At 11:29 PM 1/2/97 -0600, you wrote:
>This makes *no* sense. If one of my users is threatening to kill another,
>what duty do I have to unsubscribe the threatening party? That will not
>prevent his threatening other users. I may have other duties, but I think
>taking the offending party off the list is not really aimed at the real
>problem. The issue, as you state, is whether the danger is avoidable.
>Maybe, but it likely won't be headed off by taking someone off a mailing
>list, unless I've missed something.
I'm sure that you did.
>Well, this is the opinion of someone who *has* passed the bar. I don't know
>what kind of scenario you laid out for those attorneys, but this really
>makes no sense. It's like saying, "You know that X is stalking Y with the
>intent to kill him/her, so you have a duty to immediately have X's car towed
>for being in a loading zone."
>
No, it's more like this: You are THE manager at a private post office. You
have been told by several people that "Bob Dole", one of your carriers has
threatened to kill them. You do nothing. A month later Bod Dole goes
postal. If you get named in the wrongfull death suit, so know like Jenny
Jones will be, what does the picture look like for you? Rosey?
__________________________________________________________________
Copyright 1996 (c) Penn Jennings
Penn Jennings
jennings@cyberca.com
http://www.cyberca.com/~jennings/
The road to evil is paved with good intentions.
Follow-Ups:
|
|
