This answer to "UAE now banning VPN access - fines of up to $545,000? Any workarounds?" advocates breaking the law in a foreign country.
Does it require deletion or a disclaimer stating it is not fact based and is merely speculation?
-
We already had extensive debate on this but it seems you are conflating different issues: Advocating breaking the law and speculation. Even if it seems to contradict the letter of the law, it does not necessarily follow that the post is speculative or not fact-based, just reading a translation of a statute can leave you with a false impression regarding its current status, court interpretation or enforcement practice.– RelaxedJul 29, 2016 at 22:41
-
1You also seem to object to the fact that the answer mentions the intent of the law. This is in fact a common technique for jurists and very relevant. As long as it has a sound basis is not merely a personal opinion, that's completely fine.– RelaxedJul 29, 2016 at 22:43
-
5Could you quote the bit that "advocates breaking the law"?– BerwynJul 30, 2016 at 6:24
-
1Meh, the answer is clearly anecdotal and opinion based (containing phrases such as "I believe") I don't see any particular value of adding an additional disclaimer. I doubt anyone is going to consider this an authoratitive source of truth that is going to protect them if they do get penalised for it, it is just one availlable data point on the Internet.– Martin SmithJul 30, 2016 at 13:08
-
Should link to the classic "Encouraging others to break the law?"– hippietrailAug 8, 2016 at 13:16
-
And not to forget "How should questions/answers on how to do something illegal be treated?"– hippietrailAug 8, 2016 at 13:21
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
I am sorry that you feel my answer is "advocating breaking the law", that was not my intention.
The principle of "law" is quite different from one community to another, as a person from the middle east, I know for a fact that not every law is applicable in all cases, that's how we live, that's us, do not blame us, do not judge us. In some other communities, things are different, and my answer would be "advocating breaking the law". I can understand that, and I can't say you're wrong.
An example, Saudi and Indonesia take drugs smuggling so serious, some people from other countries do not get it, and they think things are the same as in their countries, they smuggle drugs and then get executed, they must have thought they can avoid it, but they didn't! we know that drugs laws are always applied, money will not get you out, a good lawyer will not find a way, but we also know that copyright laws, eventhough they sound so serious, are not really applied. Someone from your community might read the law and decides not to buy pirated CDs from the street in Saudi or Indonesia, because he will be in jail for 1 year as per the law, but in reality, everyone there does. Now if you ask me, I'd tell you go ahead and by the CDs, you can argue that the law prohibits that, but I can argue that no one gives a shit, especially when you see a policeman picking up some CDs and paying for them! We both are right, you might be a better person who follows the law literally, but I am a practical insider who knows which laws are applied, and which are not. This is the different between getting the answers from an official website, and getting the answer from unofficial websites, one will provide the law as is, one will provide the law, and then provide what is really going on, at the end it's your choice. You can say that I am advocating breaking the law, but I can say that I am advocating reality.
In some cases, following the "law" in some countries might get you killed, try for example following the driving laws in Egypt, that would be hilarious.
The opposite also happens, you see some people from some countries where the "law" is not really "law", asking on how to fool the embassy of one of EU countries, where the "law" means the "law", see the reaction and answers of the people from the EU when they answer, they are wondering how come people are doing that! well, do not blame them, this is how things are back their homes. Now, it's quite the opposite in your case.
Anyway, you are 100% free to look at things from your point of view, so do I. The law regarding the matter in question clearly mentions "with the intention of committing a crime", for me, and for everyone else from my community, we understand this as I explained in my answer.
To sum that up, I was interpreting the "law" as somewhat a local, and sharing my information with fellow travelers who in my opinion are seeking the kind of information I shared, otherwise they would just take the law literally as you did, and need not ask.
Regarding your "over" reaction, it was really unnecessary, making 10 edits, trying to force your opinion the wrong way, making a lot of comments, refusing to talk about it in the chat, threatening to be awake all night to bother me with the edits, etc. All of that was wrong and unnecessary; a flag, one comment and this meta post would have been more than enough. At the end, this is a community driven site, if enough people from the community shared your opinion and flagged my answer, it would have been deleted regardless of what I want. One person can't force his/her opinion, so you wasted your and my time for something that both of us have no control over, only the community can decide.
Finally, @Martin's comment said it all, my answer is clearly based on personal experience, and it's shown there, so there was no need to be redundant by adding a disclaimer as you suggested.
