[MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #216 - 11 msgs

[Jon Lambert]

Ben wrote:
> Jon Lambert Wrote:
> > Greg Miller wrote:
> > > Here, we have a fundamental disagreement. I believe letting people do
> > > what they want should be the default. Exceptions should be made
> > > reluctantly. Is it really any of the government's business if I choose
> > > to provide my services for free?
> >
> > I agree 100%.  I'd also like to point out that the distinctions
> > between employee and non-employee are purely regulatory, arbitrary, and
> > have ZERO basis in legislative action.  As a matter of fact the 20
> questions
> > asked to determine whether one is an employee or not, are based on the
> > feudal obligations of English lords circa the time the Magna Carta was
> > signed.  In any event the Internal Revenue Service has never provided
> > any system or guidelines as to what constitutes an affimative or negative
> > response in regards to weighting of the questions or the proportion of
> > questions required in determining employment or non-employement.  The
> legal
> > precedence in this area is contradictory and not uniform.  I've dealt
> > with these employee issues a lot being a contractor and sub-contractor
> > for 10 years.
> >
> 
> I disagree.  If they volunteer and are not directly employed in the
> money-making,
> it shouldn't be illegal.  If they want to outlaw volunteers, what happens to
> newbie
> helper guilds on a MUD, if that MUD is for profit.
> 

I agree with your "it shouldn't be illegal", but can't quite figure out what 
you are disagreeing with above; which is the only reason for the uneccessary over 
quote.   

--
J. Lambert
 





_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev