NSC now in it for £££

[Bozza]

I've been bored off this thread again.

Carry on as you were.

 

[Creaky]

I've been bored off this thread again.

Carry on as you were.

Up to you - here is a link to the Regulations

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/2013/contents/made

See Regulation 6 Section 2

(2) Where a person providing an information society service refers to prices, these shall be indicated clearly and unambiguously and, in particular, shall indicate whether they are inclusive of tax and delivery costs.

 

[fataddick]

They don't show any prices at all - that is the whole point.

If however you do indicate a price, as you have done on this thread, then they must be clear and unambiguous - which they aren't.

God you're even more annoying than I am.

 

[El Presidente]

Up to you - here is a link to the Regulations

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/2013/contents/made

See Regulation 6 Section 2

(2) Where a person providing an information society service refers to prices, these shall be indicated clearly and unambiguously and, in particular, shall indicate whether they are inclusive of tax and delivery costs.

You have a unique ability to ruin a perfectly good binfest.

 

[Grombleton]

Up to you - here is a link to the Regulations

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/2013/contents/made

See Regulation 6 Section 2

(2) Where a person providing an information society service refers to prices, these shall be indicated clearly and unambiguously and, in particular, shall indicate whether they are inclusive of tax and delivery costs.

I guess it could be claimed that it has been fulfilled - he mentioned a price and it was clear and unambiguous as to what they were - it's irrelevant as to whether they're public or not.

 

[Creaky]

I give in - I really don't care whether or not Bozza complies with UK law or not - if he wants to take a risk by ignoring it then that is up to him.

The point I was making is that had the site complied with the appropriate legislation then it would have been clear to the OP that payment was required to advertise a job opportunity and none of this angst would have occurred.

 

[8ace]

 

[Bozza]

I give in - I really don't care whether or not Bozza complies with UK law or not - if he wants to take a risk by ignoring it then that is up to him.

The point I was making is that had the site complied with the appropriate legislation then it would have been clear to the OP that payment was required to advertise a job opportunity and none of this angst would have occurred.

No, no it wouldn't. You really don't get it.

 

[Kazenga <3]

lol

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Indeed i tis and indeed he can.

The very important point I made earlier though appears to have been ignored!

IF you run a website that offers a commercial service such as offering advertising space for sale then you MUST follow the law of the land and display certain information which as far as I can tell is not available on NSC. - Information that had it been available would have avoided the need for this thread.

How does POA work in your world then?

 

[Guinness Boy]

Hmmm not much decency and honour calling somebody a w****r and retweeting it to his 11,500 followers with no right to reply

Again fair enough. I haven't seen the tweets. I follow the OP and he follows me because I've written blogs for him but I'm having a good long break from twitter. It's worse than this place. So once again - I thought there was an accusation of domestic violence in a public domain. I know this not to be true. It turned out to be a hilarious "joke". I apologised for not getting that. OK?

 

[Bozza]

Time to close this I think.

One of the more bizarre episodes I've experienced, I think.