Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Read the comments (Score 1) 135

by Th3 3vil Mupp3t (#31410828) Attached to: When the Power Goes Out At Google

Looking over the contract we have with Datacom, you'd be hard pressed to have the Managing Director's statements be material in affecting a contract violation. Given that the photos were taken well before any statement was made to the public by a Datacom representative takes at least some of the basis away from your argument of trust.

As for evidence, colleagues of mine have damaged equipment and I have remote monitoring, MRTG graphs and other means of validating facts. How do you think that a particular public statement can absolve a provider of responsibility or compliance to a contract precisely?

The pictures being admissible is another matter altogether - one I'm definitely not qualified to speculate on!

I'm definitely not employed by Datacom, and the fact that I've had to alter my work practices based entirely on photos such as these being published in the past is part of the basis for my contention regarding the issue of these specific photographs being taken. I'm very much not alone in this.

In Nature there are neither rewards nor punishments, there are consequences. -- R.G. Ingersoll