THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: epicure who wrote (5679)	3/29/2002 10:35:37 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (2) of 21057

'Revelation of intimate, personal, or private information about other posters or posting PMs containing such ... ' ... 'is prohibited, etc' ... so, did C's PM to Ish contain 'intimate, personal, or private information'? - would seem to be one question to be asked by the barrister for the defense .... if it did, then there comes the matter of sentencing - a ban of four minutes, or of six? ... the statutes would appear to leave the jury much latitude in this respect Difficult question, to ban C or not to ban ... here's a parallel, the John Robin Sharpe case, in which judgment came just last tuesday - ca.news.yahoo.com 'VANCOUVER, British Columbia (Reuters) - A Canadian man was found not guilty on Tuesday on a charge of possessing child pornography, on the grounds that his sadomasochistic writings had artistic merit even if they were "morally repugnant." ' ... may i hasten to add that this individual is not a member of the forestry community here

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next