[OT] RE: Inappropriate content in Fedora Core 2

[Kenneth Porter]

--On Saturday, August 07, 2004 1:08 AM -0400 Aaron Gaudio 
<prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org> wrote:

> But you're right it is the subjectivity; on the other hand, you can't
> expect the law to spell out every possible scenario (it would just as
> easily be spelling out the loopholes in it).

Attempts to spell it out failed because spelling out the criteria desired 
by the law's proponents made it clear how extreme they were. So they went 
for ambiguity, a tried and true method of passing bad law that favors the 
litigation industry. (Note that in the US, the defendant always pays, even 
if he wins, so there's a built in incentive to sue as much as possible, 
even on slim grounds.)

Another ugly aspect of the system is that our representatives will pass bad 
law so they can claim to be "doing something" about a problem. Never mind 
that the "solution" has no relationship to the problem except the title of 
the bill.

I'm all for laws that reasonably protect us from a hostile work 
environment. What we have now guarantees an oppressive work environment. I 
don't see that as an improvement. And, alas, I see no easy way to fix the 
situation.