General > General Technical Chat
Man fined for criticizing govt using science, without a license
X:
--- Quote from: Richard Crowley on May 02, 2017, 05:39:04 pm ---And thus endeth the lesson. The state has successfully deflected the attention from the real problem. Even bamboozling contributors to this august forum. :palm:
--- End quote ---
Assuming a real problem existed in the first place, and he wasn't just trying to get his wife out of a ticket. You'll be surprised to the lengths people go to when they want to help those they care about.
That being said, it's difficult to say who's in the wrong without sufficient evidence. There is no evidence he is an actual EE, nor is there any evidence that he is actually involved in producing/designing anything. The mention of running an audio business is not evidence, as anyone with business know-how can run a business. Just because he "runs" the business doesn't mean he actually participates in the work.
Likewise, there's no evidence that he is not an engineer in Sweden since (as it says in the doc) the profession isn't regulated there, and there is no official requirement of registration.
Catchy media titles such as "Man Fined $500 for Crime of Writing 'I Am An Engineer' in an Email to the Government" or "Yellow-Light Crusader Fined for Doing Math Without a License" (source) are rarely valid conclusions to cases like this.
james_s:
When it comes down to it though, whether or not he's actually an engineer is irrelevant. He didn't design anything, he's not selling a product, he's not performing professional services. He simply pointed out a problem and rather than acknowledge the problem or defend their position and explain why his claims are incorrect, they chose to deflect and distract by zeroing in on his use of the title of "engineer" in his signature. He could have signed it claiming to be the King of Sweden and it wouldn't really matter because his title or position is for the most part irrelevant. Are his calculations correct or not? That's all anyone involved ought to be concerned with. Did he point out a legitimate problem or is he full of it? Forget his title and look into that.
T3sl4co1l:
--- Quote from: X on May 02, 2017, 05:55:16 pm ---Just because he "runs" the business doesn't mean he actually participates in the work.
--- End quote ---
Cough.
As has been stipulated, numerous times in this thread, the whole point is that an exempted "engineer" title requires no qualifications whatsoever.
You can run a restaurant and call your cooks "culinary engineers", or "foodie architects", or whatever you like, as long as such titles fit the definition of an exemption.
Like I said before: the only thing that makes me an "engineer" (in the practical sense) is that I deliver on my promise.
Poor troll is poor.
Tim
Richard Crowley:
--- Quote from: james_s on May 02, 2017, 06:02:19 pm ---When it comes down to it though, whether or not he's actually an engineer is irrelevant. He didn't design anything, he's not selling a product, he's not performing professional services. He simply pointed out a problem and rather than acknowledge the problem or defend their position and explain why his claims are incorrect, they chose to deflect and distract by zeroing in on his use of the title of "engineer" in his signature. He could have signed it claiming to be the King of Sweden and it wouldn't really matter because his title or position is for the most part irrelevant. Are his calculations correct or not? That's all anyone involved ought to be concerned with. Did he point out a legitimate problem or is he full of it? Forget his title and look into that.
--- End quote ---
Precisely. There has been a problem with those red-light cameras in that city since the day they were installed. People have been attempting to have a meaningful discussion with the city government for DECADES. This incident is only one recent example of the stone wall that the city government has maintained. And it appears to demonstrate a counter-offensive strategy on the part of the authorities. Alas, something that has become commonplace in this state.
The programmed timing of the traffic lights at the four intersections with cameras is DEMONSTRABLY shorter than similar intersections across the state and even in the SAME city. One can only conclude that the intervals are shorter in order to boost revenue from the cameras. Certainly if they had any real concern for safety, they would INCREASE the intervals rather than DECREASING them. That is why many (most?) of us simply detour around those intersections whenever possible. Perhaps THAT is their "safety strategy"? :-//
MarkS:
--- Quote from: Richard Crowley on May 02, 2017, 05:39:04 pm ---Even bamboozling contributors to this august forum. :palm:
--- End quote ---
I seriously doubt that anyone here is confused about the facts of this case and the seven pages of posts show that. The thread title is misleading; basically forum click bait. We're smarter than that. Or was that sarcasm?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version