Novak vs State

[McLeod]

4 minutes ago, wwww said:

ima Novak i njegov pravni tim trenutno preca posla nego da se bavi Spiegelom. Ali nadam se da ce i oni jednog dana doci na red zbog objavljivanja neosnovanih optuzbi i blacenja, kao i Ben i kompanija. Pogotovu ako Novak ne bude igrao tenis.

 

Procitah ovih dana negde komentar: ovo ko Kafkin Proces.

 

Mozda ima, ali ako i udje u to, sanse za uspeh u tom procesu su nikakve. Jer je onda teret dokazivanja na njemu. Spigl je samo izrazio sumnju, koja realno postoji. On protiv njih nema nikakav slucaj.

 

I inace, generalno, citajuci ove price o tuzbama prema novinarima koje treba da pljuste, da li ste generalno svesni magnitude ovog procesa i drugih stvari koje se desavaju, gde takodje ima "kontroverznih" izjava novinara i analiticara?

 

Ovo je bukvalno ranga gurkanja u redu ispred prodavnice u Mirijevu fazon prema onome cime se Spigl generalno bavi.

[Div]

14 minutes ago, McLeod said:

Opet prica o pravu i sudu i tricama i kucinama.

 

Uvidom u QR kod je stvorena sumnja da je test falsifikovan. Ta sumnja se moze ukloniti iskljucivo uvidom u bazu i logove.

 

Do tada ne postoji osnov da se zakljuci ni jedno ni drugo, ostaje samo sumnja.

 

Možeš ti da sumnjaš u šta god hoćeš ali to nema praktičnog značaja dok ne daš dokaz.

Ponavljam, validnost, tačnost, javne isprave se podrazumeva, a može se i osporiti u propisanom postupku, sumnja ništa ne znači.

 

 

 

[Tunji Awojobi]

28 minutes ago, McLeod said:

Ne poznajem australijske zakone dovoljno da bih tvrdio tako nesto, ali oni spadaju u precedentno pravo i verujem da je to sto ti ovde predlazes generalno tesko ili nemoguce uraditi, nevezano za ovaj slucaj, zbog samog prava. A i u globalu moglo bi se svoditi na non bis in idem, pa moraju da traze druge nacine da ispune svoj cilj.

 

Ali opet, čak i da postoji neki ekvivalent double jeopardyija, on ni na koji način ne obavezuje ministra da u obrazloženju novog oduzimanja vize (dakle, ne u običnoj izjavi za medije) konstatuje da je ovaj imao validan dokaz o izuzeću. To nema nikakvog smisla. 

 

I zanimljivo kako potežeš pravne principe za koje nisi čak ni siguran da važe u ovom slučaju, niti ih je i jedan ekspert koji komentariše ovaj slučaj pomenuo, a ovamo tražiš dodatne dokaze za zvanično izdat dokument za koji je neko lepo objasnio da je podrazumeva da je autentičan dok se ne dokaže suprotno. A ne samo da se nije dokazalo suprotno, nego niko nije čak ni pokrenuo postupak preispitivanja, osim par opskurnih tviter profila na osnovu nekakvog screenshota.

 

I za kraj, jel možeš da objasniš teoriju po kojoj ima smisla da je on bio pozitivan tek 26., pa onda naknadno promenio datum na 16.? Zašto bi to radio tačno ako je rok svakako već probijen? Pritom, dokumentovano je bio u kontaktu sa bar jednom zaražen osobom 14. decembra. 

[McLeod]

2 minutes ago, Div said:

 

Možeš ti da sumnjaš u šta god hoćeš ali to nema praktičnog značaja dok ne daš dokaz.

Ponavljam, validnost, tačnost, javne isprave se podrazumeva, a može se i osporiti u propisanom postupku, sumnja ništa ne znači.

 

 

 

 

To sto ti hoces da glumis Kostunicu ovde takodje nema nikakav znacaj, sam to biras. Sto ne cini tvoje tvrdnje tacnijim, naprotiv.

 

Jer ja nigde nisam ni nastupao sa pozicije pozitivnog prava i sudskog postupka, pa ti je sam reply promasen.

[implant]

40 minutes ago, Devil In My Pants said:

onda u maniru Srloa Djokovica kazu..kraj, prekid...gasi bre kameru 😁

 

Opet ti upoređuješ ljude koji ovde normalno i pristojno diskutuju sa Srđanom Đokovićem? Vreme je da se podsetiš gradiva:

 

 

[Div]

1 minute ago, McLeod said:

 

To sto ti hoces da glumis Kostunicu ovde takodje nema nikakav znacaj, sam to biras. Sto ne cini tvoje tvrdnje tacnijim, naprotiv.

 

Jer ja nigde nisam ni nastupao sa pozicije pozitivnog prava i sudskog postupka, pa ti je sam reply promasen.

 

Red bi bio da kažeš sa koje pozicije pišeš, filozofske, religijske, političke, forenzičke, navijačke, ideološke, evolutivne biologije, kvantne fizike ili sa svoje pozicije u kojoj samo ti određuješ pravila i menjaš ih po potrebi.

 

 

[McLeod]

1 minute ago, Tunji Awojobi said:

 

Ali opet, čak i da postoji neki ekvivalent double jeopardyija, on ni na koji način ne obavezuje ministra da u obrazloženju novog oduzimanja vize (dakle, ne u običnoj izjavi za medije) konstatuje da je ovaj imao validan dokaz o izuzeću. To nema nikakvog smisla. 

 

I zanimljivo kako potežeš pravne principe za koje nisi čak ni siguran da važe u ovom slučaju, niti ih je i jedan ekspert koji komentariše ovaj slučaj pomenuo, a ovamo tražiš dodatne dokaze za zvanično izdat dokument za koji je neko lepo objasnio da je podrazumeva da je autentičan dok se ne dokaže suprotno. A ne samo da se nije dokazalo suprotno, nego niko nije čak ni pokrenuo postupak preispitivanja, osim par opskurnih tviter profila na osnovu nekakvog screenshota.

 

I za kraj, jel možeš da objasniš teoriju po kojoj ima smisla da je on bio pozitivan tek 26., pa onda naknadno promenio datum na 16.? Zašto bi to radio tačno ako je rok svakako već probijen? Pritom, dokumentovano je bio u kontaktu sa bar jednom zaražen osobom 14. decembra. 

 

Australijski ministar nicim nije vezan i ovaj postupak moze da se vodi u nedogled i na kraju, ako politicari tako odluce, ce se zavrsiti deportacijom. Znaci sve ovo sto gledamo je zamajavanje, predstava, mrcvarenje Novaka Djokovica zbog kojeg on i treba kad sve ovo prodje da podnese privatnu tuzbu protiv odgovornih lica.

 

Dosadno mi je vise da ponavljam - tvrdnje o kojima pricas na sudu moraju da se dokazu van svake sumnje, a to je nemoguce bez uvida u bazu kojeg nece biti. Zbog toga slucaj, pravno, ne postoji.

 

To opet ne znaci da je dokument institucije koja je stavljena pod sumnju - dokaz. Jer ako jeste, onda ne znam sta se natezemo oko ove stvari - australijski ministar ima diskreciono pravo da deportuje Novaka Djokovica sa najnemustijim mogucim obrazlozenjem. Po snazi njihovog prava. Zasto vodimo ovu diskusiju onda na 200 stranica?

 

Da nije mozda zato sto bi to vama bilo nepravedno, pa cete onda da se pozivate na neka zivotna pravila, nacela, moral, a ovamo glumite legaliste?

 

Stvarno postaje presmesno.

 

Nekada se za tvrdnje da je Zemlja okrugla zavrsavalo na lomaci, potpuno pravno validno za to vreme. Ti i Div trenutno drzite busiju tom logikom, ako vama to ne smeta, ne smeta ni meni.

[Tunji Awojobi]

4 minutes ago, McLeod said:

Da nije mozda zato sto bi to vama bilo nepravedno, pa cete onda da se pozivate na neka zivotna pravila, nacela, moral, a ovamo glumite legaliste?

 

Stvarno postaje presmesno.

 

Nekada se za tvrdnje da je Zemlja okrugla zavrsavalo na lomaci, potpuno pravno validno za to vreme. Ti i Div trenutno drzite busiju tom logikom, ako vama to ne smeta, ne smeta ni meni.

 

O, izvinite gospodine "non bis in idem", nisam znao da vam sad odjenom smeta pozivanje na pravne presedane. 

 

Dakle, tvoj stav o celoj stvari se svodi na to da će ga oni proterati proizvoljno zato što su tako rešili. Zašto? Zato. Ok, onda tako reci i da završimo s ovim. 

[erwin]

 Deo FAZ-ovog intervjua s Bekerom koji se odnosi na Đokovića i šanse Zvereva ako Đoković ne bude igrao:

Quote

BORIS BECKER INTERVIEW:
"Novak Djokovic has a wonderful character".

In an interview, Boris Becker appeals to critics to overcome prejudices against Novak Djokovic. He explains what the tennis star is really like as a person. He also talks about Alexander Zverev's title chances in Australia.

After a long hesitation, Australian Immigration Minister Alex Hawke has declared Novak Djokovic's entry visa invalid. Do you think his decision was appropriate?

It was to be expected that the Australian government would not take the ignominy of losing the case regarding Novak Djokovic's entry visa and would strike back a strong return. Any government is stronger than a single individual - this is true for all people and also for Novak Djokovic.

Is Djokovic himself to blame for his situation, or do you have sympathy for him?

If you don't get vaccinated, that doesn't automatically make you a bad person. I got vaccinated and boosted, but I'm also in my fifties. There are many people who hold Novak's view, rely on their strong immune systems, and perhaps have a different view of the world. As a democratic society, we should also allow these other opinions. In the meantime, we have learned that despite three vaccinations, you can also become infected and pass on the disease. That is the devilish thing: there is no best solution, only a temporary one. Novak made a different decision than I and the majority of people. But he did nothing forbidden.

The behavior of the Australian authorities and the Australian Tennis Federation also provoked criticism. How do you see their role in this spectacle?

I am not someone who points the finger at people, but they are not entirely innocent in the disaster surrounding Novak Djokovic. But he has to pay the bill all by himself. I hope the international media will take a close look at who is responsible for all the mistakes.

Will Djokovic now take on the whole world and stay true to his line, or will he come out of this purified and get vaccinated immediately?

I don't think it will get any easier for him. The French Open and Wimbledon are looking very closely at the situation in Australia. If he wants to continue to focus on tennis, he has to make changes. That's why my opinion would be, "Novak, try to realize that it will be easier for you vaccinated." Whether he does that, I don't know.

Can you imagine him ending his career prematurely because of Corona and his attitude towards it?

No. He's entrenched in tennis, I don't think so.

If his lawyers succeeded in obtaining the right to start the Australian Open after all, would Djokovic be so mentally strong that he would still win the tournament as the bogeyman of the Australian public?

I like to call him a street fighter with the motto "me against the world." Novak being booed actually happens to him at every Grand Slam. It won't bother him if the stadium is against him, it will bother him more that he had the worst sporting preparation for a Grand Slam tournament in his career. Novak also needs his training hours on the court and preparation matches.

Djokovic is used to the fact that the spectators almost always stick by his opponent. You know him extremely well, you were also his coach between 2013 and 2016: do you have an explanation for his unpopularity, or does the public just have a false image of him?

First of all, the tennis world has been divided into Roger Federer fans and Rafael Nadal fans for 20 years. A Serb comes along and ruins the party. That's the basic problem, that he interferes with two legendary tennis legends becoming even bigger, winning even more. That's why he's respected by most, but not loved. Also, his view on sports, cultural, political issues is different from the general public - I'm talking about Western Europe and North America. In addition, he eats a vegan diet and is very religious. He doesn't come from neutral Switzerland, he doesn't come from popular Spain, he comes from a civil war country called Serbia, which used to be called Yugoslavia. All these are not ideal omens. You have to know that to be able to assess Novak Djokovic properly. The fact that he, like Federer and Nadal, has won 20 Grand Slam titles, that he has been number one in the world rankings for the longest time, is even more creditable to him because he basically has the crowd against him. No tennis player likes that. Many fans have not even tried to understand him. There are many prejudices, people think in pigeonholes. Many don't bother to ask: What is Novak Djokovic like as a person?

And what is he like as a person?

He is a wonderful character, he loves his family more than anything, he loves his home country Serbia more than anything, he still has friends from the past that he has not forgotten. He has many human qualities that you don't know like that. He is an incredible fighter. If anyone had a chance to win the Australian Open under these conditions, it would be Djokovic. I'm part of the extended part of his family - I think he is of mine, anyway. We have spent many private, intimate, incredibly great moments together, and that has bonded us. That doesn't mean we always see eye to eye: I've been vaccinated, I have different political views, but still we are very close as people.

For us, the two sides of Djokovic are difficult to bring together: on the one hand, the absolutely performance-oriented, extremely rational professional who works and acts, and on the other, the esoteric who at times confides in a guru. How do you see that?

Novak seems very rational, but he is very emotional, which sometimes becomes visible in his outbursts on the court, which are not always comprehensible. His decisions are not always rational either, he is extremely emotional. You also don't have to believe everything you read, half of it is not true. I feel the same way, I know from my own experience. But it's probably the secret of his success that he's not an 08/15 guy who does the same thing every day.

Is Djokovic the best tennis player in the world, better than Federer and Nadal?

Of the three, he is the most successful player, there is no other way to say that, whether you like him or not. All three have collected 20 Grand Slam titles, but none has been the world number one for as long as Novak. And the ATP rankings are the Bible.

What makes Djokovic unique?

Novak has already given tennis something, he has changed the sport extremely in terms of fitness, nutrition and strategy. The same goes for Roger and Rafa. Novak is nowhere near as defensive as he was ten years ago. I've worked a bit on his offense, his positioning on the court, his serve, his volley. If you saw him at the US Open and at Wimbledon: He's coming to the net a lot now. Novak has expanded his game in all areas and improved it as a result. That's his secret - incidentally also Nadal's and Federer's. They have accepted that the game has changed and adapted, they have understood that they have to play more completely.

If Djokovic doesn't play, as it looks at the moment, will that clear the way for Alexander Zverev's first Grand Slam victory?

That would be too easy now. Because of the Djokovic saga, we have forgotten about the man from Mallorca, who also has something to say, Rafael Nadal. Then there's the number two in the world, Medvedev. For me, he's almost on a par with Djokovic. Because he has already won a Grand Slam, the US Open - and defeated Djokovic in the final. Zverev hasn't done that yet, no one has done that except Nadal. But Sascha Zverev does indeed have a great chance to win his first Grand Slam title, and he can become the world number one. What we didn't necessarily assume five years ago, let's be honest: His great talent was known, but he did have a few weak points. He's eliminated those now. I would wholeheartedly wish for him to triumph in Melbourne.

What did he learn in 2021 that he hadn't learned before? Or was it merely the Olympic victory in Tokyo that freed him up?

Improvements that enable a player to win the Olympics don't happen overnight. That's the result of years of continuous work. What can he do much better now? Consistent performance. He used to play two or three incredible matches in every tournament, but to win a tournament you need five wins, in a Grand Slam you need seven. But you can't play your best tennis seven times, you have to win even if you don't play that well. And that's where he's grown, his belief in his own strength is as big as it's ever been. That's the big change, that his serve has become more secure and more variable, especially the second one, helps him.

Only six German men and only three German women are seeded for the main draw in Melbourne. With the exception of Zverev, all the prospects are around 30 years old, and in the women's field they are all over 30. What's wrong with the DTB's promotion of young talent, because Zverev and his family took their own path to development?

That's true, but Zverev still benefited from the German Tennis Federation (DTB/ed.) in his teenage years, both financially and through sporting support. In my role as Head of Men's Tennis at the DTB, I also looked after Zverev. What's going wrong? I can't give you an answer in two sentences: Good conditions, athletically and financially, are in place at the DTB, the coaches are good. The question is: How motivated is a fifteen- or sixteen-year-old German tennis player at this age these days? It's a generation problem, the French and the Spanish have that too. Or America! The country with the most money, the most tournaments, and the best tennis centers: Why can't a teenager come up there? Now there's a Spaniard in Alcaraz, who I would rate extremely highly, but he's 18, and Nadal is 35, so there's also a huge gap. There are many factors at play, there is no exact point at which I would say the DTB is guilty or has done something fundamentally wrong. There is no formula for a twelve-year-old or a fourteen-year-old to be trained to win Wimbledon. That doesn't work. (...)

https://www.faz.net/aktuell/sport/australian-open/boris-becker-ueber-novak-djokovic-und-alexander-zverev-17732464.html?GEPC=s3&premium=0x9cfb3a396cc8358c548e2dc907537fd9 (prevod: Deepl)

Edited January 15, 2022 by erwin

[implant]

22 minutes ago, McLeod said:

 

😉 Imamo validnu sumnju uvidom u QR kod. Nije definitivan dokaz da je laziran, ali sumnja postoji.

 

Eh..postoje sumnje na osnovu čega, Tviter ekspertize? Postoje sumnje i da se Nadal dopinguje, jel beše onaj doktor spaljivao papire ili šta već beše radio. Ne možeš ti na osnovu sumnje da se nekome posereš u život; ako sumnjaš, zahtevaj istragu. Ako ne zahtevaš istragu, tu bi po meni trebalo da bude kraj ovim spekulacijama.

 

Jedino što sigurno znamo, po do sada dostupnim i dokazivim podacima, je da se Đoković šetao zaražen i kršio pravila o karantinu. 

[wwww]

56 minutes ago, L' Imperatore said:

 

Zanimljivo bi bilo znati kako je taj frankfurter alemanie cajtung predstavio ovaj slučaj svojim koristnicima. Ako je to bilo u fazonu "priviligovani srpski milioner, mislio da za njega pravila ne važe", onda rezultat ankete ni malo ne čudi.

 

@wwww nam je pre par dana pisala o tome kako mediji u Nemačkoj dosta različito pišu o celom slučaju. Pa ako možda zna, da nam kaže "na čijoj strani" je bio ovaj cajtung?

oni su uglavnom do sad pisali negativne clanke o Novaku.

Generalno je komentarisanje Novaka vec godinama negativno, svi su ogromni fanovi Federera. A i Beker je dosta kumovao tome, posto se iz potrebe da pokaze kako je on bio toliko bitan za Novakov uspeh (i da je veliki strucnjak) nije libio da popljuje bivseg sticenika.

[Wingwalker]

Moze voditelje sigurno, jer je bilo vredjanja i klevete.
Televizija moze da se pravi luda, svakako.

Uhhh...pa nisu bili u ulozi voditelja u trenutku izricanja kleveta i uvreda, odjavili su emisiju i čavrljali izmedju sebe i taj video klip je na net okačio njihov kolega...koji je zbog toga razumljivo sa profesionalne strane dobio otkaz a sa etičke pokazuje šta ozi vlada, novinari i sirota raja misle o tome.

[McLeod]

12 minutes ago, Tunji Awojobi said:

 

O, izvinite gospodine "non bis in idem", nisam znao da vam sad odjenom smeta pozivanje na pravne presedane. 

 

Dakle, tvoj stav o celoj stvari se svodi na to da će ga oni proterati proizvoljno zato što su tako rešili. Zašto? Zato. Ok, onda tako reci i da završimo s ovim. 

 

Ne, nego je besmisleno da pricamo o sudskom postupku koji se vodi na taj nacin, bukvalno na svako pitanje koje si postavio si i dobio odgovor. O mogucnostima, zasto je ovako, a nije onako, o svemu tome smo pricali, a ti opet insistiras na stvarima koje nisam nigde tvrdio.

 

A ovo sto ti tvrdis je bukvalno to - zasto je test validan? Batut reko da jeste. Zasto? Zato.

Edited January 15, 2022 by McLeod

[Losmi17]

Just now, Wingwalker said:

Uhhh...pa nisu bili u ulozi voditelja u trenutku izricanja kleveta i uvreda, odjavili su emisiju i čavrljali izmedju sebe i taj video klip je na net okačio njihov kolega...koji je zbog toga razumljivo sa profesionalne strane dobio otkaz a sa etičke pokazuje šta ozi vlada, novinari i sirota raja misle o tome.

Kakve to veze ima sto nisu bili voditelji?

U pitanju su uvrede i klevete na njegov racun, koje je zbog leaka videlo mnogo njih.

Klasicna povreda ugleda, casti, kleveta itd.

[L' Imperatore]

37 minutes ago, wwww said:

...

 

U USA ne moze uci bez 2 vakcine (IW, Majami), Ameri ukinuli ono izuzece za sportiste koje je vazilo prosle godine. Videcemo sta ce biti s Italijom, Francuskom, Spanijom i UK. Svasta moze da se desi u narednih par meseci.

 

...

 

Jel ovo još uvek važi? Mislim, zanimljivo je s obzirom da je Florida odabrala dosta otvoreniji pristup što se tiče covid restrikcija, u poređenju sa ostalim saveznim državama. Ili to za 2 doze pričamo od ulasku u USA, ne za turnir?

[alcesta]

5 hours ago, wwww said:

 

 

 

 

 

Iz ovoga što kaže Kirgios je jasno koliko Novaka pogađa što mu tako malo kolega daje podršku. Žao mi je što se tako suočio sa realnošću, ali valjda mu je najzad jasno da mu za sve što radi za PTPA niko neće reći hvala. Čast izuzecima.

 

4 hours ago, Dropkick Murphys said:

I sam reče da se ne bi vakcinisao sad, da nije morao zbog AO, ali ovo ne može da popularizuje antivax kampanju, jer....zavrnuo je rukav, iako nije hteo.

Verovatno kao i veliki broj Australijanaca.

Ima ova izjava Cicipasa predistoriju, tu je morao da se vadi posle ovoga:

Quote

"No-one has made it a mandatory thing to be vaccinated. At some point I will have to, I'm pretty sure about it, but so far it hasn't been mandatory to compete, so I haven't done it, no," he said.

"I'm young, under 25 category, for me the vaccine has not been tested enough, it is new. It has some side effects.

"I personally know some people who have had them. I'm not against it, I just see no reason for someone in my age group to need to be vaccinated."

He added that no one should be forced into taking the jab.

"I want to see a better version of the vaccine, which will give us more pluses than minuses," added the French Open runner-up.

https://www.thehindu.com/sport/tennis/stefanos-tsitsipas-angers-greek-government-over-vaccination-views/article36008491.ece

 

Onda je grčka vlada skočila na njega pa je morao da se pravda kako se ne razume u medicinu i da nije ništa loše mislio, i tako dalje... nije ni čudo što mu nije drago da gleda kako neko drugi odbija to što je on uradio, sa verovatno prilično sličnim motivima.

 

3 hours ago, McLeod said:

Da ne kvotujem sve, uopste ne pricam o dokazivanju na sudu, vec sam jednostavno pitao gde je taj dokaz da je test pravi, posto ste pominjali. Izjava Batuta nije dokaz. Mozda nekima od vas jeste, ali onda vi sebi treba da objasnite kako vam je izjava institucija ove zemlje sa sve pecatom i potpisom validna kada vam to ide u prilog, a u svih ostalih 99% slucajeva vlast ove zemlje laze i sve sto oni tvrde zapravo je suprotno.

Nevezano za to je li potvrda legitimna ili nije, stvarno je malo smešno da zvanični organ jedne zemlje u potvrdu mora da stavi uveravanje "our tests are reliable nad accurate" ili šta već piše. na šta to liči, valjda se u ozbiljnim zemljama tako nešto podrazumeva?!

[McLeod]

3 minutes ago, alcesta said:

 

 

Nevezano za to je li potvrda legitimna ili nije, stvarno je malo smešno da zvanični organ jedne zemlje u potvrdu mora da stavi uveravanje "our tests are reliable nad accurate" ili šta već piše. na šta to liči, valjda se u ozbiljnim zemljama tako nešto podrazumeva?!

 

naravno da se podrazumeva. Isto kao sto se podrazumeva da ista institucija ne laze u vezi broja zarazenih i umrlih od korona virusa.

 

pa se onda pokaze da postoji sumnja, a ako postoji sumnja, onda se toj instituciji vise ne veruje na rec.

 

I drago mi je ako neko (generalno, ne konkretno ti) misli da je ovo ozbiljna zemlja ako staje na taj nacin iza Novaka Djokovica, neka se toga seti i sutra kad naprasno ponovo postane neozbiljna, to bi bilo posteno i prema sebi i prema toj zemlji.

Edited January 15, 2022 by McLeod

[wwww]

11 minutes ago, L' Imperatore said:

 

Jel ovo još uvek važi? Mislim, zanimljivo je s obzirom da je Florida odabrala dosta otvoreniji pristup što se tiče covid restrikcija, u poređenju sa ostalim saveznim državama. Ili to za 2 doze pričamo od ulasku u USA, ne za turnir?

o ulasku u USA.

[Wingwalker]

 

 

 

Kakve to veze ima sto nisu bili voditelji?

U pitanju su uvrede i klevete na njegov racun, koje je zbog leaka videlo mnogo njih.

Klasicna povreda ugleda, casti, kleveta itd.

 

To je ,,mnogo njih videlo" ne njihovom krivicom...može da tuži onog ko je to postavio tj napravio viralnim. Akteri klipa nisu znali da su usnimljeni. Naravno ovo je prikaz u očima slepe Justicije...jer se samo to i računa.

 

[alcesta]

3 hours ago, McLeod said:

 

Ne moras da verujes Batutu. Ne moras da verujes nikome. Postoje naucno utemeljena saznanja koja sezu preko 100 godina u proslost.

 

Jer vidis, tu je srz problema, ne samo u vezi ovoga, nego u vezi bilo cega - nerazumevanje empirije, nauke i logike (ne pricam tebi nego uopste).

 

Ja ne moram da verujem nikome, ako mogu da razumem problem. To sto neko drugi imputira verovanje meni ili biranje strane na osnovu emotivne vezanosti ili druge vrste naklonosti jednoj ili drugoj strani, moze samo da bude indikator da ta osoba zapravo tako bira stranu i u ovom slucaju, a i generalno.

Pa niko ne može da zna sve niti da razume sve na ovom svetu. Razumevanje empirije, nauke i logike ide samo do određene tačke, za usko specijalizovane oblasti ne vredi mnogo jer prosto ne možeš da razumeš takve oblasti za koje nisi stručnjak. I onda moraš da veruješ nekom autoritetu, simple as that. Ono što je u tom slučaju potrebno jeste da možeš da prepoznaš koji je izvor verodostojan a koji nije. Zato je toliko važno da izjave lekara ne budu kontradiktorne, jer kome će laici da inače veruju? Ne mogu svi da vise na netu i da čitaju Lancet i najnovije peer reviewed studije. 

[ciao]

15 minutes ago, L' Imperatore said:

 

Jel ovo još uvek važi? Mislim, zanimljivo je s obzirom da je Florida odabrala dosta otvoreniji pristup što se tiče covid restrikcija, u poređenju sa ostalim saveznim državama. Ili to za 2 doze pričamo od ulasku u USA, ne za turnir?

Pogledah sada na sajtu IATA sta treba za ulaz u USA, za vakcinisane sve ok, ali postoji masa izuzetaka za nevakcinisane, naprimer lekarska potvrda o kontraindikaciji zbog eventualne alergije naprimer  i jos masa drugih stvari. Postoji i nesto o karantinu od deset dana za nevakcinisane koji moze da se skrati sa testom tokom karantina, sve u svemu moze se tamo uci i nevakcinisan ako se samo malo potrudis nece te staviti u zatvor koliko ja vidim

[Predragdjape]

Mene zanima kakva je to pravna i uredjena drzava, kada ih jedan teniser, evo veceras, po drugi put dobija na sudu? 😄 

[McLeod]

4 minutes ago, alcesta said:

Pa niko ne može da zna sve niti da razume sve na ovom svetu. Razumevanje empirije, nauke i logike ide samo do određene tačke, za usko specijalizovane oblasti ne vredi mnogo jer prosto ne možeš da razumeš takve oblasti za koje nisi stručnjak. I onda moraš da veruješ nekom autoritetu, simple as that. Ono što je u tom slučaju potrebno jeste da možeš da prepoznaš koji je izvor verodostojan a koji nije. Zato je toliko važno da izjave lekara ne budu kontradiktorne, jer kome će laici da inače veruju? Ne mogu svi da vise na netu i da čitaju Lancet i najnovije peer reviewed studije. 

 

Slazem se sa tobom, nigde nisam ni tvrdio da mogu uvek i u svakoj oblasti/slucaju da formiram misljenje na taj nacin.

 

Ali se ne slazem sa drugim delom posta. U tom slucaju ne formiram snazno misljenje. Prosto i jednostavno. I zivotne odluke donosim bez emotivnog upliva i confirmation biasa, ili se bar trudim da ih stavim ad acta.

[erwin]

 

[Tunji Awojobi]

32 minutes ago, McLeod said:

 

Ne, nego je besmisleno da pricamo o sudskom postupku koji se vodi na taj nacin, bukvalno na svako pitanje koje si postavio si i dobio odgovor. O mogucnostima, zasto je ovako, a nije onako, o svemu tome smo pricali, a ti opet insistiras na stvarima koje nisam nigde tvrdio.

 

A ovo sto ti tvrdis je bukvalno to - zasto je test validan? Batut reko da jeste. Zasto? Zato.

Nisam. Čak ni na neka koja sam postavio dvaput. Ali stvarno ne želim da ih ponavljam i treći put. Slažem se da je besmisleno.