Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (75129)	9/19/2003 4:30:02 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Not on net benefit to society. Although, they might want to know if he is using this vehicle to cause harm to some person or group. That's what I meant. Sort of like an environmental impact statement, a document that lays out the potential for Mojo's approach to do harm. This, in addition to testimony regarding the basis and sincerity of his convictions, would give the administrative judge sufficient information to make a determination. If he doesn't do this at the time of licencing but he is challenged by you and x or by some internal professional entity, he should have the right to appeal to the government agency for an exemption. I'm not so sure about this. Seems to me that if he is sued, that the plaintiff has a right to her day in court. If he petitions for an exception before hand, there is no citizen opposing him so it's between him and the ALJ. Once there is a complainant, though, the complainant's rights must be protected as well. Of course if he wins the suit, then when he petitions for an exemption, the process should go more smoothly. If he loses, though, the ALJ would be hard pressed to give him an exemption and, even if he did, it wouldn't apply retroactively. So it behooves Mojo to get his exemption in advance, perhaps as part of the licensing process.