Quoting from the Wikipedia article, "Ford spoke and voted at the February 7 meeting: "[A]nd if it wasn't for this foundation, these kids would not have a chance. And then to ask for me to pay it out of my own pocket personally, there is just, there is no sense to this. The money is gone, the money has been spent on football equipment
Paul Magner that brought forth the court case is not a millionaire, although there may be a millionaire named Paul Magner living in Toronto.
"Ontario Superior Court Judge Hackland's ruling was released on November 26, 2012. Hackland found that Ford had violated the MCIA and declared his seat vacant, the decision to take effect in 14 days. In his decision, Hackland disagreed with all of Ford's legal arguments. In his disposition, Hackland stated: "Ford's actions were not done by reason of inadvertence or of a good faith error in judgment. I am, therefore, required by s. 10(1)(a) of the MCIA to declare the respondent's seat vacant. In view of the significant mitigating circumstances surrounding the respondent's actions
Then Ford appealed the decision, and won his appeal on what some view as a technicality, the "financial judgment was not under the City of Toronto Act or the Council Code of Conduct. Further, the sanction was beyond the authority of the City Council to enact."
Although he won the appeal, he was not awarded court costs.
that was taxing to watch.\]
That is so nucking futs!
Thanks for that comment. No go back into your troll-hole and read the book Knuckle Dragging for Cretins.
Politics being what it is, a politician will try to wrap themselves with the glory coming from a successful project. As with anyone they want to minimize the risk. Being a politician has nothing to do with their gender, only the glad-handing opportunism. To simplify it for your less developed neocortex:
Being political is not for everyone, but having a politician who supports a large scale project, will ensure funding and support. If you tell your boss that a project will be successful and it will work and it doesn't. I would not be surprised if you do get a strip torn off since you made your boss look bad!
Another example of prior art exists, and I quote from the IEEE article
One of the major improvements of Telidon over first generation videotex systems is its high-quality graphic capability. High resolution colour drawings, intricate shapes, even photographs are all possible through Telidon technology.
This was in 1981. In 1985 I did some work for a small Toronto based company, where they were developing both Telidon content and technology. I wrote a NAPLSP decoder/encoder written using C, lex and yacc. Everything was coded using a machine readable instruction set. Since everything was done using dialup modems, and 2400 baud was considered fast.
I also did a standalone NAPLSP server and browser that would display content. This was delivered to Xerox when they had their own retail stores in Toronto. It was commercialized to a certain degree.
There were several dozen public terminals in malls and other public areas in the city. It was a prime example of a technology that was a solution looking for a problem. Lack of bandwidth, and a lack of critical mass in terms of a wide spread adoption doomed it to failure. It was fun while it lasted.
It is regrettable that Michael Doyle had Microsoft settle with him. By settling with him, it gave him the war chest to proceed with further litigation. The concepts that he is claiming as his own, written up by Ted Nelson in Computer Lib (1974), and then became reality with Telidon (1981). Michaels patent is dated 1993. It is the interest of everyone to refute the patent by presenting prior art. Perhaps a Telidon terminal demonstration would be in order.
You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish. -- from the tunefs(8) man page