneducated in law or the actual matter of the trial, who really don't want to be there but are too stupid to come up with an excuse to be let go?
So they are bored, angry and just want to go home?

Or worse - people who think that it is their patriotic duty to pass judgement on others.

--
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens

Slashdot Mirror

Sex Offender Gets New Hearing After Hearing Officer Rants Against Arial Font

312 comments