[OT] RE: Inappropriate content in Fedora Core 2
Kenneth Porter
shiva at sewingwitch.com
Sat Aug 7 05:46:00 UTC 2004
--On Saturday, August 07, 2004 1:08 AM -0400 Aaron Gaudio
<prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org> wrote:
> But you're right it is the subjectivity; on the other hand, you can't
> expect the law to spell out every possible scenario (it would just as
> easily be spelling out the loopholes in it).
Attempts to spell it out failed because spelling out the criteria desired
by the law's proponents made it clear how extreme they were. So they went
for ambiguity, a tried and true method of passing bad law that favors the
litigation industry. (Note that in the US, the defendant always pays, even
if he wins, so there's a built in incentive to sue as much as possible,
even on slim grounds.)
Another ugly aspect of the system is that our representatives will pass bad
law so they can claim to be "doing something" about a problem. Never mind
that the "solution" has no relationship to the problem except the title of
the bill.
I'm all for laws that reasonably protect us from a hostile work
environment. What we have now guarantees an oppressive work environment. I
don't see that as an improvement. And, alas, I see no easy way to fix the
situation.
More information about the users
mailing list