Worldwide Assumption Proposal

Here’s what appears on the botton of the CBC Charlottetown home page:



Now I realize that nobody at CBC Charlottetown came up with that (or at least I hope not!); presumably it is the crack CBC legal team that requires such a disclaimer.

What I am wondering is: couldn’t all come to some general consensus that we’re all not responsible for the contents of the sites we link to. I mean, doesn’t this just make common sense? Who would assume that if the CBC links to www.Evil.com that the CBC has come out in favour of evil?

And, while we’re at it, can we also come to an agreement that if coats and other personal belongings hung on a restaurant coat rack are stolen, it’s not the restaurant’s fault?

And that you can’t park in somebody’s driveway unless they have a sign that says “it’s okay to park here?”

We might put some sign painters out of work, but we would relieve the world of a lot of visual pollution.

Comments

Kevin O's picture
Kevin O on December 28, 2001 - 11:26

…which again brings up the “No Turning” sign out on North River Road just across the street from SlyOrange.


Perhaps the potentates over there a SyOng caused the whole problem in the first place with their gluttonous and indifferent turning.

Steven Garrity's picture
Steven Garrity on December 28, 2001 - 16:32

I like the concept of Worldwide Assumptions. I would like to propose a humble assupmption: that the timestamps on weblog posts serve as the permanent link to that post.

Kevin, it’s true, we silveroranges have been known to turn indescriminantly. But not at the infamous “No Turning” sign — we’re affraid of mean people with signs.

Add new comment