Skip to content

Comment on Robots.txt for the NYT has a specific exclusion for an 1996 news articleparent

Comments

For that very reason a convicted criminal in my country (in the EU) can get a document saying that they are not a convicted criminal after they paid their dues to the society.

That’s an interesting phrasing. Even you (who seems to support the policy) describe the convicted criminal as a convicted criminal, yet they’re able to get a piece of paper that says they aren’t one.

Does everyone have to produce such a paper routinely in life, or is this a case of “hi, I’m @sokoloff and, even though you didn’t ask, I’d like you to read this paper which says I’m totally not a convicted criminal”?

“A, are you a convicted criminal?” “No.”

“B, are you a convicted criminal?” “No.”

“C, are you a convicted criminal?” “This piece of paper says I’m not.”

That’s an interesting phrasing. Even you (who seems to support the policy) describe the convicted criminal as a convicted criminal, yet they’re able to get a piece of paper that says they aren’t one.

They can get that paper after they payed their dues to society (served their time).

Does everyone have to produce such a paper routinely in life

Not routinely but I don't think anybody goes through their life without ever needing that paper. It is required for a vast variety of government programs and some jobs also require it. Working in IT I had to get it a few times when applying for jobs in private sector.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.