'Discutir 2' e outras coisas.
Traz-nos André M., muito oportunamente, ao debate o seguinte post:

Um artigo interessante sobre a regulamentação europeia na internet:
Dalzell recognized that the U.S. government's true fear of the Internet was not indecency or obscenity, but hypothetical worries about how "too much speech occurs in that medium." Dalzell and eventually the Supreme Court realized that the best way to foster the soon-to-be spectacular growth of the Internet was to reduce government regulation--not to increase it.
Unfortunately, Europeans still haven't quite figured that out. The Council of Europe--an influential quasi-governmental body that drafts conventions and treaties--is meeting on Monday to finalize a proposal that veers in exactly the opposite direction.
Nem os blogs ficam de fora.....
The all-but-final proposal draft says that Internet news organizations, individual Web sites, moderated mailing lists and even Web logs (or "blogs"), must offer a "right of reply" to those who have been criticized by a person or organization.
With clinical precision, the council's bureaucracy had decided exactly what would be required.
A conclusão parece justa : while the Council of Europe is very influential and its proposals have a tendency to become law, that outcome is not guaranteed.

Considero um excelente contributo para discussão iniciada por JPP, e espero, ansiosamente, não de flash-back, mas de feed-back do mesmo a este post tão oportuno.
Quando é que a Europa (e, particularmente, o nosso pobre Portugal…) perceberá que não é certificando e regulamentando as coisas, em intermináveis e, às vezes, inomináveis procedimentos burocráticos, que alcançam o garante de qualidade?! Será que o Estado tem que meter o nariz em tudo? Deixem as coisas fluir… livremente!!!! Para quê esta paranóia de modelização, de uniformização?