From: Terry Donaghe (terry@Donaghe.com)
Date: Fri May 10 2002 - 14:19:44 MDT
As long as proving intention doesn't become too burdensome (I have no idea), then this seems like an excellent idea. It also seems that it would work equally as well in other areas where "zero tolerance" rules exist. For example, if schools adopted a similar policy, we might see fewer children being expelled or suspended from school for pointing a chicken finger at a friend or playing cops and robbers at recess.
I'm afraid that so much common sense may well be beyond the grasp of most politicians, school board members, and others...
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "natashavita@earthlink.net" <natashavita@earthlink.net>
Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 15:39:18 -0400
>
>There as been just a bit of conversation on technological pollution. I remember some years back when discussing this with a few like-minded folks. We agreed that a zero tolerance on technological pollution is not suitable to the times because not all polluting is intentional. Rather, it was more reasonable to incorporate knowledgeable alternatives and ways in which the waste products could be handled before engaging in a mass marketing and selling campaign.
>
>I am interested in "zero tolerance for intentional polluting". I think there could be some tolerance on unintentional polluting or unconscious polluting as many people worldwide are not well informed and frankly (looking at the diet and health of more than 1/2 of the US), ill informed about many health conscious matters.
>
>Further zero tolerance can result in disproportionate punishments and profiling. Further, zero tolerance, while sounding mighty, deals with a set of punishments, not the problem and not the mechanics of developing well-funded knowledge in how to educate technological developers to be aware of potential pollutants. And, zero tolerance disciplinary policies are apt to contain extraordinarily broad definitions of offensive or dangerous behavior.
>
>It seems more pro-act conscious to assertively address potential dangers from technological pollution and give it a hell of a lot of attention.
>
>Natasha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>mail2web - Check your email from the web at
>http://mail2web.com/ .
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:58 MST