Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)OH
Posts
3
Comments
492
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Reuters had a choice to reword the article (like some other media houses in OP's link have done) or retract the article. they have chosen to do the latter.

    the core difference is that choice. had the court deemed that the article should have been taken down, Reuters wouldn't have even had that choice.

    getting mad at the court in this case is akin to getting mad at the car that a drunk driver drove into a house. sure, it has been the proximal instrument of destruction, but it wasn't the one who veered off the road.

    blame the leeching lawyers here.

  • just a minor clarification. the court did not order the article to he taken down. the court just said that the article constitutes defamation.

    it was Reuter's decision to therefore take down the article. in OP's first link, there's info of other media houses that have also pulled such stories.

    blame the scummy lawyers protecting the scumbag and his predatory behaviour.

  • from what one hears about the pressure of these exams, i dont think the reasons for those measures are as wholesome as assumed in this comment.

    these exams are amongst the most competitive in the world and their outcome provides only a single window which dictates the rest of your life. that is not a system worth boasting about.