PayPal and Visa are dicks.
-
I just thought of a small change to the law that might fix it - instead of requiring breach of contract to sue for purely monetary damage, allow people to sue over purely monetary damage in all cases. That pretty much closes the loophole. If a company refuses to service you and thereby does non-monetary damages you could already sue them anyway. Or, alternatively, mandate that contracts never include a clause that says they can "terminate for any or no reason", because that's unreasonable anyway.
David1987 wrote:
That pretty much closes the loophole. If a company refuses to service you and thereby does non-monetary damages you could already sue them anyway.
So Paypal cannot create any terms of service? You can do anything and everything you wish while using them as your agent and they have nothing to say about it? What color is the sky on your planet?
David1987 wrote:
Or, alternatively, mandate that contracts never include a clause that says they can "terminate for any or no reason", because that's unreasonable anyway.
That's slavery. Would you sign a contract that said you couldn't quit?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
David1987 wrote:
I dont give a flying f*** about what the law says, I'm talking about how it should be.
So the United States needs to change the way we do business to suit the world view of one pissed-off Englishman? Are you perhaps channeling George III?
David1987 wrote:
There is a huge difference between a person quitting his job and a company refusing the provide a service. They are miles apart.
Only in your mind. I think you should talk to the many people here on CP who are incorporated and serve as the sole employee of the corporation that they own. They would, I suspect, be surprised to discover that they should be required to accept any job offered to them. If you wish to argue that 1-person corporations are different, then how about 2-person? 3? 4? 5? When does slavery kick in?
David1987 wrote:
The only entity that can ever decide whose reasons are best is the court
And they claim American are litigious. Whgen Wikileaks signed on with Paypal, they agreed to allow "PayPal to permanently restrict their account due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that the payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity." Wikileaks made lots of noise about suing Paypal, but as far as I know, has done nothing - given the unambiguous language of the above which is a slight abridgment of Paypal's contract, I'd say that Wikileaks would win shortly after pigs flew and snowballs fights were being held in hell. Now you may wish that betraying one's country was not illegal, but nonetheless, that is what Bradley Manning - with the encouragement, facilitation, and instruction of Wikileaks, did, and that is not only considered illegal, but highly immoral in the U.S. of A.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
I'm still not English, but whatever.
Oakman wrote:
They would, I suspect, be surprised to discover that they should be required to accept any job offered to them.
Not necessarily. They could have a good reason for refusing. Ok so wikileaks violated the contract. Fine. I'm not a big fan of wikileaks, contrary to what you may think. They're a bit of a grayhat IMO, a nice mixture of good and bad.. Anyway my main problem is not that they cut off wikileaks, but that there is no room to complain under ANY circumstances. They're now also refusing service to several websites that didn't do anything illegal.
-
It's not about "not allowing a person to do a certain job", but not allowing them to do it for someone specific. Domain name seizures are just that. Ordering a company (ICANN) to stop proving a service (DNS) to specific companies and websites.
Oakman wrote:
Men ... anointed with public office ... deciding what jobs you can take (and presumably then, what jobs you cannot)?
In response to "and presumably then, what jobs you cannot":
David1987 wrote:
They already can and frequently do.
Hence my response. However, the question remains.:
David1987 wrote:
not allowing them to do it for someone specific
For whom, specifically, has a public official told you cannot work? As for Domain Name seizure, there are ways: e.g., a Chinese registrar and a Cocos Islands Top-Level Domain :) ).
The 1-legged bar stool of understanding is supported by booze. Equipped with that, I know everything, and the rest of you are just a bunch of ignorant peasants with dung on your boots. A R G H
-
David1987 wrote:
That pretty much closes the loophole. If a company refuses to service you and thereby does non-monetary damages you could already sue them anyway.
So Paypal cannot create any terms of service? You can do anything and everything you wish while using them as your agent and they have nothing to say about it? What color is the sky on your planet?
David1987 wrote:
Or, alternatively, mandate that contracts never include a clause that says they can "terminate for any or no reason", because that's unreasonable anyway.
That's slavery. Would you sign a contract that said you couldn't quit?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
That's slavery. Would you sign a contract that said you couldn't quit?
I never said that. You changed that nicely. But maybe it wasn't such a good idea. Although, let's go with that, just for the heck of it. I could argue that slavery isn't bad when it's a person-who-is-a-company. Every single person in that company could quit anyway if they don't like it.
Oakman wrote:
So Paypal cannot create any terms of service? You can do anything and everything you wish while using them as your agent and they have nothing to say about it?
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. Being able to sue does not guarantee you win.
-
Actually no. The case of wikileaks I can sort of understand. Not completely, but I see their point. They are now however targeting random others that did not hurt the US in any way. edit: also, your post borders on libel.
David1987 wrote:
They are now however targeting random others that did not hurt the US in any way.
citation? I just spent ten minutes on Google looking for something like that and found zip, nada, zero stories.
David1987 wrote:
your post borders on libel.
You seem to know as much about libel laws as you do employment laws. I may have hurt your feelings by saying I'd bet you hadn't thought things through, but such a statement injures neither your reputation nor your standing in the community. I will give you some advice, however: If your feelings bruise easily, you should stay out of internet forums.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Oakman wrote:
Men ... anointed with public office ... deciding what jobs you can take (and presumably then, what jobs you cannot)?
In response to "and presumably then, what jobs you cannot":
David1987 wrote:
They already can and frequently do.
Hence my response. However, the question remains.:
David1987 wrote:
not allowing them to do it for someone specific
For whom, specifically, has a public official told you cannot work? As for Domain Name seizure, there are ways: e.g., a Chinese registrar and a Cocos Islands Top-Level Domain :) ).
The 1-legged bar stool of understanding is supported by booze. Equipped with that, I know everything, and the rest of you are just a bunch of ignorant peasants with dung on your boots. A R G H
ict558 wrote:
For whom, specifically, has a public official told you cannot work?
They never did such a thing to me. They did however tell that to a child-rapist who wanted to work at a kindergarten. And many companies are not allowed to do busyness with certain entities in for example Syria.
-
David1987 wrote:
They are now however targeting random others that did not hurt the US in any way.
citation? I just spent ten minutes on Google looking for something like that and found zip, nada, zero stories.
David1987 wrote:
your post borders on libel.
You seem to know as much about libel laws as you do employment laws. I may have hurt your feelings by saying I'd bet you hadn't thought things through, but such a statement injures neither your reputation nor your standing in the community. I will give you some advice, however: If your feelings bruise easily, you should stay out of internet forums.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
It's on torrentfreak somewhere IIRC.
Oakman wrote:
such a statement injures neither your reputation nor your standing in the community
Hence "borders on". learn2readplz? edit: on the other hand, you could be in violation of bullet 3 of section 12 of the codeproject ToS. Of course only a moderator could decide whether you actually are, but if you get any more offensive I might just ask them to take a look.. edit2: or to put that in your language, what part of bullet 3 of section 12 of the codeproject ToS do you not understand?
Oakman wrote:
If your feelings bruise easily, you should stay out of internet forums.
My feelings don't bruise. I'm arguing. And unlike you I don't typically resort to insults and sneaky defamation in an attempt to win, because ad hominem is a logical fallacy.
modified on Saturday, July 23, 2011 1:29 PM
-
It's on torrentfreak somewhere IIRC.
Oakman wrote:
such a statement injures neither your reputation nor your standing in the community
Hence "borders on". learn2readplz? edit: on the other hand, you could be in violation of bullet 3 of section 12 of the codeproject ToS. Of course only a moderator could decide whether you actually are, but if you get any more offensive I might just ask them to take a look.. edit2: or to put that in your language, what part of bullet 3 of section 12 of the codeproject ToS do you not understand?
Oakman wrote:
If your feelings bruise easily, you should stay out of internet forums.
My feelings don't bruise. I'm arguing. And unlike you I don't typically resort to insults and sneaky defamation in an attempt to win, because ad hominem is a logical fallacy.
modified on Saturday, July 23, 2011 1:29 PM
David1987 wrote:
edit: on the other hand, you could be in violation of bullet 3 of section 12 of the codeproject ToS. Of course only a moderator could decide whether you actually are, but if you get any more offensive I might just ask them to take a look..
By all means, do, you pompous little twit.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
David1987 wrote:
edit: on the other hand, you could be in violation of bullet 3 of section 12 of the codeproject ToS. Of course only a moderator could decide whether you actually are, but if you get any more offensive I might just ask them to take a look..
By all means, do, you pompous little twit.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
ict558 wrote:
For whom, specifically, has a public official told you cannot work?
They never did such a thing to me. They did however tell that to a child-rapist who wanted to work at a kindergarten. And many companies are not allowed to do busyness with certain entities in for example Syria.
David1987 wrote:
They did however tell that to a child-rapist who wanted to work at a kindergarten.
You're a very silly man[^], and I'm not going to talk to you. :)
The 1-legged bar stool of understanding is supported by booze. Equipped with that, I know everything, and the rest of you are just a bunch of ignorant peasants with dung on your boots. A R G H
-
See, I thought you were an adult. But now I have my doubts. (see, I can play this game too, it's just pointless) Come on kid, we were having a discussion. I have no actually interest in stopping it. Just trying to push it back into line.
David1987 wrote:
we were having a discussion
Anytime someone decides that since he's lost the argument, he'll resort to threats, however childish, laughable and meaningless, it's not a discussion.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
David1987 wrote:
we were having a discussion
Anytime someone decides that since he's lost the argument, he'll resort to threats, however childish, laughable and meaningless, it's not a discussion.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Nice try, but the same goes for insults, and you started that. Now, are you going go on with the discussion or what? Not that there's much point though, you clearly believe in freedom as the highest good including the freedom to screw people over without giving them a chance to defend themselves.
-
Nice try, but the same goes for insults, and you started that. Now, are you going go on with the discussion or what? Not that there's much point though, you clearly believe in freedom as the highest good including the freedom to screw people over without giving them a chance to defend themselves.
David1987 wrote:
you clearly believe in freedom as the highest good including the freedom to screw people over without giving them a chance to defend themselves.
OMG!!! I am sure that's libelous, or maybe it's slander! Quick,quick, send an email to Chris and complain that someone is being a meanie!!! Or maybe call out the National Guard? Write to the United Nations? Ask Allah to strike him dead??? A world where I can be insulted is not a just world! Ohmeohmy! :(( Buzz off, kid. I have something important to do now - I just emptied the dryer and I have to sort socks which is a much higher priority than trying to help you to reason.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
David1987 wrote:
you clearly believe in freedom as the highest good including the freedom to screw people over without giving them a chance to defend themselves.
OMG!!! I am sure that's libelous, or maybe it's slander! Quick,quick, send an email to Chris and complain that someone is being a meanie!!! Or maybe call out the National Guard? Write to the United Nations? Ask Allah to strike him dead??? A world where I can be insulted is not a just world! Ohmeohmy! :(( Buzz off, kid. I have something important to do now - I just emptied the dryer and I have to sort socks which is a much higher priority than trying to help you to reason.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Actually no. The case of wikileaks I can sort of understand. Not completely, but I see their point. They are now however targeting random others that did not hurt the US in any way. edit: also, your post borders on libel.
David1987 wrote:
They are now however targeting random others that did not hurt the US in any way.
Well, they targeted Bradley Manning, by suspending his Action Group's account, and then immediately reinstating it. Apparently PayPal considers the act of (allegedly) betraying one's country to be less of an offence than its (alleged) encouragement, facilitation, and instruction by Wikileaks, which remains suspended. (Somewhat ironically, most of my Googled results were the 'right to refuse service' clauses of the companies using PayPal.)
The 1-legged bar stool of understanding is supported by booze. Equipped with that, I know everything, and the rest of you are just a bunch of ignorant peasants with dung on your boots. A R G H
-
David1987 wrote:
They are now however targeting random others that did not hurt the US in any way.
Well, they targeted Bradley Manning, by suspending his Action Group's account, and then immediately reinstating it. Apparently PayPal considers the act of (allegedly) betraying one's country to be less of an offence than its (alleged) encouragement, facilitation, and instruction by Wikileaks, which remains suspended. (Somewhat ironically, most of my Googled results were the 'right to refuse service' clauses of the companies using PayPal.)
The 1-legged bar stool of understanding is supported by booze. Equipped with that, I know everything, and the rest of you are just a bunch of ignorant peasants with dung on your boots. A R G H
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
Imagine if Oakman was in the senior management, I could see him retaliating in such a way when someone attacks his ideals!
So you think I have the right to say, "I don't want to work for you!"? I'll bet David really agrees. He just hasn't thought it through and is responding emotionally because he think Wikileaks are white hats so they should get special favors.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Of course and I personally have done that, refused a contract b/c I did not agree with the ethics of a company (Andersons Consulting). It's just that you are one of the more polarised/outspoken personalities on CP and even David can probably see you responding in this way.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Of course and I personally have done that, refused a contract b/c I did not agree with the ethics of a company (Andersons Consulting). It's just that you are one of the more polarised/outspoken personalities on CP and even David can probably see you responding in this way.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
It's just that you are one of the more polarised/outspoken personalities on CP and even David can probably see you responding in this way.
In my defense, no matter how far back you go, you will see that when I am the OP in this forum, I have been posting non-inflammatory tidbits, jokes, and generally innocuous concepts. I save my political and economic diatribes for Soapbox 1. However, when someone posts something like the OP of this thread, I have trouble keeping my mouth shut. Some of us are blessed with the persona of Mike, I am stuck with that of Mannie. :sigh:
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
David1987 wrote:
you clearly believe in freedom as the highest good including the freedom to screw people over without giving them a chance to defend themselves.
OMG!!! I am sure that's libelous, or maybe it's slander! Quick,quick, send an email to Chris and complain that someone is being a meanie!!! Or maybe call out the National Guard? Write to the United Nations? Ask Allah to strike him dead??? A world where I can be insulted is not a just world! Ohmeohmy! :(( Buzz off, kid. I have something important to do now - I just emptied the dryer and I have to sort socks which is a much higher priority than trying to help you to reason.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
I'm posting this to both parties involved in this primary school playground spat: I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are both mature, sensible adults in real life. As such: Let it go. Drop it and walk away. Agree to disagree, shake hands and apologise, or take it offline. Whatever. But not here.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I'm posting this to both parties involved in this primary school playground spat: I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are both mature, sensible adults in real life. As such: Let it go. Drop it and walk away. Agree to disagree, shake hands and apologise, or take it offline. Whatever. But not here.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP