[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Usenet Group - an alternative approach
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Usenet Group - an alternative approach
- From: "Mark McCall" <mark@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:41:42 -0000
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
I like your twisted mind Mark!!! :-)
I haven't even been reading the posts about the UK group lately because
they
wind me up sooooo much!
M.
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
>sentto-1109639-5662-979573824-mark=automatedhome.co.uk@xxxxxxx
>om
>[mailto:sentto-1109639-5662-979573824-mark=automatedhome.co.uk@xxxxxxx
>nelist.com]On Behalf Of Mark Harrison
>Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 3:47 PM
>To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>Subject: [ukha_d] Usenet Group - an alternative approach
>
>
>If I were an evil bugger, then I'd suggest that a group of us took
>the opportunity to monitor comp.home.automation and post very UK-
>specific comments on every question that was asked.
>
>I would have thought that a couple of days of doing this on every
>thread could convince the Americans that there were "non-US"
aspects
>to their questions.
>
>
>For example, the "nanny-cam" thread could have Mark Harrison
post:
>
>- "Obviously, you'd need to register with the DPR before setting
up a
>camera that might record your employees/contract workers, saying that
>you were going to collect (video) data about them for the purposes of
>monitoring their performance."
>
>Then Stuart Grimshaw could reply
>
>- "Good point - but wouldn't the nanny then have the right to a
copy
>of the entire set of video footage containing her/him?"
>
>To which Mark McCall would say
>
>- "Yes, and you'd only be able to charge a maximum of £10 for
this,
>AND it would have to be provided on paper unless you could agree an
>alternative format, so in principle you'd have to print out every
>frame that had been recorded."
>
>So Keith Doxey could say
>
>- "Wouldn't there be an impact under the Human Rights Bill"
>
>(NB - he wouldn't mention that this is an EU bill - after all, the
>Americans don't flag up that their concerns relate to US legislature.)
>
>And Graham Howe could reply
>
>- "Yes, it's been in force since 25th February 2000 - you might
have
>to notify the nanny in advance that you reserved the right to film
>her. Suggest you talk to your local CAB before doing this.
>Alternatively you could look on the DTI website."
>
>
>
>Mark ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|