If I yell and curse at you, that can be considered provoking, If I yell at you and you come charging at me trying to harm me, then I have a right to defend myself from you.
Except you willfully ignore the part about getting into trouble for fighting and other things, and just leave it at what he likes to listen to and watch. Him getting into trouble for fighting plays into the assumption of the previous 2 and makes it not profoundly ignorant.
They did not take away the email, they just added ads to it. In addition they do it while it is still in transit technically so it is done before reception.
How so? There are only a few "protected" things you cant discriminate against, age, sex, skin color, disabilities, however there are plenty of things you are legally allow to discriminate against.
You do realize that second hand smoke is not the only problem, there is also the residue, which is just as likely a problem as the peanut oil you talk about, but even worst, because it does not just stick to your hands but your entire clothes and then falls off.
As for the last bit and where did I get it from, a quote from you:
"We consider any policy that discriminates against workers for engaging in legal activity (smoking, eating peanuts, wearing perfume) outside of work to be unlawful."
Drinking outside of work is a legal activity, but we dont allow it for lunch, or for people to come in drunk..
I am not an anti-smoking zealot, I dont smoke, and hate to be around smoke because it makes me sick, however I will hang around my friends when they smoke if I want to.
Well you know what they say about slippery slop arguments....
First peanuts.. Peanuts do not jump right off your clothes and affect those around you, like smoke does.
Perfume, if it causes allergies to your coworkers should be banned as well.
How about this: We are allowing the business to do it, and they are deciding to not allow it.
So according to your logic getting drunk during lunch should be allowed on the job?
THE COURT: okay. Welcome back. Please take a seat. We had a few more departures in your absence. let's continue with the questions. the next question is, have you or a family member or someone very close to you ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff, a defendant, or as a witness?
Let's see. On the first row, who would raise their hand to that question? All right. let's go to Mr. Hogan.
PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In 2008, after my company went belly up, the programmer that worked for me filed a lawsuit against me and ultimately, across the next few months, it was dismissed and in such a fashion that neither one of us could sue the other one for that matter.
Read the sentence that starts with "Let's See"
according to the transcript, if you had bother reading it, everyone was asked at the same time the question and asked to raise their hand, he raised his so they went to him for more detail, of which he only gave 1.
Your post makes no sense. It does not matter how much of the thickness comes from the battery, the total thickness is only 1mm thicker, and gets a total of 33 percent more battery.
Except copying in and of itself is not disallowed, if so then apple could not make a phone at all for its copying of samsung and all the other makers before them. Apple has to have a valid patent, and that is where the jury screwed the pooch.
Slashdot Mirror
If I yell and curse at you, that can be considered provoking, If I yell at you and you come charging at me trying to harm me, then I have a right to defend myself from you.
Except you willfully ignore the part about getting into trouble for fighting and other things, and just leave it at what he likes to listen to and watch. Him getting into trouble for fighting plays into the assumption of the previous 2 and makes it not profoundly ignorant.
Correct, but you cant use the 5th to prevent incriminating someone other then yourself, unless doing so would incriminate you.
They did not take away the email, they just added ads to it. In addition they do it while it is still in transit technically so it is done before reception.
How about causing the same issues as smokers have? http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/third-hand-smoke/AN01985
but allowing people to be fuckholes and smoking around other people is ok.
How so? There are only a few "protected" things you cant discriminate against, age, sex, skin color, disabilities, however there are plenty of things you are legally allow to discriminate against.
He is so just he mass murders innocents!!!!
Lets just look at where those studies come from...
killing yourself is one thing, you deciding it is ok to kill me is quite different.
you having an abortion or not does not affect me in any way. You coming with poison residue on your clothes, and coming into contact with me does.
You do realize that second hand smoke is not the only problem, there is also the residue, which is just as likely a problem as the peanut oil you talk about, but even worst, because it does not just stick to your hands but your entire clothes and then falls off. As for the last bit and where did I get it from, a quote from you: "We consider any policy that discriminates against workers for engaging in legal activity (smoking, eating peanuts, wearing perfume) outside of work to be unlawful." Drinking outside of work is a legal activity, but we dont allow it for lunch, or for people to come in drunk.. I am not an anti-smoking zealot, I dont smoke, and hate to be around smoke because it makes me sick, however I will hang around my friends when they smoke if I want to.
Well you know what they say about slippery slop arguments.... First peanuts.. Peanuts do not jump right off your clothes and affect those around you, like smoke does. Perfume, if it causes allergies to your coworkers should be banned as well. How about this: We are allowing the business to do it, and they are deciding to not allow it. So according to your logic getting drunk during lunch should be allowed on the job?
Because you can do it with other job sectors, not just manufacturing. It is perceived, because it is not required to bring jobs back.
In addition to this Apple was destroying the mails for longer then samsung.
THE COURT: okay. Welcome back. Please take a seat. We had a few more departures in your absence. let's continue with the questions. the next question is, have you or a family member or someone very close to you ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff, a defendant, or as a witness? Let's see. On the first row, who would raise their hand to that question? All right. let's go to Mr. Hogan. PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In 2008, after my company went belly up, the programmer that worked for me filed a lawsuit against me and ultimately, across the next few months, it was dismissed and in such a fashion that neither one of us could sue the other one for that matter. Read the sentence that starts with "Let's See"
That they then went to him for more information when he answered yes.
according to the transcript, if you had bother reading it, everyone was asked at the same time the question and asked to raise their hand, he raised his so they went to him for more detail, of which he only gave 1.
you do realize that there is a written transcript of every word that happens in court right?
yes because having a juror who uses incorrect personal information is winning on the merits......
Because that is in anyway what happened.
Your post makes no sense. It does not matter how much of the thickness comes from the battery, the total thickness is only 1mm thicker, and gets a total of 33 percent more battery.
They didnt spend months, more like a week or 2
So you have not used the phone, so dont know how it functions, but it is oh so perdy, so obviously it is just as good of a design or better!!!!
Except copying in and of itself is not disallowed, if so then apple could not make a phone at all for its copying of samsung and all the other makers before them. Apple has to have a valid patent, and that is where the jury screwed the pooch.