Assisted Dying Leaflet published by ?

[snowman]

On 1/9/2023 at 9:46 PM, Yibble said:

"Three doctors have spoken out against proposals to legalise assisted dying."



https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/doctors-oppose-assisted-dying-legislation-586505

 

He sounds like he is in the wrong job

Edited January 11, 2023 by snowman

[WTF]

21 minutes ago, snowman said:

he can fuck off

and then fuck off again.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

4 hours ago, genericUserName said:

With maximum respect, that's not especially relevant in this context. Email does what email does. There are also lots of great solutions where documents, for example legal documents, need encrypytion.

Yet, many of them aren’t user friendly. How many years have we had various technological solutions?

How many people at best will password protect a word document, and send the password in the same email anyway? Plus, there are the passwords that are or aren’t actually encrypting the document.

People are generally bad at security, even passwords are a nightmare, but any real replacement is in an infancy. See various webauth standards as an example.

The woes of multitudes of people losing their crypto keys highlights the problems around entrusting people to manage their own keys. (See the man who pops up every few months wailing about his millions in a landfill)

Now imagine trying to send Doris her new PIN, getting her public key and making sure she can safely decrypt and use the data. 

[Thorulf]

The real question is how can they post such leaflets using the postal service. People pedalling there own propaganda like the one I got on animal cruelty a while back. I don't want that crap through my letter box. 

My Dad officially died from a heart attack! In truth had dementia and was basically filled full of Midazolam and starved to death, I have ranted about it before but it was a dreadful end to a awesome human being. 

At least we can do is properly discuss the issue and leave God out of it. 

[thommo2010]

Seen it posted on Facebook and the usual whys this coming through my door. Here's an idea don't like it bin it move on with your life. Why is everything turned into a big song and dance these days?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[genericUserName]

6 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Yet, many of them aren’t user friendly. How many years have we had various technological solutions?

I do not see document encryption as particular being an issue here. Old fashioned letters are not encrypted either.

Important documents could still be sent. Important documents will typically already be sent as Special Deliveries.

[Josem]

On 1/9/2023 at 4:59 PM, WTF said:

is it josems backers again ?

I have not seen the leaflet, do not know anything about its production, and have no reason to think that anyone I know helped to produce it in anyway.

 

It is bizarre to read complaints in this thread about people exercising their right to anonymous/pseudonymous free speech... while making such complaints under anonymous/pseudonymous accounts themselves. Physician, heal thyself.

 

I generally think that if your opinions are not worth putting your name to, then you're probably right - and we should take that as a strong indication of their value. Our world would be a better place if there was increased accountability for the things that people said and wrote.

[genericUserName]

5 minutes ago, Josem said:

I generally think that if your opinions are not worth putting your name to, then you're probably right - and we should take that as a strong indication of their value. Our world would be a better place if there was increased accountability for the things that people said and wrote.

Haven't you had anonymous backers whose opinions you have effectively represented? In which case, are you saying that the opinions you have represented have little value?

 

[Josem]

12 minutes ago, genericUserName said:

Haven't you had anonymous backers whose opinions you have effectively represented? In which case, are you saying that the opinions you have represented have little value?

Everyone reading this knows that reducing anonymous speech is not a genuine or good faith concern of "genericUserName".

 

But because of the misinformation on this issue, some readers might not know it is illegal for the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance to publish a list of supporters, just like it is illegal for the Manx Wildlife Trust to publish a list of its supporters, just like it is illegal for the Manx Cooperative Society to publish a list of its supporters, just like it is illegal for any other organisation to publish such lists. I think that obeying the law is a good thing, not a bad thing.

[Declan]

3 minutes ago, Josem said:

Everyone reading this knows that reducing anonymous speech is not a genuine or good faith concern of "genericUserName".

 

But because of the misinformation on this issue, some readers might not know it is illegal for the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance to publish a list of supporters, just like it is illegal for the Manx Wildlife Trust to publish a list of its supporters, just like it is illegal for the Manx Cooperative Society to publish a list of its supporters, just like it is illegal for any other organisation to publish such lists. I think that obeying the law is a good thing, not a bad thing.

 

It's not illegal to publish a list of your supporters with their permission. You could even make it a condition of membership or donating that you will make it public.

[WTF]

1 hour ago, Josem said:

 

 

I generally think that if your opinions are not worth putting your name to, then you're probably right - and we should take that as a strong indication of their value. Our world would be a better place if there was increased accountability for the things that people said and wrote.

and similarly even with a name attached some opinions aren't worth reading or listening to. 

[Roger Mexico]

37 minutes ago, Josem said:

But because of the misinformation on this issue, some readers might not know it is illegal for the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance to publish a list of supporters, just like it is illegal for the Manx Wildlife Trust to publish a list of its supporters, just like it is illegal for the Manx Cooperative Society to publish a list of its supporters, just like it is illegal for any other organisation to publish such lists. I think that obeying the law is a good thing, not a bad thing.

But people weren't querying the lack of a list of the supporters of the MTA (though some suspected it might not be very long) they were asking for details of the financial backing of the organisation - something that is not only allowed but compulsory for a political party in most democracies and required for lobbying groups (such as MTA).

And most organisations are more than happy to publish lists of corporate supporters, indeed it is often sold as one of the pluses of corporate membership.  Here's the Manx Wildlife Trust's list for example.  I don't think anyone's arrested them for it yet.

[The Voice of Reason]

I think people are getting over upset about this,

Yes you may get a piece of mail through your letterbox, the contents of which you may disagree with. 
Equally you may fall into conversation in the pub with someone in the pub expressing the same view. 
You can put the mail in the bin. Disentangling yourself from the conversation in the pub might prove more difficult ( although of course unalike the letter/ pamphlet in the mail you have the opportunity to offer a different point of view)

But you know if someone wants to promote their own point of view however distasteful you may find, it then they are entitled to do so. Subject to hate laws, decency laws and all that.

If this leaflet was produced and delivered within the constraints of the law then its hard to argue against it. There’s a lot of things produced  that fall within the remit of “free speech” that I find offensive but hey ho

Edited January 11, 2023 by The Voice of Reason

[AcousticallyChallenged]

2 hours ago, genericUserName said:

I do not see document encryption as particular being an issue here. Old fashioned letters are not encrypted either.

Important documents could still be sent. Important documents will typically already be sent as Special Deliveries.

Old fashioned letters aren’t encrypted, but, equally, tamper-evident envelopes do exist, and the attack surface is reduced mainly to physical access or an errant postie. See the USPS for an example of a postal police force to not trifle with. 

People are generally far better at understanding security of physical items.

Important letters are sent via recorded at best a lot of the time. First class post is even seen as sufficient for serving court documents, suggesting a presumed reliability to it. Unless you need it there next day, why would you pay over twice the price?

[genericUserName]

11 hours ago, Josem said:

Everyone reading this knows that reducing anonymous speech is not a genuine or good faith concern of "genericUserName".

I have not advocated against anonymous speech in this context @Josem. That was you.

I was questioning your idea that anonymous opinion has lower value whilst seemingly being involved with advocating on behalf of anonymous opinion. Your implication being that you represent lower value opinion. It seemed like a disconnect.

I appreciate your response.

But - no big deal.

Edited January 12, 2023 by genericUserName