Well the definition is just so broad, that pretty much any exposure or sexual twist to a crime can get you added. And if they challenge it then they are accused of being soft on child rapists and the like.

More like, what good is a list to protect kids if it's populated by people who are of no threat, and never have been?

I do have to wonder if this will every be challenged as "Cruel and unusual".

They paid their time, if they were to be punished more throw them back behind bars, otherwise stop actively harassing them. Realistically they probably would have gotten off easier had they just committed a good ol' fashioned murder.

Or had a piss behind a dumpster after drinking one night.

It's stupidly easy to get on the list, realistically it's so watered down that it does not really mean anything useful. I looked up the ones near me once and something like half were for BS reasons.

Could not agree more...

I use various kinds of carpentry tools and yes they can be very dangerous if you don't use caution. Pisses me off seeing people being cavalier about safety when working with something dangerous like a saw, or electricity.

Or worse when they blame the tool because they decided to disregard the various safety features and put their thumb in the path of the blade.

Or you know... Judge Dredd

Yep, we've been paying for these upgrades since Clinton but haven't seen a damn thing really.

The upgrades are always too expensive and they don't have the money, so WTF have them been doing with all those service fees for the past couple decade?

They need to be held accountable, give us the upgrades or give us the money.

Yea, I can't see that getting through the Corp Filters/Marketing for a company like Nokia, unless it's a Google translate.

Not just time, they have been getting tax breaks and additional fees since the 90's with the express purpose of investing and upgrading the nation's network infrastructural.

So how far do you take it?

If I am doing carpentry and fall off a ladder and need to go see a doctor and not be able to make it in, is that too an abused sick day?

Both are personal choices.

Could I use one of my sick hours to leave early?

What's the point of having them if i am penalized either way?

I used to be one of those people.
Almost never took a day off, it was too costly. I figured I could either go into work for eight hours, and buy two new games; or not on both.

You got it turned around.

The burden of proof is clearly on the accuser, not defendant. He could remain silent and still win if the accuser does not make his case.

Showing that he suffered damages/loss of business is NOT sufficient to satisfy the burden of proof in a libel case. Otherwise you'd open the door for any and every business to sue over any bad review and could win by simply showing they suffered a loss.

> You're honor, they accused me of discriminating against blacks and I suffered a monetary loss!
>> Do you discriminate?
> Well yes, but I still suffered a loss.
>> I rule in your favor.

There is a difference between posting somthing bad/negative/criminal, like underage drinking; and a company wanting to promote some random interesting fact about itself.

I think they meant to swing it as being news from people will use to base their investment decisions on.

Seems you are not allowed to make straight BS free statements about the factual use of your services by your customers. You have to make sure and layer it in corp BS to the point that only professional analysts can figure out what you're saying.