Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bryan

  1. 7 minutes ago, TimG said:

    The software industry would be in big trouble if the courts did not enforce "perpetual rights to use and distribute". If Facebook ran into problems it was because they did not ask for those rights (probably because it would scare users away). Your argument was that no terms can be added. That is false. There are terms that can be added but each website may not wish to add such terms because of negative user reactions. 

    The reason Facebook has lost these cases is because they over-reached by claiming perpetual rights. If they had specified a set period of time after which they expired, they likely would have been OK. 

  2. 2 hours ago, Greg said:

    You don't have the right to revoke your licence, and I DO I have a perpetual license to publish your comments - period.

    You shouldn't shoot your mouth off about things you know nothing about. You absolutely do not own anyone's content here. There is nothing that you can put in the terms of service or the rules of the forum that can change that. Legally is it NOT yours. I don't have a reason to want to remove my content, but some people might have very good reasons for it. I guarantee you if anyone decided to get a lawyer involved, you would lose. 

    Again, even Facebook and Twitter cannot assert that right, even though it's in the terms of service. You can edit and delete any and all of your content there, because they have smart lawyers that are protecting their owners from themselves.

  3. 6 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:


    To that end, I have saved all my MLW "content"...it is indexed and searchable offline.  

    When things get slow in real time, I go back and read old topics for a good laugh.

    Between MLW archives, Google cache, and the NSA, we can be immortal !

    You can save your content, you can republish it, and you absolutely can delete it too.

    Ever read Facebook or Twitter's claims to the right of publication of your posts? Far more onerous than Greg's. But guess what, you can still delete any any all content as much as you want whenever you want.

  4. 6 hours ago, Greg said:

    No, the rules are clear on this:

    By participating in these forums, you give me the licence to use the copy you provide.  Everyone's contributions are part of a greater discussion, I'm not going to allow someone to arbitrarily remove part of the conversation just because they're having a tantrum. Also, some postings are quoted by other members, do you expect me and the other members to selectively edit out the quoted responses just because you want the forum wiped clean of your words?

    I'm not changing my mind on this rule, so lets drop this discussion right now.

      I have the right to revoke your license at any time, it's my content. Your right does not extend beyond publishing the conversation at the time that it happens, you do not have perpetual license to it.

  5. On 1/31/2017 at 3:41 PM, kactus said:

    Now you tell me what risk does a 5 year old boy of american cititizen pose on national security!?!?!? This s just wrong....



    The problem is, ISIS has released footage of kids as young as 4 being trained to be assassins. These little kids are actually  shooting and beheading real people.  I'm not going to post it here, it's really graphic. 

    If they think they have a reason for extra caution for the parents, then they have legitimate reason for extra caution with the kids.

  6. 2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

    I'm cheering it.  Kinda.  No one likes a liar, but I'm okay with FPTP. 

    Yeah. My reaction depends on what the actual question is. Sure, I'm happy that FPTP is staying. What I'm not happy about is that people voted for Trudeau based on promises that were obviously false when he was making them. But I'm also somewhat resolute in that I already knew that Liberals virtually never keep any of their promises.

    At the risk of conflating US and Canadian politics (and instigating thread drift along the way), I also think that Trudeau's typical promise breaking behaviour only further emphasizes how remarkable President Trump is -- no one expected a politician that actually went about doing specifically what he promised to do. That's not how politicians behave on either end of the political spectrum or on either side of the border. It's quite jarring.

  7. 1 hour ago, blueblood said:

    Ahem: harpers record:

    gst cut - check

    stupid child tax - check

    income trust - fail

    tfsa - check

    income splitting - check

    balance budget after deficit forced by coalition- check mate

    Even income trust was because the situation changed substantially. Large corporations were using them as a loophole to declare themselves as income trusts to avoid paying taxes. When the conditions change, so must the solutions.


    In all seriousness, it's difficult to find another Canadian politician whose record of doing what he said he would is as strong as Harper's was.

  8. 8 hours ago, Greg said:

    No one is allowed to delete all their posts - period.  

    This is false. The content does not belong to you, it belongs to the people who wrote it. 

    I can delete or edit all of the content that I want to on any and all other forums and social media site that I go to. Privacy concerns might come up down the line that would make removing a person's online posts a neccessity, and it is important that it remains possible for the user to do that. 

    I have no reason to delete my posts here, but I will not be participating in a forum that thinks they own my content.

    • Like 1
  9. 19 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

    IMO a state-funded public broadcaster should be as objective as it can be. 

    Should be, but pretty much every place that has one sees it plant its flag decidedly on the left side of centre.

    In some ways, I almost wonder if it's a good idea for a state broadcaster to be reporting on politics at all. The guy you expose today could be your boss tomorrow, not a great idea to give people incentive to cut your budget or shut you down.

  10. 5 hours ago, dialamah said:

    Seems to me only an idiot insists his or her opinion is more accurate than actual measured data.   


    If it were just an opinion, you might have a point. Relying on measured data assumes that these incidents are actually recorded as such by the government. That's one of the biggest stresses that the people doing the investigations have to deal with. Politics interferes with the process, and charges are rarely ever filed regardless of the extent of the fraud. More often than not, nothing at all happens to the people who are caught red handed. 

  11. On January 20, 2017 at 6:28 PM, cybercoma said:

    I'm sure it happens, but the vast majority of welfare "fraud" occurs due to simple paperwork mistakes. To say they routinely catch people on social media defrauding the welfare system is inconsistent with the data.

    I know the people who are catching the fraudsters -- they are BUSY. Blatant outright fraud is rampant. 

  12. 9 hours ago, August1991 said:

     Is a Facebook picture admissible as evidence? 

    For sure. Social services here in Manitoba routinely catches welfare fraud because people post the evidence online for the investigators to see. Some of them post so much that you can collect far more than what you'd get if you spend the time and money on physical surveillance.

  • Create New...