Thankfully, smarter people than you and I decide what the law "applies to." That's what the courts have ruled, there can be no "consent" if it's a condition for employment. There must be articulated suspicion.
thisisnotgoingwell
joined 2 years ago
Huh??? "Bound by the fourth amendment?" Have you ever read the Constitution? The fourth amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. As in, a protection afforded to all Americans. Please read a little.
Your reading comprehension is horrible, to say the least. Let me highlight the keywords for you so it's easier.
Most courts have ruled that mandatory urinalysis, at least in the absence of probable cause or reasonable suspicion, is invalid as a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
My source discussed your concerns, I think you did not read it.
"Most courts have ruled that mandatory urinalysis, at least in the absence of probable cause or reasonable suspicion, is invalid as a violation of the Fourth Amendment. While some courts have concluded that government workers may have a diminished expectation of privacy in comparison with the public at large, other courts have required some quantum of individualized suspicion before drug testing can be conducted. States have attempted to uphold mandatory drug testing by arguing that government employees voluntarily consent to drug testing and voluntary consent does not violate the Fourth Amendment. Courts have not accepted this argument, however, finding that consent obtained under the threat of disciplinary action is coercive and thus unconstitutional. The real issue in mandatory drug testing involves balancing individual versus government interests. Most courts hold that, absent probable cause or reasonable suspicion, individual constitutional rights are not outweighed by governmental interests"
Probably because routine mandatory tests are bad, and the comment you replied to is an endorsement to it. It's a gross violation of your constitutional rights under the 4th amendment. Also, why do you care to make assumptions on why people downvoted if you're not even making an effort to broaden your views?
I tend to agree with most of what you said but the main reason this is even a thing is that women typically date older men who are already established. Dating in your early 20s is basically impossible because your female counterparts aren't looking for guys that are just starting out or figuring out who they are. Women seek security and sustainability and the 28 year old guy who knows himself and has his own house, good job and car looks far more appealing than the 21 year old who's living with his parents or going to school. I'm not even criticizing women here, it makes sense.
Well others including I have explained it to you. It's not open. And your comparison (SMTP) shows your lack of knowledge on the subject.
Oh yeah lol that too
I'm convinced you're incorrect. SMTP is an open transport protocol defined in RFC 2821 by the IETF. Anything that is an IP "open protocol" would be defined by IETF as an RFC. No one owns it. No license is required to operate an SMTP server. Same with other common protocols like SIP. It sets qualifications/requirements for what it is so anyone can use it.
RCS is a proprietary standard owned by the GSMA. It seems there is some support for developers that want to use RCS but it's through an API. Meaning your use is licensed and at a cost. Also, you can't really see what it's doing. You're just using an API. Your access can be revoked. So is it an open standard? No.
I did my own research and I plan to try these APIs because I have used other messaging services like twilio for paging applications. But here are some other geeks arguing about it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/wm18td/stop_telling_people_that_rcs_is_an_open_standard/
Yes, and your source says nothing to the contrary.
Honestly, I think the nicest thing you can do for people is to make your point quickly and keep it as short as possible.
For peers on collaborative issues:
Hello NJSpradin,
Hope you had an excellent weekend. I'd like to discuss the doohickey problem. I'm leaning towards XYZ, but I'd love to know your thoughts. Let me know when it's most convenient to meet.
Thanks.
For peers or people that are not doing their job.
Hello NJSpradin,
As discussed, the delivery of the doohickey proposal is needed ASAP. Please make this your priority and let me know if there's anything you need.
Thanks.
Call it whatever you want, I guess but it seems like you're projecting. There's nothing controversial about the idea that women seek security or that men are biologically attracted to young women.
You're asking for a source which is funny because you're the one making the counterargument. I'd expect you to have provided something. I imagine that with your bait insult(incel, lol, I'm married but okay) you're not really looking for an intelligent discussion here. But on the off-chance you are, here you go.
Article https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201907/do-women-really-prefer-men-money-over-looks
One of many studies referenced in the article
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1474704919852921