Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

    Can I suggest that within this site, we create and maintain a state by state list of cafes that can produce a coffee up to the standards we CSers expect.

    You know, like a "coffee snobs cafe seal of approval".

    For fun, perhaps, a shit-list too.....................Ahh! but that would grow extensively long and get very depressing, actually not much fun really.



    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

      Originally posted by reubster link=1176013879/15#15 date=1176167567
      Can I suggest that within this site, we create and maintain a state by state list of cafes that can produce a coffee up to the standards we CSers expect.

      You know, like a "coffee snobs cafe seal of approval".

      For fun, perhaps, a shit-list too.....................Ahh! but that would grow  extensively long and get very depressing, actually not much fun really.



      Goood Idea [smiley=tekst-toppie.gif]

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

        Heres another good information sheet on defamation regarding material published after 1 January 2006:
        http://www.artslaw.com.au/LegalInformation/Defamation/DefamationLawsAfterJan06.asp

        Take particular note of the sections regarding defences.

        Defences

        The first step when someone threatens you with defamation is to establish whether they actually have a case. The plaintiff must be able to prove all three elements discussed above – that the material has been communicated to a third person (other than the plaintiff), that the plaintiff is identified in the communication and that the communication defames them.

        The next step is to consider whether you have a defence under the law of defamation. Defences include:

        1. Honest opinion (previously known as fair comment)
        2. Justification/Truth
        3. Qualified privilege
        4. Other defences
        The explanations of defences 1 and 2 are the relevant ones.



        Lovey - your journo mate may well have been right prior to 01/01/2006 but one of the changes brought in was the defence of "truth".

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

          and the truth shou set us free

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

            But can you imagine convincing a Jury (if it ever got that far) - all sitting there sipping their instant coffee :P - that Xyzs coffee house (hope thats not a real one) makes cr@p coffee? : :

            Its a bit like convincing a Jury that someone has stolen a computer program.... but the owner still has the discs.... and its still running on his/her computer.... so how has it been stolen? :-/ :-/

            The law is often more about perception than reality! As is often said "Justice is blind" - it might not have any taste as well ;D ;D

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Good ones, no bad ones- espresso when out...

              First you find out if the judge is a coffee snob, and if that is the case request a bench trial (judge only - no jury) to eliminate the Nescafe factor. . .

              Comment

              Working...
              X