But the reply in the public forum is not linked to the original, so how will the public find it? I don't understand - they require that the reply is linked, and your suggestion does not do that. You have to accept the reply, verify it and post it on your site because that is where the contentious comment appears. I don't see how the right of rebuttal (otherise known as freedom of speech) could work in any other way. That is why parliament (or whatever you have) meets together, discusses things in one place, and publishes an account. You are asking for the right to make open loop public announcements without taking responsibility for them. That's like slandering someone in the street - it's not on, and you can expect an argument. That's what this law allows - people can argue back and take away some power from the 'WebMasters'.
I disagree with you, and I am telling you so. That is what this law would allow everyone to do. If it were face to face, or a phone call, our discussion would be private. But if you go on the Internet, and make it public, then I should (and will) have the right to reply in public, in the same way (so that it is intelligible). I don't see your point - do you want to say bad things about people, and for them to have no right to rebutt your comments? What is distressing about giving people freedom to give thier point of view?
I can only think the poster means 2% of the G7.
Japan 120m
US 260m
UK 60m
Germany 85m
Canada 30m
France 60m
Italy 60m
---
675 / 18m = 37.5
1/37.5 *100 = 2.6%
It does 80 to the gallon, which is less than a moped/Honda stepthrough. Why noy get a 125 cc morotbike that does 70 to the gallon, but does 70 miles per hour and has a range of 200 miles?
Slashdot Mirror
But the reply in the public forum is not linked to the original, so how will the public find it? I don't understand - they require that the reply is linked, and your suggestion does not do that. You have to accept the reply, verify it and post it on your site because that is where the contentious comment appears. I don't see how the right of rebuttal (otherise known as freedom of speech) could work in any other way. That is why parliament (or whatever you have) meets together, discusses things in one place, and publishes an account. You are asking for the right to make open loop public announcements without taking responsibility for them. That's like slandering someone in the street - it's not on, and you can expect an argument. That's what this law allows - people can argue back and take away some power from the 'WebMasters'.
I disagree with you, and I am telling you so. That is what this law would allow everyone to do. If it were face to face, or a phone call, our discussion would be private. But if you go on the Internet, and make it public, then I should (and will) have the right to reply in public, in the same way (so that it is intelligible). I don't see your point - do you want to say bad things about people, and for them to have no right to rebutt your comments? What is distressing about giving people freedom to give thier point of view?
I never thought you could ever be an ex-scouser. If you are ever a scouser, you are always a scouser. Until death.
I can only think the poster means 2% of the G7. Japan 120m US 260m UK 60m Germany 85m Canada 30m France 60m Italy 60m --- 675 / 18m = 37.5 1/37.5 *100 = 2.6%
I have just landed a great job using Fortran - forget COBOL, Fortran is the way to go.
It does 80 to the gallon, which is less than a moped/Honda stepthrough. Why noy get a 125 cc morotbike that does 70 to the gallon, but does 70 miles per hour and has a range of 200 miles?