Harassment is only if the behaviour is targeted at an individual or identifiable grohup of individuals - not sure that was the case here (seems like the guy was just an asshole in general). It would also have to either be threatening in nature, physical in nature, or on one of the 11 grounds of discrimination.
LOL - that law was completely toothless/ineffective which is why this was enacted:
CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 (80) PART I CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms Marginal note:Rights and freedoms in Canada
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. Fundamental Freedoms Marginal note:Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
No they're not the same, but that does not mean that the latter doesn't exist.
I never claimed it didn't exist - just that "bullying" laws violate rights while slander/libel laws are for false claim disputes between citizens where they belong. I'm not condoning the behaviour - I'm just saying that government has no place in criminalizing it.
Freedom of expression is not unlimited. "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice." that trumps freedom of expression every time.
Freedom of expression does include this as it relates to criminal law up to the point where hate speech is involved. Civil law covers slander / libel so making false claims is not without consequence, but it's not up to criminal judges/law to determine the "truth" of a statement or the "bullying" nature of a comment. Harassment is often misunderstood as limiting freedom of expression - but it doesn't limit expression specifically, rather a pattern of behaviour that could endanger the safety of another individual.
Common-law advises Canadian law, it does not dictate it. If anything the US has a greater obligation under treaty law though the courts often choose to ignore that part of the US constitution. maliqua was right, spirit of the law comes before common-law.
Also, this guy is NUTS for pleading guilty - the law is a complete violation of freedom of expression rights.
Exactly why nobody was buying what the rep was selling. CRTC's questions are usually rather passive but in this case they grilled the Ontario rep and poked so many holes in his presentation it was embarrassing.
You're right, courts do not have magical powers - but the rule of law and application of the law is within their domain. If it's not enforceable, it's not up to the courts to enforce it beyond issuing court orders to be enforced by others in the government.
hunwha? The legitimacy you speak of is the courts exercising the rule of law. The courts in all 3 countries established that existing laws put foreign companies operating inside territorial borders in a meaningful way (example: amazon.ca or attempting to earn profit from people in the territory) are subject to the laws of that territory. The same law applies to every company regardless of sector
Courts in the US, Canada, and the UK all disagree with your statement. Operating in a country does not require you to have a physical presence anymore, just "meaningful ties".
I actually watched the hearing live - the CRTC (federal) asked the Ontario government representative (one presenter of many) "what are you going to do when the headlines read Ontario Government Wants To Regulate the Internet?". He of course tried to side step it as "just new media" but no one was really buying into what the Ontario rep was selling.
A thousand times this... I'd even take their old search algorithms over their latest "guessing" and "missing terms" crap. In all the time I've used Google I've never had to use anything beyond +/- and "" to find what I wanted... now it's a mess of buggy "search tools", constantly having to switch to "verbatim", a mass of exclusion terms, etc. It's become an absolute nightmare to use. Unfortunately there's no competition to turn to (I've tried the top 6 alternatives, they just can't compete except for Bing which is down right ugly and not much better on its assumptive behaviours)
It's not over-thinking it, it's just basic common sense. A decade or so ago when I worked at a video store I had a massive following (turned out to be 50% of the business) because I recognized the simple fact that when someone asks for a recommendation, they don't want what you thought was good, they wanted what they think is good. Customer who comes in and loves b grade horrors isn't going to like Downton Abby, but they'll love Eight Legged Freaks. Games are no different. I can swear up and down that Bioshock, System Shock 2, and Masters of Orion 2 are some of the best games ever made - but if the person prefers RPGs they're not going to agree with me.
Not saying don't ask these types of questions but if you're going to ask the community about this sort of thing be more specific as overly broad questions serve no one but those seeking to argue.
Community is one thing but unfocused questions like these are just flame-bait.
What games do you make sure to always have on hand for get-togethers
What's the audience? D&D is an awesome must have game for a very specific audience and they might enjoy W40k but neither will work for most audiences.
What's the intelligence level? Even the "average" audience can very widely in what they like based on the level of discourse among those participating. Balderdash is phenomenal when played by a room full of intellectuals but falls flat among a group who are always making up stuff because no one in the group ever knows the real definition.
Are there kids involved? Does it need to be "friendly" enough as to be random? Are video games appropriate or will there be some who won't get the controllers? Men, women, or mixed? Active or passive? Is there a goal beyond just playing (ie: get to know you games or team building or whatever)? Intention to get drunk?
The point is these types of questions are far too ambiguous and impossible to answer so they become "I like X" "X sucks Y is so much better" "Screw X and Y they don't hold a candle to Z". Only the original poster knows the specifics so X,Y, & Z might be great in their own situation but for the OP are not even remotely appropriate.
"Must have" games: Deck of cards x2 including jokers. Beyond that its anyone's guess. Console/computer specific: Mario cart & Super Smash Brothers. (this is coming from a non-nintendo gamer)
Proper diagnosis is not baloni anymore. 8-12 hours of intensive testing that objectively measures performance against millions who've taken the same tests gives a very reliable result that can be backed up with a CT scan or MRI.
That's NOT what its all about. It's primarily an executive function disorder. Every aspect of day to day life, including the "pleasurable" aspects are affected. ADHD-H the hyperactivity is to increase blood flow to the brain to allow the communication to occur between the problem solving centres of the brain and the executive function. The attention and emotion centres border the executive area and so, depending on the person, they'll end up distracted or they'll become emotional/stressed.
If what you said was even remotely true then that wouldn't explain ADHD-C/ADHD-I (about 30% of diagnoses) ADHD-I can cause you to focus so intently on what you're doing and be unable to switch (be cause the executive function is screwed up) so you'll sit there doing the same thing and plow through. Doesn't matter how boring or how intensely rewarding it is. I'm just coming down off a 37 hour episode of the most mind numbingly inane research that got me zero reward and set me back. I'll take me 48 hours to recover minimum before I can get back to being productive (hopefully). It's great when I spend that time doing something productive like coding but can ruin a week.
Worst part is, I can't control when it happens or what triggers it because things like self discipline and control are regulated by the executive function centre.
It is. ADD and ADHD are fake "disorders" invented by doctors and pharmaceutical companies to get kids addicted to their drugs and make lifelong customers.
When I was a kid, nobody had ADD/ADHD because it hadn't been fabricated yet.
You were born prior to 1775? Must suck stepping on your balls so much.
Slashdot Mirror
Harassment is only if the behaviour is targeted at an individual or identifiable grohup of individuals - not sure that was the case here (seems like the guy was just an asshole in general). It would also have to either be threatening in nature, physical in nature, or on one of the 11 grounds of discrimination.
LOL - that law was completely toothless/ineffective which is why this was enacted:
CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 (80)
PART I
CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
Marginal note:Rights and freedoms in Canada
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Fundamental Freedoms
Marginal note:Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
You think hate speech is not protected? Of course it is.
Not in Canada. In the US most definitely it's protected. In Canada it's a crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No they're not the same, but that does not mean that the latter doesn't exist.
I never claimed it didn't exist - just that "bullying" laws violate rights while slander/libel laws are for false claim disputes between citizens where they belong. I'm not condoning the behaviour - I'm just saying that government has no place in criminalizing it.
If it can't happen at the quantum level it's not sound it's vibration.
Physical harm and emotional harm are not the same and you were just being hyperbolic.
Freedom of expression is not unlimited. "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice." that trumps freedom of expression every time.
Freedom of expression does include this as it relates to criminal law up to the point where hate speech is involved. Civil law covers slander / libel so making false claims is not without consequence, but it's not up to criminal judges/law to determine the "truth" of a statement or the "bullying" nature of a comment. Harassment is often misunderstood as limiting freedom of expression - but it doesn't limit expression specifically, rather a pattern of behaviour that could endanger the safety of another individual.
No, it isn't.
Freedom of speech does not mean you have no repercussion for lying about people. It never has/
Canada doesn't have freedom of speech.
Common-law advises Canadian law, it does not dictate it. If anything the US has a greater obligation under treaty law though the courts often choose to ignore that part of the US constitution. maliqua was right, spirit of the law comes before common-law.
Also, this guy is NUTS for pleading guilty - the law is a complete violation of freedom of expression rights.
Exactly why nobody was buying what the rep was selling. CRTC's questions are usually rather passive but in this case they grilled the Ontario rep and poked so many holes in his presentation it was embarrassing.
You're right, courts do not have magical powers - but the rule of law and application of the law is within their domain. If it's not enforceable, it's not up to the courts to enforce it beyond issuing court orders to be enforced by others in the government.
Justice being served is a separate issue.
More than that, because of rule of law they can simply go after their money through various treaties.
hunwha? The legitimacy you speak of is the courts exercising the rule of law. The courts in all 3 countries established that existing laws put foreign companies operating inside territorial borders in a meaningful way (example: amazon.ca or attempting to earn profit from people in the territory) are subject to the laws of that territory. The same law applies to every company regardless of sector
Courts in the US, Canada, and the UK all disagree with your statement. Operating in a country does not require you to have a physical presence anymore, just "meaningful ties".
I actually watched the hearing live - the CRTC (federal) asked the Ontario government representative (one presenter of many) "what are you going to do when the headlines read Ontario Government Wants To Regulate the Internet?". He of course tried to side step it as "just new media" but no one was really buying into what the Ontario rep was selling.
My bet is they'll end up being a form of Sea Cucumber or Acorn Worm.
Yup, that's a "verbatim" search.
Yes! Where? I want it!
A thousand times this... I'd even take their old search algorithms over their latest "guessing" and "missing terms" crap. In all the time I've used Google I've never had to use anything beyond +/- and "" to find what I wanted... now it's a mess of buggy "search tools", constantly having to switch to "verbatim", a mass of exclusion terms, etc. It's become an absolute nightmare to use. Unfortunately there's no competition to turn to (I've tried the top 6 alternatives, they just can't compete except for Bing which is down right ugly and not much better on its assumptive behaviours)
http://www.trueachievements.co... as this thread illustrates, one person's gem is another's turd. Or the reverse http://www.trueachievements.co...
It's not over-thinking it, it's just basic common sense. A decade or so ago when I worked at a video store I had a massive following (turned out to be 50% of the business) because I recognized the simple fact that when someone asks for a recommendation, they don't want what you thought was good, they wanted what they think is good. Customer who comes in and loves b grade horrors isn't going to like Downton Abby, but they'll love Eight Legged Freaks. Games are no different. I can swear up and down that Bioshock, System Shock 2, and Masters of Orion 2 are some of the best games ever made - but if the person prefers RPGs they're not going to agree with me.
Not saying don't ask these types of questions but if you're going to ask the community about this sort of thing be more specific as overly broad questions serve no one but those seeking to argue.
Community is one thing but unfocused questions like these are just flame-bait.
What games do you make sure to always have on hand for get-togethers
What's the audience? D&D is an awesome must have game for a very specific audience and they might enjoy W40k but neither will work for most audiences.
What's the intelligence level? Even the "average" audience can very widely in what they like based on the level of discourse among those participating. Balderdash is phenomenal when played by a room full of intellectuals but falls flat among a group who are always making up stuff because no one in the group ever knows the real definition.
Are there kids involved? Does it need to be "friendly" enough as to be random? Are video games appropriate or will there be some who won't get the controllers? Men, women, or mixed? Active or passive? Is there a goal beyond just playing (ie: get to know you games or team building or whatever)? Intention to get drunk?
The point is these types of questions are far too ambiguous and impossible to answer so they become "I like X" "X sucks Y is so much better" "Screw X and Y they don't hold a candle to Z". Only the original poster knows the specifics so X,Y, & Z might be great in their own situation but for the OP are not even remotely appropriate.
"Must have" games: Deck of cards x2 including jokers. Beyond that its anyone's guess. Console/computer specific: Mario cart & Super Smash Brothers. (this is coming from a non-nintendo gamer)
Kari was in episode 2 and randomly through season 1, Season 2 was the first trio (Kari, Tori, and Scotti)
Proper diagnosis is not baloni anymore. 8-12 hours of intensive testing that objectively measures performance against millions who've taken the same tests gives a very reliable result that can be backed up with a CT scan or MRI.
That's NOT what its all about. It's primarily an executive function disorder. Every aspect of day to day life, including the "pleasurable" aspects are affected. ADHD-H the hyperactivity is to increase blood flow to the brain to allow the communication to occur between the problem solving centres of the brain and the executive function. The attention and emotion centres border the executive area and so, depending on the person, they'll end up distracted or they'll become emotional/stressed.
If what you said was even remotely true then that wouldn't explain ADHD-C/ADHD-I (about 30% of diagnoses) ADHD-I can cause you to focus so intently on what you're doing and be unable to switch (be cause the executive function is screwed up) so you'll sit there doing the same thing and plow through. Doesn't matter how boring or how intensely rewarding it is. I'm just coming down off a 37 hour episode of the most mind numbingly inane research that got me zero reward and set me back. I'll take me 48 hours to recover minimum before I can get back to being productive (hopefully). It's great when I spend that time doing something productive like coding but can ruin a week.
Worst part is, I can't control when it happens or what triggers it because things like self discipline and control are regulated by the executive function centre.
It is. ADD and ADHD are fake "disorders" invented by doctors and pharmaceutical companies to get kids addicted to their drugs and make lifelong customers.
When I was a kid, nobody had ADD/ADHD because it hadn't been fabricated yet.
You were born prior to 1775? Must suck stepping on your balls so much.