Re: Buffer cache statistics (ratios) and CBO SQL optimization?

joel-garry_at_home.com (Joel Garry) wrote in message news:<91884734.0401131604.7b7805a9_at_posting.google.com>...

> > Precisely. It's hard to make "libel" become a synonym to "injury"...
>
> It ain't easy. But it actually has been done:
> http://www.cyberlibel.com/libel.html#Number%208

Doubt that will stick in any country other than US... Physical injury is very clearly what the original law was all about, reinforced by all the examples provided. And that is fine. Libel is NOT physical injury. Except in some over-exhalted judiciary imagination.

> Note also you don't have to prove damage (which was news to me, I'm
> really rusty at this stuff).
> So if we say Geo is an adulterous woman, s/he can sue. Actually
> anyone can sue for anything, but at the risk of malicious prosecution
> backwash.

Hehehe! Would love to see how well that would stack up in any other country than the US...
As a matter of fact, IF we said that in THIS newsgroup, then I'd agree (s)he could sue. Due to the nature of the newsgroup. Read on, please.

> Check out the "disparage" part. I must say, I've seen some
> disparaging words around here.

I've seen PLENTY of disparaging words in critiques by scholars to other's work in Universities and tehnical organisations. And I still have to see anyone get sued over that. This is NOT, I repeat: NOT! a social encounter newsgroup. It is a technical newsgroup.

Anything here that may be classified as invalid technical information is open to quite strong remarks, of any nature. They relate to the technical material, not the persons involved. Of course normal socio-educational restrictions may prevent one from getting too "heavy", but some may not have such qualms. Provided their comments stay on the technical content, then there is NOTHING that anyone can construe as matter for judicial intervention of the "libel" kind.

Of course someone involved in a "multi-whatever dollars" company might feel at a disadvantage to have their information exposed as incorrect. The same however would happen if a competitor did that exposing. What, they gonna send to court ALL their competitors for doing their job? Which is to compete? Gimme a break.

Either it is accepted that this newsgroup is of a technical nature and then it's like ANY other technical forum where ideas may be accepted or rejected based on their TECHNICAL merit (NOT the size of the promoter's purse).
Or it is accepted that it is a social newsgroup in which anyone has to be subjected to whatever social opinions may happen. And like any social environment, one is free to accept or reject what is then only a commercial proposition. Not a technical one.

In either case, I find it hard to believe anyone would have grounds to see a court case through.

As for the strong language used against one or another, I can't comment: it's purely a personal choice. I would never mention Don's hair style in a technical comment on one of his books, no matter how revolting it may be to me. The hair style, I mean.

Others might use that argument in a technical discussion to reinforce an opinion about one of his technical statememnts. Their choice.

I do however reserve the right to use whatever language I feel appropriate for trolls and other idiots off-topic of the NG. Others might disagree. Fine by me. Waiting for the first "libel" suit from a troll: THAT will be fun!

> For the most part, yeah. But the viewpoint of a corporate counsel
> looking at the issue of employees posting from corporate resources
> must necessarily be defensive.

Disagree. Like I said: this is NOT a social group, this is a technical and professional group. That is a COMPLETELY different proposition.

Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam Received on Wed Jan 14 2004 - 01:08:27 CST