Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rosndo's commentslogin

> I haven't ever been in a place that felt so fake and liveless. The only thing you can do is go to the mall.

That’s not true at all. Mall is probably the last place anyone should go to in Dubai.

Instead of going to the Mall, you could drive a little and go view the wonderful collection at Louvre Abu Dhabi.

You could also go eat excellent sushi at the little (and cheap) 3 Fils at the local Fishing harbor in Jumeirah. There’s also a decent seafood restaurant next door run by local fishermen.

On Palm there’s the excellent Ibn AlBahr run by a group of Lebanese(?) fishermen.

Deira too is full of nice authentic places.

But sure, if you’re a mall enthusiast then a shitty mall is all you will find. If you seek out nice authentic places, they’re easy to find.


Dubai sounds decidedly better than the towns that surround it, sure, but it's pretty clear based on this description (and every other) that it is not even close to a world class city.


I mean I’m deliberately neglecting to mention all the European restaurants like L'Atelier de Joël Robuchon, LPM, Gaia, COYA, Zuma, Cipriani and so many others.

Most of these aren’t my favourites, but they’re definitely well loved in world class cities like London.

Do I think Dubai is a world class city? Nah. But it’s not very far.

Personally I’m really not a fan of the place, I’d only ever visit to meet with lawyers. Too warm, too much sand, most of the restaurants can also be found in much better cities (Monaco has most of the aforementioned within a short distance, and vastly better beaches)


I think what makes a world class city is not that it has those sorts of restaurants/shops/etc, but that it incubates those things. Quite a long way from that.


Sockpuppet alert: doldols = rosndo


[flagged]


[flagged]


> How are you not totally creepy and demented yourself, since you're the one who's losing your shit when somebody truthfully points out that you're a sock puppet

I make that fact clear in my messages, I don’t make any effort to hide my multiple accounts.

I already told jacquesm that I only use multiple accounts to get around ratelimits on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31240871

It’s weird and creepy that he continues to follow me around after that.

> why are you so desperately trying to conceal your numerous false identities?

I’m obviously not, put down the pipe.

> It was also spectacularly unwise for you to go on the record with your threats to commit extortion and fraud and libel and identity theft. But you be you. You can't unring that bell, and I'm sure Dan will be happy to provide the IP addresses of all of your sock puppet accounts to the authorities, if it comes to that.

Nobody cares lmao. Back in the real world you won’t be able to find a single police officer interested in these kinds of things, much less many police officers in several countries which it would take for anyone to even reach me.


We've banned this account and related accounts for breaking the site guidelines repeatedly and ignoring our repeated requests to stop. Also for using multiple accounts abusively, and (it seems) also for crossing into aggressive attacks outside this site. Seriously not cool.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


What exactly am I supposed to do when another user is stalking me besides tell them off?

How am I using multiple accounts abusively? I’ve been using them to make substantive comments when prevented from doing so by ratelimits, which is something actively encouraged by your webdesign.

I write a good comment, get hit by the ratelimit, am I just supposed to throw it away? That’s shitty. The right and proper thing to do would be to inform me of the ratelimit before I waste my time writing a comment I can’t post.

I don’t think you can criticize the comment histories of my other accounts like https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=doldols , I’ve been using them to make substantive contributions, not to abuse people.


Your account was rate limited because you have a history of breaking the site guidelines. We've warned you about doing that, and asked you to stop, many times.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31126715 (April 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31054808 (April 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30928186 (April 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30617519 (March 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30608897 (March 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30501710 (Feb 2022)

Using multiple accounts to get around moderation restrictions is obviously an abuse of the site.


Nobody is stalking you.

Replying to your frequent postings on a public forum and stating the fact that your accounts are sock puppets, which you don't deny, is certainly not stalking.

If you're terrified of people publicly replying to your public posts, then don't post in public, simple as that.

If you bravely decide you have thick enough skin to tolerate people replying to your posts, and you hit the rate limit, then post later, simple as that.

On the other hand, your creepy and unlawful actions of launching massive denial of service attacks against other users and threatening to spend thousands of euros to ruin their lives by committing fraud and identity theft is DEFINITELY stalking.

You went WAY beyond "telling them off". So don't pretend we all don't know what you really are.

YOU are the stalker.


[flagged]


...while getting all of your accounts banned for stalking is both free and priceless.


It’s not a place where you live all year round.


It’s nice for a week or two, but gets boring pretty fast. You can only eat at L’Atelier so many times.

But it’s surely better than almost every other city in the world.


> But it’s surely better than almost every other city in the world

On which basis?


Good infrastructure, clean streets, adequate public transit, no crime. Well connected globally.


> Good infrastructure

They don’t even have a working sewage system.


Hmmm. this article from 2011 says they do: https://web.archive.org/web/20130504074926/http://gulftoday....


This company is still advertising its tanker services in 2020.

https://dotless.ae/how-does-dubai-manage-its-sewage-water/

From 2016 so Dubai may have had a working sewage system for a year, so I could be wrong.

> Dubai: The emirate of Dubai will get a new deep tunnel sewerage system costing Dh12.5 billion in the next five years to replace more than 121 sewage pumping stations.

Pumping station meaning tankers transport the waste away.

https://gulfnews.com/uae/government/dubai-to-get-a-new-sewag...


From the end user perspective that still seems like a working sewage system, no?

It’s not like they’re making residents pay high taxes to pay for the tankers either.


We disagree on what a working sewage system means. Tanker trucks aren’t it. Dubai may have had a working sewage system for a year now. Not great but better than I thought was the case.


Your definition involves strange mental gymnastics to turn a perfectly functional albeit expensive sewage system into a non-working sewage system.

The end user experience of the sewage system in Dubai is no different than in regular Western cities. That’s really all that matters when trying to figure out if it’s “working” or not.


Restaurants, flight connections, quality of services, friendly tax regime. Restaurants obviously being the most important metric.

Sure, it’ll lose out to London, Paris, Barcelona, New York, Los Angeles, …

But it won’t lose out to cities like Manchester or Liverpool.


>Restaurants obviously being the most important metric

This reminds me a bit of Eddie Izzard's impression of the Queen: "A plumber? What on Eaaarrrthh is that?" Not everyone can eat at a restaurant nightly. Not everyone can eat. And some of the reason for that is designed into the current system.


Sure, but HN audience is primarily rich tech workers, entrepreneurs and temporarily embarrassed versions of those.

In this context it makes sense to look at things from that perspective. On reddit it would of course be different.


I’d hope rich tech workers and entrepreneurs aren’t all ok with the amount of slavery and oppression going on in Dubai.


There is no slavery in Dubai, oppression yes, but not actual slavery.

You’ll find more slaves per capita in the US where prisoners are widely used as actual slave labor.


There are definitely people who are enslaved in the UAE under the Kafala System. It’s unclear to me how widespread it is, but it does happen. When I was there, I personally met a woman on Tinder, and on our date she told me she had been forced into prostitution by the person who brought her to the UAE. She had to earn tens of thousands of dollars to get her passport back from him.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafala_system


This is absolutely illegal and you can get your passport back within a day or two by just calling MOHRE.

A decade ago this stuff may have been more common, but the government has cracked down heavily to the point that it doesn’t exist any more than it does in Europe.


> Places that allow the rich to prevent themselves from being taxed by their home countries do not deserve existence.

Sounds like you are describing almost every single country on earth!

I think what you really object to is countries offering attractive tax regimes.


> * .eu can be used as an alternative to .com for businesses and organizations in the EU.

This is bad advice. Nobody should use .eu


Why's that? It's pefectly usable for things like portal pages linking to country-specific pages.


Sure, for pages that you don’t hope anyone to actually find.


> How long does Jump imagine they have to accept counteroffer?

Generally in situations like this, unless otherwise specified, courts would fall back to a “reasonable” period of time or until Jump is notified that the offer is no longer valid.


No, you’re playing with words here.

Replace your first sentence with “will you buy this car from me for $10000” and that seems like a pretty clear verbal contract.

Of course verbal contracts are tricky, but this particular case was in writing.


The words matter yes, as does the meaning behind them. If we return to the yard sale and have the seller say "I will buy that knickknack for $1, do you agree" and the seller says "Yes", then the verbal contract is much more obvious.

Just like a customer asking for a price check, a seller asking if a customer is interested are normal parts of conversations that occurs between buyers and seller before a sale is made final. Regardless if it is in writing or not, the important part is if there has been an general agreement between the two parties. That agreement is what forms a contract.

If I go to a store and point at some knickknack and ask "how much for that?", the clerk says "$1", I say "that's a deal", the clerk say "you got to be a member of the club, which cost $1000", then that is not a break of contract. Depending in the jurisdiction it could be an illegal contract or false advertisement, but those tend to take a perspective of protecting customers against being tricked. That is a harder case to make when its the seller that refuses to agree to the sale.


“How much is that?” is strictly different from “I will pay you $2500 for this”.

First isn’t an offer, nor is it a negotiation.


How was it a clear joke?


But was he not accepting the deal on his part by offering it in the first place?


That's not how negotiation works - not legally and not practically.

I give you an estimate $10k for some work you want. But confirmed work comes in. Now I can't do your work. Sorry, I withdraw the estimate.

I offer to sell you a website for $X. While you're thinking about it, someone else offers $2X. I take the second offer.


That’s completely different though, none of those scenarios are even vaguely similar to what happened here.

I think the fact that you have to engage in such mental gymnastics to try and make your point is pretty telling.


It was not a genuine offer.


Akin to “jokingly” signing a regular paper contract, no?


Almost, except without the signature, the paper, the contract, or the regularity. But almost.


Both the paper and the signature are utterly irrelevant.

You can certainly enter a contract over email, it’s not irregular.


Idk I feel like nothing is really on the table until there's ink on paper so to speak. Like if this company made a job offer via email but no contract was signed yet, then no contract has been signed yet.

If we consider verbal contracts absolute then that changes a LOT of things.


The price is figure isn't acceptance of an offer or a contract its negotiation regarding what terms would in fact be acceptable to both parties in preparation for forging an actual meeting of minds which would in turn enable a contract to be created.


I make an offer (in writing), you make a counteroffer (in writing), I accept your counteroffer (in writing).

Seems like a contract to me.


You go to walmart you ask the employee "how much is that TV". The employee says $999. No contract between you and Walmart has been effected. If you go back tomorrow to buy the TV and the price has risen to $1099 you can either make an agreement or not by handing over the money in exchange for a receipt and a TV. Importantly a quote must be different from a contract because virtually all contracts have conditions beyond price that must be satisfied in order to effect a deal between parties and discussing price is a way to clarify that that particular precondition has been met not an indication that all possible preconditions have been met.

An individual can be forgiven for not understanding the difference between a quote and a contract but a corporate lawyer never had that misunderstanding in the first place. When they tried to accept and they got a response that wasn't in the affirmative they understood that no deal had been struck. What they are trying to do is argue that a hypothetical lawyer, perhaps one that nearly failed out of school, could have incorrectly concluded from a 4 word email that an agreement had been made until the next email came in an hour later ergo the court should absolutely enforce that!

The purpose of contract law is to enforce the obligations that arise from legitimate meetings of minds not for highly paid corporate lawyers to play gotcha with laymen. If the meeting of minds in question wasn't sufficiently clarified in the 4 word email then follow up clarify mutual understanding and move forward. It appears that further clarification was sought AND in fact it made clear that there was no meeting of the minds at all. Now after the fact they would like the court to enforce what they wish the counter party had agreed to irrespective of what they actually intended.

Instead they should find someone who actually wants to do business with them instead of suing people that obvious have no desire to. The court should instead make them pay for the opposing sides legal bills and a penalty for bring a frivolous lawsuit that misunderstands centuries of commerce which understands the difference between discussion on price and affirmation of a deal something that would have been expressed by a handshake in person or a follow up email to the effect of "yes that will be fine then"


Your example is completely irrelevant, nobody asked for a quote here. Jump made an offer and received a counteroffer.

A counteroffer is not a quote.


In what way is the price is _____ not a quote? If there is a doubt about acceptance you send a follow up email ... which they did and got clarification that the offer wouldn't be accepted as such. Now they want to play gotcha and they are going to lose. Instead of debating the matter why don't you watch this play out in court.


It’s not a quote when it’s a counteroffer in a negotiation.


Why would an email not be an agreement?


Its not legally binding, are you asking why an email isn't legally binding?


Yeah, why not?


Because a window isn't a door


So you don’t actually know?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: