[過去ﾛｸﾞ] Let's talk with Jim-san. Part2 (837ﾚｽ)
上下前次1-新
このｽﾚｯﾄﾞは過去ﾛｸﾞ倉庫に格納されています｡
次ｽﾚ検索 歴削→次ｽﾚ 栞削→次ｽﾚ 過去ﾛｸﾞﾒﾆｭｰ
117: 2006/07/30(日)00:55 ID:w51oQHIT(1) AAS
I love you,Mr.Jim.
118: 2006/07/30(日)04:56 ID:BJ/vM7hg(1) AAS
The same method as 2ch will be impossible.
It is desirable to pay a countervalue and to employ the staff of exclusive use.
119: ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日)11:19 ID:H0sTRxna(1/8) BE AAS
Jim-san,
Please understand the volunteer system of 2ch at 1st.
* The deletion system of 2ch is not perfect.
* The deletion system of 2ch needs a lot of volunteer.
* The participation reason for the volunteer of 2ch has only their own motivation.
120(1): ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日)11:33 ID:H0sTRxna(2/8) BE AAS
To keep the scale, you should defend them from the risks.
I think that the following concepts are necessary to defend them.
What is Deleter?
Deleter can delete only for user's convenience.
Deleter cannot do the deletion that makes the infringement of right and the law, etc. grounds.
Only Mr. Jim can judge it.
Deleter is a user.
Only the deletion as the user is admitted in Deleter.
Deleter cannot take part in the site management and the policy as the organization.
>>◆79EROOYuCc
省1
121: ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日)11:49 ID:H0sTRxna(3/8) BE AAS
If I cannot defend them, I cannot consign the deletion to them.
So, I cannot become a leader until Jim-san understands my concepts.
122(1): ◆MARY/2Kkkc 2006/07/30(日)14:33 ID:Cwh6Szby(1/4) AAS
>>120
>>Deleter cannot do the deletion that makes the infringement of right and the law.
You seem like SAMURAI, and cool! however,
I do not understand your intension.
Could you give me a reason and an example?
123(1): ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日)15:17 ID:H0sTRxna(4/8) BE AAS
>>122
2ch has Hiroyuki-san. But, BBSPINK doesn't have the person in charge in Japan.
Deleter comes to have to delete the malfeasance and the violation if there is no limitation.
When Deleter was not able to be deleted, this will become a legal risk.
Deleter is not a specialist of the law.
To avoid the risk even if message is the justifiable criticism, Deleter must delete it.
Please understand the lawsuit risk of Deleter is larger than that of Mr. Jim in Japan.
Please hire professionals if you request the interpretation of the law to Deleter.
If Mr. Jim requests it to the any volunteers, I cannot agree.
124: ◆MARY/2Kkkc 2006/07/30(日)16:03 ID:Cwh6Szby(2/4) AAS
>>123
>>Deleter cannot do the deletion that makes the infringement of right and the law.
So, your meaning is that a deleter does not need to follow the law when he/she judges a deletion, but he/she must follow only a deletion policy.
The reason is because he/she is not a professional lawyer, and he/she has a legal risk since Jim is not in Japan.
Is this your intention?
What kind of a legal risk we have?
Could you give me an example?
125(1): ◆yzY8OufLJI 2006/07/30(日)17:02 ID:lwOJyOIw(1) AAS
>◆IZUMI162i6
>◆MARY/2Kkkc
Please look at two Res of >>65 and >>73.
I think that the grinding match of the aspect as the American of Mr. jim and
the Japanese by the user and the aspect is necessary for the guideline and
knowing BBSPINK.
And, I think that the guideline should receive the examination by the specialist as
Mr. MUMUMU is proposing it.
How about this proposal?
省8
126: ◆uRW6KoTaRo 2006/07/30(日)17:13 ID:xCdAaSRA(1/2) AAS
Let's talk with Mr.Jim here.
Let's talk without Mr.Jim there.
127(2): ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日)17:21 ID:H0sTRxna(5/8) BE AAS
> So, your meaning is that a deleter does not need to follow the law
> when he/she judges a deletion
No. I think Deleter must not follow the law.
All Japanese have to correspond to the infringement of right if it is possible.
If Deleter can do a legal judgment as the site, Deleter will not be able to escape the obligation.
Example
*****************************************************************
Dear BBSPINK,
This is IZUMI from IZUMI Corp in Japan.
Delete the following messages.
省9
128(1): ◆uRW6KoTaRo 2006/07/30(日)17:39 ID:xCdAaSRA(2/2) AAS
The legal risk may cause illegal risk.
For example,violence,intimidation,extortion and so on.
129: 2006/07/30(日)18:25 ID:qBjw+O7q(1/3) AAS
For instance,he/she refuses the deletion of >>127
RE:IZUMI of IZUMI;co
｢I claimed "you" should delete. The reason is a violation of the law.
However, the deletion was refused. I want to pursue this responsibility. ｣
at this time
D:｢i do not have a knowledge of law. And i am not a lawyer.
Therefore, i am not being given the authority to do a legal judgment by the owner.
Only the owner has this power.
It is clearly shown in 2ch板:xxx｣
I think that he/she should be able to insist like this.
130(1): ◆MARY/2Kkkc 2006/07/30(日)18:28 ID:Cwh6Szby(3/4) AAS
>>125
I am not sure about it, but I do not think it is a big problem,
because I could find many web site in Japan says only "not to enter under 18 years old".
>>127
Thank you for your explanation and an example.
I still do not understand this part why is it?
"If Deleter can do a legal judgment as the site, Deleter will not be able to escape the obligation."
>The message might be a justifiable criticism.
>However, you are hesitating in whether it is a justifiable criticism or an infringement of right.
>Can you judge "Do not delete it" for this request?
省11
131(1): ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日)20:21 ID:H0sTRxna(6/8) BE AAS
>>130
If deleter can stop the infringement of right as the Japanese people.
Hesitating might be no problem.
If Deleter judges, "I leave this message", the risk is generated.
So, Deleter will be not able to do the judgment that leaves the message.
Therefore, I ask you again.
Can you judge "Do not delete it" for this request?
And, can you say to other Deleter, "Please have the danger"?
132(1): 2006/07/30(日)20:37 ID:H0sTRxna(7/8) BE AAS
なんか文が切れてるぞ。
The law demands to stop the infringement of right.
If deleter can stop the infringement of right as the Japanese people.
133: ◆MARY/2Kkkc 2006/07/30(日)21:54 ID:Cwh6Szby(4/4) AAS
>>131-132
Now, finally, I think I got your intention.
I was impressed for your consideration.
So, you think a risk is generated when a deleter recognizes a writing has a violation.
I think that a risk is not generated yet, when a deleter find a writing and he does not recognizes a violation, even if it has a violation.
So, he has to delete when he is sure about a violation, but he can leave it when he is not sure.
>Can you judge "Do not delete it" for this request?
Yes, I can leave a posting, when I do not recognize it has a violation.
>And, can you say to other Deleter, "Please have the danger"?
省2
134(4): ◆uRW6KoTaRo 2006/07/30(日)22:57 ID:K29cIdod(1) AAS
MARYさんは日本語できない人なの？
IZUMIさんは英語では細かいニュアンスが伝えられないようなので、
日本語できる人相手に英語で議論するのは全く無駄な事です。
IZUMIさんは他スレに日本語で色々細かい所も書いているので、
MARYさんはそれを読んでみて、必要があれば日本語で議論してみて、
その結果を、Jimさん向けにここに英語で書けばいいと思います。
135(1): 2006/07/30(日)23:32 ID:qBjw+O7q(2/3) AAS
>>134
They(we) might be better speak in English as in detail as possible.
I think that JIM should be able to trace the discussion later.
of course,the discussion have to be done by using Japanese in another place,too.
136: 2006/07/30(日)23:35 ID:qBjw+O7q(3/3) AAS
>>134
あ、申し訳ない。
>>135は誤読して書いてしまった･･･。
すみません。
>>134
i think so too.
上下前次1-新書関写板覧索設栞歴
あと 701 ﾚｽあります
ｽﾚ情報 赤ﾚｽ抽出 画像ﾚｽ抽出 歴の未読ｽﾚ AAｻﾑﾈｲﾙ
ぬこの手 ぬこTOP 0.012s