Sharks in the Septic Tank 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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: The Philosopher who wrote (50817)	6/13/2002 3:22:22 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) of 82486

I agree that there apears to be a contract here. But it does not appear to me (in the guise of a reasonable person) to express the intents you allege. The offer appears to be here: Message 17547719 You then presented a counter offer here--where one may safely assume that you accept any and all tenets of the offer to which you do not explicitly offer denial or modification. Message 17549002 So what did Laz intend? He states that "If you agree to this arrangement (which may be moot anyway if she never returns), you're unbanned at Poet's request as of tomorrow." Your counteroffer removed the condition regarding IHUB, but does not appear to have otherwise altered the offer. If Laz did, in fact, unban you the day after this posting took place, then a reasonable person would believe that the contract had been fully executed. You knew full well that the offer was to unban you "tomorrow". In your counter-offer you did not seek to challenge this essential premise. Indeed, you made it obvious that you contemplated the express possibilities that other reasons might indeed come up in the course of time in which Lazarus might exercise his legal authority and right to ban you again. You even go so far as to expressly state that this legal authority would trump your agreement and would remove any practical significance from this informal exchange ("you have the complete discretion to ban anybody on SM at any time for any reason"..."if in future you choose to ban me or anybody else for anything they do on IH or anywhere else on or off the web, you have that power. So that is in any case moot.") Neither of you intended to deprive Lazarus Longfellow of his authority to ban for other reasons where thread hygiene was violated or breached. Both of you were clearly aware that this "agreement" was particular to a "toorabout" as regards Poet, and not a carte blance removal of normal powers to exercise his discretion in other matters of thread hygiene. Indeed, he did not have the authority to rescind his duties and obligations as thread monitor, as I and others had expectations of him to monitor the thread, and to exercise his duties as were contemplated when he chose to make the thread moderated, and to offer it as such to the participation of SI members...

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next