Sorry, I don't buy the arguement that the judge is overstepping his bounds on this issue. Or that this is a Free Speech issue. Arlotta (the man) seems to have targetted Johnson (the woman, his ex) with a revenge smear compaign. Pretty much harassment by any definition.
(Disclaimer: I am about to make a couple of paragraphs of assumptions based on some previous work experience in the office of a California defense attorney. *Pay attention to these*. I am not looking for a flamewar just providing food for thought.) I feel some sympathy for Arlotta. Being the subject of a restaining order probably had significant impact on his life and he felt his reputation damaged. I have seen many job applications and California gun permits ask "Have you ever been or are you currently the subject of a restaining order?". *Presumably*, this original restraining order was from a domestic violence incident between the two. *Perhaps* he was arrested and did some jail time. That could have led to him losing his job and having to borrow money for bail, legal fees, or basic living expenses. All of these legal problems and their root cause (the domestic violence arrest/restraining order) would have been exposed to his family, his employer and potential employers. In *most* cases it takes two to tango and he may have felt unjustly burdended with the consequences of BOTH of their actions.
Arlotta gets through the court system with, at the very least, a restaining order. This guys is clever, but not that smart. He figures out how to get revenge or "satisfy his moral outrage", but fails to assertain that judges CAN and should be able to place specific requirements into protective/restaining orders. *Most* restraining/protective orders are written with two main components. "Do not come within XXX yards of person, person's residence, person's business." and "DO not make contact with person in any way including written, oral, electronically, or through a 3rd party."
Arlotta sets up a blog with *his side* of the story bringing up all the negative parts of Johnson's past and personality that *he feels* was responsible for the domestic violence and break-up, etc. Then proceeds to directly target co-workers and family of Johnson to *help ann johnson". What a !great guy. Wanting to help her so much that he figured out how to do so while not *technically* violating the restraining/protective order.
The judge/court gets another request from Johnson to order Arlotta to cease and desist. The judge (a woman) is not in awe of Johnson's clever tiptoeing on the letter of the restraining/protective order. TFA states “The record amply demonstrates that Arlotta’s repeated electronic messages and promotion of his blog were not ‘merely attempt [s] to publish his thoughts and ideas to an audience,’ . The record would include all previous court/arrest records pertaining to the case of Johnson and Arlotta. So, the judge takes away the tools that Arlotta was using to directly target Johnson for *help* she (Johnson) doesn't want.
The judge simply countered Arlotta's cleverness with a precise removal of his method of targetted harrasment/*revenge*/*satisfaction of moral outrage*.
In the end, I am very happy that we are watching these judges and courts closely and keeping them from blanket removals of our personal freedoms in the interest of public good or whatever.
If you made it to the end of this rant. Thank You for your time.
It's called a class C+ in california. Where I pay attention to the road first and foremost and the phone call a distant second. Using the headset is a must of course.
Contact your state DMV to inquire about their equivalent to California's Class C+ endorsement.
I know, I know. I will admit it. I'm just a better driver than most of the people on the road.
The part where content sharing legality is inferred to impact my decision regarding what country I live in. It doesn't even make a top 1000 list for me. Nothing personal. The AC who posted before you gets the joke.
You should do some fact checking. Read this http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults1.htm before you cry "fallacy" towards my opinion about crack and attempt to back them up with figures from alochol prohibition.
Crack use has declined for many reasons, not just the because "people see what it does".
I am, in fact, very happy that you know anybody who would smoke crack under any circumstances at all is already smoking it. I feel much better somehow. I'm going to sell all my belongings and follow you. Forsaking all other logical thought.
I don't agree that ALL drugs should be legal. Some substances are just simply a blight on the population. Too often users of the "harder" substances become addicts. Addicts become isolated from being productive at work and in personal relationships. But this is not the fatal flaw.
The flaw here is that the tax rates for consumable goods is regulated on the federal, state, and local level. This is why smuggling cigarettes from North Carolina to New Jersey/New York is profitable. If you think a bit laterally, you could apply this same conumdrum to Kramer and Neuman "smuggling" recyclables from NY into Michigan for the better rebate. In other words, good luck with that.
If some of the "harder" more addictive substances were legalized and made cheaper we would see a huge increase in abuse.
Look to the crack epidemic in the 80's. Cocaine made so cheap for a powerfully addictive high that a person's habit could be supported by petty theft, burglary, and robbery.
Give this man a Cee-gar! He has pinpointed imho THE biggest problem of every one of the occupy x camps. Hippies and some other demographics (religious charities, homeless volunteers, etc.) have a disproportionate amount of easy marks amoung thier ranks. Most hobos use this to live on while savvy criminals use this knowlege to take advantage of the unsuspecting.
Well maybe the pendulum will swing the other way. After that "for a while" time is up the DC owner will rebuild from scratch. They will off-load to those other DCs they own for the duration. During that rebuild the cost-effectiveness of running with "No one" on location (which I translate as minimal staff. Be they employees or contractors.) will be evaluated.
The question will be asked. Is it cheaper to re-build the entire place with updated equipment, processes, and possible wire and ducts too. Or, is it cheaper to go the maintainence route with a full cadre of staff and update a little at a time.
I don't know for certain, but most cases in history support the theory of machine trumps manpower.
In the your second paragraph, you detail PERFECTLY the reasons this move is taking place. Actually, the first two words of that paragraph state the entire goal. "Disasters Aside." I believe that the goal is predictable realiability and uptime for the entire operation. I agree that there must be a staff of engineers for maintainence, but all the maintainence can be put in the schedule, plan, and budget. Even the supervisor/inspectors/watchers fall into the "expected cost" column.
If a data center spends more on prevention vs. recovery and yields near zero down time the profits come in the form of a better service offering than your competition. System failure for any reason short of acts of God should not interrupt your operation to the point of affecting the year's profits.
Even now, this is where I keep my Electronic Toll Collection device. I do this for a few reasons. 1. I hate anything obstructing the field of view out of my windshield. 2. I don't always use it when paying the toll. 3. I don't like the idea of it being always readable by road sensors.
As I approach the toll plaza, I reach into my center console grab the bagged device. Remove the device from the bag. Cross the toll plaza. Rebag the device and return to center console. Easier than when I retrieve paper money from my wallet because that is usually deep in my pocket.
Your opinion that moving to mass transit is "good for everyone" smacks of someone who has never tried to use the bus as a commute option. As 6'3" 260 lb adult male the is bus an absolute nightmare. The leg room problem would be laughable if not for the pain of my knees smashed up against the seatback in front of me. Plus, one of my shoulders and most of an arm will always be partially in your seat no matter how far I try to lean the other way and ignore the awkward position of my spine. I would rather take an 8 hour flight in coach than spend 1 hour on a commuter bus.
Look I understand that generally mass transit is better for traffic congestion and the natural environment. Heck, it was even cheaper by about $150 a month than driving. However, if I cannot walk from the bus stop to the office because of 90 minutes of physical torture beforehand then forget it.
Slashdot Mirror
That is the post I was waiting to read. Hahah.
Or Xbox Loop?
Sorry, I don't buy the arguement that the judge is overstepping his bounds on this issue. Or that this is a Free Speech issue. Arlotta (the man) seems to have targetted Johnson (the woman, his ex) with a revenge smear compaign. Pretty much harassment by any definition.
(Disclaimer: I am about to make a couple of paragraphs of assumptions based on some previous work experience in the office of a California defense attorney. *Pay attention to these*. I am not looking for a flamewar just providing food for thought.)
I feel some sympathy for Arlotta. Being the subject of a restaining order probably had significant impact on his life and he felt his reputation damaged. I have seen many job applications and California gun permits ask "Have you ever been or are you currently the subject of a restaining order?". *Presumably*, this original restraining order was from a domestic violence incident between the two. *Perhaps* he was arrested and did some jail time. That could have led to him losing his job and having to borrow money for bail, legal fees, or basic living expenses. All of these legal problems and their root cause (the domestic violence arrest/restraining order) would have been exposed to his family, his employer and potential employers. In *most* cases it takes two to tango and he may have felt unjustly burdended with the consequences of BOTH of their actions.
Arlotta gets through the court system with, at the very least, a restaining order. This guys is clever, but not that smart. He figures out how to get revenge or "satisfy his moral outrage", but fails to assertain that judges CAN and should be able to place specific requirements into protective/restaining orders. *Most* restraining/protective orders are written with two main components. "Do not come within XXX yards of person, person's residence, person's business." and "DO not make contact with person in any way including written, oral, electronically, or through a 3rd party."
Arlotta sets up a blog with *his side* of the story bringing up all the negative parts of Johnson's past and personality that *he feels* was responsible for the domestic violence and break-up, etc. Then proceeds to directly target co-workers and family of Johnson to *help ann johnson". What a !great guy. Wanting to help her so much that he figured out how to do so while not *technically* violating the restraining/protective order.
The judge/court gets another request from Johnson to order Arlotta to cease and desist. The judge (a woman) is not in awe of Johnson's clever tiptoeing on the letter of the restraining/protective order. TFA states “The record amply demonstrates that Arlotta’s repeated electronic messages and promotion of his blog were not ‘merely attempt [s] to publish his thoughts and ideas to an audience,’ . The record would include all previous court/arrest records pertaining to the case of Johnson and Arlotta. So, the judge takes away the tools that Arlotta was using to directly target Johnson for *help* she (Johnson) doesn't want.
The judge simply countered Arlotta's cleverness with a precise removal of his method of targetted harrasment/*revenge*/*satisfaction of moral outrage*.
In the end, I am very happy that we are watching these judges and courts closely and keeping them from blanket removals of our personal freedoms in the interest of public good or whatever.
If you made it to the end of this rant. Thank You for your time.
while driving.
It's called a class C+ in california. Where I pay attention to the road first and foremost and the phone call a distant second. Using the headset is a must of course.
Contact your state DMV to inquire about their equivalent to California's Class C+ endorsement.
I know, I know. I will admit it. I'm just a better driver than most of the people on the road.
That is why manual transmissions should be outlawed1
Wouldn't it require a demographic study to determine if there are any Sikhs in Iran? If I ran a seek for Sikhs that is how I would do it.
The US is just waiting to ignite the thermite paint.
Doesn't Saudi oil go out of the Red Sea and the Suez Canal as well?
The part where content sharing legality is inferred to impact my decision regarding what country I live in. It doesn't even make a top 1000 list for me. Nothing personal. The AC who posted before you gets the joke.
You should do some fact checking. Read this http://www.druglibrary.org/prohibitionresults1.htm before you cry "fallacy" towards my opinion about crack and attempt to back them up with figures from alochol prohibition.
Crack use has declined for many reasons, not just the because "people see what it does".
I am, in fact, very happy that you know anybody who would smoke crack under any circumstances at all is already smoking it. I feel much better somehow. I'm going to sell all my belongings and follow you. Forsaking all other logical thought.
Two words - Charlie Sheen
Right. Because file sharing policy is the sole dictate of where I should live.
I don't agree that ALL drugs should be legal. Some substances are just simply a blight on the population. Too often users of the "harder" substances become addicts. Addicts become isolated from being productive at work and in personal relationships. But this is not the fatal flaw.
The flaw here is that the tax rates for consumable goods is regulated on the federal, state, and local level. This is why smuggling cigarettes from North Carolina to New Jersey/New York is profitable. If you think a bit laterally, you could apply this same conumdrum to Kramer and Neuman "smuggling" recyclables from NY into Michigan for the better rebate. In other words, good luck with that.
If some of the "harder" more addictive substances were legalized and made cheaper we would see a huge increase in abuse.
Look to the crack epidemic in the 80's. Cocaine made so cheap for a powerfully addictive high that a person's habit could be supported by petty theft, burglary, and robbery.
Come on now let's be realistic. If you are a person of interest they get your email BEFORE you do.
Random enough for me. Truly.
Give this man a Cee-gar! He has pinpointed imho THE biggest problem of every one of the occupy x camps. Hippies and some other demographics (religious charities, homeless volunteers, etc.) have a disproportionate amount of easy marks amoung thier ranks. Most hobos use this to live on while savvy criminals use this knowlege to take advantage of the unsuspecting.
Well maybe the pendulum will swing the other way. After that "for a while" time is up the DC owner will rebuild from scratch. They will off-load to those other DCs they own for the duration. During that rebuild the cost-effectiveness of running with "No one" on location (which I translate as minimal staff. Be they employees or contractors.) will be evaluated.
The question will be asked. Is it cheaper to re-build the entire place with updated equipment, processes, and possible wire and ducts too. Or, is it cheaper to go the maintainence route with a full cadre of staff and update a little at a time.
I don't know for certain, but most cases in history support the theory of machine trumps manpower.
In the your second paragraph, you detail PERFECTLY the reasons this move is taking place. Actually, the first two words of that paragraph state the entire goal. "Disasters Aside." I believe that the goal is predictable realiability and uptime for the entire operation. I agree that there must be a staff of engineers for maintainence, but all the maintainence can be put in the schedule, plan, and budget. Even the supervisor/inspectors/watchers fall into the "expected cost" column.
If a data center spends more on prevention vs. recovery and yields near zero down time the profits come in the form of a better service offering than your competition. System failure for any reason short of acts of God should not interrupt your operation to the point of affecting the year's profits.
hmm..
if we keep losing all the good Jobs.
Yes. No. Yes. Yes.
But it doesn't mean I won't either. Thanks AC.
Even now, this is where I keep my Electronic Toll Collection device. I do this for a few reasons.
1. I hate anything obstructing the field of view out of my windshield.
2. I don't always use it when paying the toll.
3. I don't like the idea of it being always readable by road sensors.
As I approach the toll plaza, I reach into my center console grab the bagged device. Remove the device from the bag. Cross the toll plaza. Rebag the device and return to center console. Easier than when I retrieve paper money from my wallet because that is usually deep in my pocket.
Your opinion that moving to mass transit is "good for everyone" smacks of someone who has never tried to use the bus as a commute option. As 6'3" 260 lb adult male the is bus an absolute nightmare. The leg room problem would be laughable if not for the pain of my knees smashed up against the seatback in front of me. Plus, one of my shoulders and most of an arm will always be partially in your seat no matter how far I try to lean the other way and ignore the awkward position of my spine. I would rather take an 8 hour flight in coach than spend 1 hour on a commuter bus.
Look I understand that generally mass transit is better for traffic congestion and the natural environment. Heck, it was even cheaper by about $150 a month than driving. However, if I cannot walk from the bus stop to the office because of 90 minutes of physical torture beforehand then forget it.