[過去ﾛｸﾞ] Let's talk with Jim-san. Part2 (837ﾚｽ)
上下前次1-新
抽出解除 ﾚｽ栞
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
130(1): ◆MARY/2Kkkc 2006/07/30(日) 18:28:21 ID:Cwh6Szby(3/4)調 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?
>And, can you say to other Deleter, "Please have the danger"?
If the deleter is not sure, then he/she can ask a leader.
If the leader is not sure, then he/she can ask Jim.
If Jim does not delete it, then Jim gets a plaint.
The volunteer has no legal risk, here.
>>128
Very good point, Kotaro-san.
To avoid both the legal risk and illegal risk,
I suggest one volunteer obligation.
* An official volunteer must keep secret on the public about his/her contact address.
Otherwise, Jim can not prevent from someone sending a volunteer a plaint.
131(1): ◆IZUMI162i6 2006/07/30(日) 20:21:25 ID:H0sTRxna(6/8)調 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"?
上下前次1-新書関写板覧索設栞歴
ｽﾚ情報 赤ﾚｽ抽出 画像ﾚｽ抽出 歴の未読ｽﾚ
ぬこの手 ぬこTOP 0.269s*