Plateforme Level Extreme
Abonnement
Profil corporatif
Produits & Services
Support
Légal
English
2010 Lifetime Achievement Award Recipients
Message
 
 
À
25/10/2010 10:09:23
John Baird
Coatesville, Pennsylvanie, États-Unis
Information générale
Forum:
Visual FoxPro
Catégorie:
Conférences & événements
Divers
Thread ID:
01486402
Message ID:
01486856
Vues:
94
>>>>>>The "community rep" didn't represent me. Frankly I doubt any one would dare speak out against the judges, so that proves nothing. The panel is completely trustworthy and there was no need of a community rep.
>>>>
>>>>Consider lay representation on professional boards (medical, legal) including in Canada. Few of us know who those representatives are or whether their principles match ours, because what really matters is that these people are smart enough to understand what is going on and to be satisfied with what they see the insider majority doing behind the closed doors. A robust process and its supporters may be convinced that they are above reproach but still they will invite such people in so that justice is not only done, it is seen to be done. And because even the very noblest among us sometimes benefit from an outside perspective! The processes to worry about are the ones that are determinedly secret IMHO.
>>>
>>>Trust me, I wholeheartedly agree. I have been exposed to our court system and lawyers. There is no invited watchdog of the courts - in fact a judge may alter the court transcripts, break constitutional law, and unless you are rich, you cannot fight. To see justice done does not come from blindly trusting. They do not invite anyone to watch, and in fact, often deny you the right to record proceedings.
>>>
>>>http://www.chathamdailynews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2760869
>>>
>>>However we all agree that a criminal would not be a good choice for a public watchdog. What this "rep" did was technically identity theft, against a true great in the community, and was publicly admitted. To me this person was a very poor representative of the community.
>>
>>You think that was worse than getting Naomi fired from her job over an online spat? I don't.
>
>
>I agree with Mike on this. Naomi was probably the worst candidate that could have been picked. She is so in it for the self-esteem boost and reward that she would have agreed to anyhting to be included.
>
>Naomi is lucky she's not in prison. If she had done that to me... I would have pushed it...

In prison for impersonating someone else on line? I am not defending what she did but let's keep some perspective.
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Fil
Voir

Click here to load this message in the networking platform