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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (37703)	5/10/1999 12:26:00 PM
From: Graystone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

For Legal Purposes or Consensus is immaterial, in this case, agreed. Consensus is never irrelevant. Legal systems predicated upon common law change. Common law often reflects popular opinion. Witness the fact that women are allowed to vote and alcohol is legal. How do you think that came about ? The idea that the crowd can be wrong is appealing when confronted by a mob, however, denying women the vote would not have been possible, keeping alcohol illegal was not possible, consensus made it so even before the laws were passed. This is not commentary about the Webnode3 case. The Webnode3 case has a legal aspect, I am sure. In the end, the legal aspect is dwarfed by the consensus. Business Wire is acting very stupid, like a politician who insists that women should not have the vote, or one who insists that Prohibition is right. Stupid is, as ...

To: Ilaine who wrote (37703)	5/10/1999 1:25:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Copyright bears statutory damages.

To: Ilaine who wrote (37703)	5/10/1999 9:21:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Note Graystone's answer. This is based on a society that recognizes non-objective laws. Which means everything's up for grabs if you have no objectivity. In actuality, in a free society of individuals women should have always had the right to vote, that is if the Constitution and Bill of Rights had been applied objectively to EACH individual from the beginning. Slavery would have been instantly abolished. And there would never have been, nor would be now, laws prohibiting alcohol consumption, or the use of marijuana, cocaine, heroin, etc.