Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Canada Sci-Fi The Almighty Buck Idle

Star Trek Fans Told To Stop "Spocking" Canadian $5 Bill 223

Posted by samzenpus from the draw-it-on-and-prosper dept.
bellwould writes The Toronto Sun is reporting that Bank of Canada executives are urging Star Trek fans to stop altering Wilfred Laurier's face on the Canadian $5 bill to look like Spock. Although not illegal to draw on the bills, a Bank of Canada spokesperson points out that the markings may reduce effectiveness of the security features or worse, the money may not be accepted.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Trek Fans Told To Stop "Spocking" Canadian $5 Bill More

Star Trek Fans Told To Stop "Spocking" Canadian $5 Bill

Comments Filter:

  • Funniest headline I've seen all day (Score:5, Insightful)

    by siuengr ( 625257 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:32PM (#49183591)
    It just made me smile.

    • Re:Funniest headline I've seen all day (Score:5, Informative)

      by monkeyzoo ( 3985097 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @05:01PM (#49183909)

      Yeah.
      Her full quote is:

      She says in a statement, “It is not illegal to write or make other markings on bank notes... However, there are important reasons why it should not be done. Writing on a bank note may interfere with the security features and reduces its lifespan. Markings on a note may also prevent it from being accepted in a transaction. Furthermore, the Bank of Canada feels that writing and markings on bank notes are inappropriate as they are a symbol of our country and a source of national pride.”

      Guess she's asking "please." Not sure I see the harm.

    • Re:Funniest headline I've seen all day (Score:4, Funny)

      by MrBigInThePants ( 624986 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @05:17PM (#49184051)
      Very much so. But lets be serious people. Money is serious business to be treated seriously by serious people.

      "...Bank of Canada executives are urging.. "
      Oh canada, listen to your financial betters! Stop an absolutely awesome currency-wide joke because they say so for no really good reason. Yes, THIS is how the world should be run, without humour of any sort.

      "may reduce effectiveness of the security features or worse, the money may not be accepted."

      Oh yes, be afraid Canada, VERY afraid. Authoritarians love to tell you how to act and when that fails attempt to bully and scare you into doing what they want - no matter how ridiculous they sound while doing so.

      IOW: BoC executives should STFU.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Really, if you're going to holler "Help, help, I'm being repressed!" over stuff like this, it's going to be hard to take you seriously when you actually have a point.

        • You are being a dick.

          I never said I was repressed - I am not even from Canada.

          I was quite obviously parodying the impotent message from the self important executives.

          Why do I have to explain this? Oh right....troll....
        • PS: And don't you oppress me!!!

          PS: That was a monty python quote. I would not expect you to get that considering how far over your head my other post flew...

    • Illogical (Score:5, Funny)

      by penguinoid ( 724646 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @05:34PM (#49184205) Homepage Journal

      This complaint is illogical. I estimate a 99.9732156% chance that it will be ignored.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Never tell me the odds!!!

        Oops...wrong franchise...

    • Re:Funniest headline I've seen all day (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @06:01PM (#49184397)

      Bank of Canada, meet the Streisand Effect

  • Alternate Bank of Canada Press Release (Score:5, Funny)

    by cruff ( 171569 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:32PM (#49183603)
    The Bank of Canada wishes to inform Star Trek fans that while they may live long, they may not prosper if other parties refuse to accept defaced $5 bills that have been drawn on (aka "Spocked") in tribute to the late actor Leonard Nimoy.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      The Bank of Canada wishes to inform Star Trek fans that while they may live long, they may not prosper if other parties refuse to accept defaced $5 bills.

      Whoops, is that legal? In the U.S. you cannot decline payment made in cash (if you normally take cash). But it's also illegal to deface money.
      But if it's not illegal to Spock a 5-spot in Canada that makes the bills legal currency still.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by everett ( 154868 )

        This isn't entirely correct, you're not allowed to not take cash to settle a debt. If there's no debt, you're more than welcome to tell people to piss off with their bag of change.

        • This isn't entirely correct, you're not allowed to not take cash to settle a debt. If there's no debt, you're more than welcome to tell people to piss off with their bag of change.

          Actually there is no legal requirement to take cash, debt or no debt. You can refuse to accept cash if you want.

          • Re:Alternate Bank of Canada Press Release (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @05:39PM (#49184257)

            Good luck convincing a court that someone owes you money after you refused their cash.

            • Pretty sure there have been court cases about this. If someone rolls up with a wheelbarrow full of $3000 in loose change, you can tell them to piss off without voiding the debt.

            • Good luck convincing a court that someone owes you money after you refused their cash.

              Why would they owe you money? You never gave them the goods because you couldn't be sure their cash wasn't counterfeit. If anyone is going to have to convince a court, it's they who are going to have to argue that I did something illegal by refusing to accept their funny money.

              • They would owe you money because the entire premise of this discussion is that they have a debt to you. A debt literally means they owe you money.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by mjwx ( 966435 )

              Good luck convincing a court that someone owes you money after you refused their cash.

              If Canada are anything like other commonwealth countries, then it will go something like this:

              Plaintiff: Your honour, the tender offered by the defendant was defaced.
              Judge: I see, please pay the plaintiff in non defaced currency.

              In Australia you can refuse payment by cash, a lot of businesses dont have the facilities to process it (mainly online businesses). Only certain types of businesses are forced to accept cash (most do because cash is such a useful medium and it's the cheapest, fastest way of f

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Socguy ( 933973 )
              I have personally experienced Telus, a major phone company in Canada, refusing cash payments of their bills due to the cost of handling the money. Also pennies (before rounding was introduced) were only valid currency up to about $2 here in Canada. I have no idea about the other coins but it wouldn't surprise me if there were similar regulations around them.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by mark-t ( 151149 )
              They don't owe you money if you refuse to accept cash... but neither do they owe you the services or goods for which you may have wanted to pay for in cash... in which case they are typically asked for immediately in advance of such services rendered or goods exchanged.

            • such a tired myth (Score:3, Interesting)

              by SuperBanana ( 662181 )

              First off, Canada != US, fellow American.

              Second: people and businesses can limit the forms of payment they'll accept for practical reasons all the time. As in: no bills over a certain amount, or refusing payment in pennies. Coins CAN be legal tender, but no merchant or private party MUST accept a particular form of currency. Don't want to accept $1 bills, only $5 and $10? That's fine:

              http://www.snopes.com/business... [snopes.com]

              "Legal tender is the default method of payment assumed in contractual agreements inv

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by swb ( 14022 )

            As far as I know, this is only true prior to creating the debt. You can decide you'll only sell your widget for credit cards, in trade for tribbles or whatever payment method you decide on. But you can only do so BEFORE the sale.

            After the sale (once the debt is created), you MUST accept legal tender to settle the debt when it is offered. If I sit down in a restaurant and eat a meal without any notice that I can't pay my bill in cash and then I want to pay in cash, they must take my cash.

            • Per treasury.gov

              This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibi

              • This is a Canadian thread, so the proper reference is to the Currency Act [justice.gc.ca] ; specifically, s. 8(2).

                Coins are legal tender, but only up to a maximum number of coins depending on the denomination. The most you can use in one transaction is 100 (dimes or nickels).

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by swb ( 14022 )

                Right, they can refuse the sale ahead of time. There is no debt before the sale.

                But once the debt exists, they cannot refuse to accept legal tender for its payment.

          • And then i will write payment refused on the receipt and never pay you. If you press it in court, a judge is NOT going to like that you refused legal tender to settle the debt, regardless of form. You are right you can refuse, but then the person indebted to you can simply write the debt off leaving you little recourse.

            • And then i will write payment refused on the receipt and never pay you. If you press it in court, a judge is NOT going to like that you refused legal tender to settle the debt, regardless of form. You are right you can refuse, but then the person indebted to you can simply write the debt off leaving you little recourse.

              And you would lose in court. There is no law requiring someone to accept legal tender in payment of a debt; and failure to do so does not absolve someone of liability for the debt.

              • Re:Alternate Bank of Canada Press Release (Score:5, Informative)

                by Firethorn ( 177587 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @07:26PM (#49184913) Homepage Journal

                There is no law requiring someone to accept legal tender in payment of a debt; and failure to do so does not absolve someone of liability for the debt.

                Yes there is - [cornell.edu]

                U.C.C. – ARTICLE 3 – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS , PART 6. DISCHARGE AND PAYMENT 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.
                (a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract. (b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates. (c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument, the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument.

                31 US Code 5103 - Legal tender [cornell.edu] -
                United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.

                If I owe you $2k and show up with 20 authentic $100 bills and you refuse them, I'm debt free.

                Now, if you're selling a car(for example) for $2k and you don't want cash, you're free to refuse to sell me the car for my $2k cash. But you're not allowed to hold me hostage if you provide me services before payment and I offer to pay by cash.

              • You talk out of your ass. Look up relevant cases before spewing in ignorance, two decades ago even the IRS was bitch slapped after refusing trucker who paid in pennies. Refusing legal tender puts you in a very bad position in a court of law.

            • While it is interesting to suppose what it would be like if that were to work, in reality it would not:

              In State v. Carroll, 1997 WL 118064 (Ohio App. 4 Dist.), the Court upheld the municipal court's refusal to accept the pennies. The plaintiff argued that under 31 U.S.C.A. ' 5103, United States coins are legal tender "for all debts, public charges taxes and dues," and for that reason the city was required to accept the pennies as payment of the fine. Without pointing to any case law, the Court simply conclu

          • Actually there is no legal requirement to take cash, debt or no debt. You can refuse to accept cash if you want.

            Actually, there is [treasury.gov], sort of. You can refuse to accept cash: however, they are valid legal payment for the debt, so if you refuse the payment, you are either de facto implying the debt no longer exists (because you're not accepting repayment for it), or you're breaking the law by refusing legal payment. You cannot refuse repayment in cash and then claim the debt still exists. IANAL, so I'm sure there are subtleties involved with, for e.g., contracts (i.e. you agree to give them 10 widgets later in exchange f

            • Actually there is no legal requirement to take cash, debt or no debt. You can refuse to accept cash if you want.

              Actually, there is [treasury.gov], sort of. You can refuse to accept cash: however, they are valid legal payment for the debt, so if you refuse the payment, you are either de facto implying the debt no longer exists (because you're not accepting repayment for it), or you're breaking the law by refusing legal payment. You cannot refuse repayment in cash and then claim the debt still exists. IANAL, so I'm sure there are subtleties involved with, for e.g., contracts (i.e. you agree to give them 10 widgets later in exchange for 5 doohickeys now, offering cash instead would be a violation of the contract), but generally, creditors must accept cash in repayment of debts.

              =

              Per the web site you referenced:

              This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus

              • Disclaimer first, this is US centric, though it 'should' work in many countries.

                So absent a state law failure to accept cash in no way eliminates a debt.

                Actually, it kind of does. Work out the logic and realize that not all businesses are creditors.

                Take two restaurants.
                1. Fast food joint. You place your order, they tell you a total, and you pay before they give you your food. NOT a creditor, if they don't want to take cash they don't have to.
                2. Sit down traditional restaurant where the bill comes AFTER your meal. They're thus a creditor because they extend you credit(your

                • Disclaimer first, this is US centric, though it 'should' work in many countries.

                  So absent a state law failure to accept cash in no way eliminates a debt.

                  Actually, it kind of does. Work out the logic and realize that not all businesses are creditors.

                  You're take is interesting, though wrong. Being a creditor has no bearing on the what you must accept in payment; in fact it's pretty clear no one is required to accept cash. Why don't you try it, go to court, and report back?

                  • Sure - I'll just quote UCC Article 3, Negotiable Instruments, part 6. Discharge and payment. [cornell.edu]

                    (a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.

                    (b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amoun

                    • Nice try but U3-603 refers to negotiable instruments,which is a written promise to pay an individual a stated amount of money. A bill in a restaurant isn't a negotiable instrument, for example. Yea, those most courts would simply say take the money and both of you stop wasting our time. My point is some people seem to believe that if a business refuses to accept your cash in payment you are discharged of the obligation to pay; which is not the case.

                    • My point is some people seem to believe that if a business refuses to accept your cash in payment you are discharged of the obligation to pay; which is not the case.

                      Again, I'll clarify a bit: I'm not saying a business can't refuse cash. It CAN in 'most' cases. The ONLY time it's obligated to accept cash is when you actually OWE them money. My common example would be the sit-down restaurant. The meal has been delivered and consumed, the debt created.

                      Then, per 31 USC 5103, US currency is legal tender for that debt. While UCC article 3 might not apply(I've seen judges contort more to make something applicable), you've still made a valid offer to pay.

                      This can be modi

              • Not only that there are in fact precedents [tennessee.edu] indicating that the courts will have no problem declaring you a jackass for trying to use pennies, and uphold your debt regardless of your shenanigans.

                • The fix is to tender the bills in a non-assholish way. IE reasonably large bills, not defaced or origamied.

                  You show up with 7 'clean' 20 bills to pay a $128 bill, you should be good.

      • In the U.S. you cannot decline payment made in cash (if you normally take cash).

        Sure you can, if you haven't delivered the goods. Notice the reference to "all debts"? If a debt doesn't exist, you have every right to demand pork bellies before you hand over the merchandise.

        OTOH, if the restaurant cashier doesn't want to take your bill in cash after your meal, you can tell them to take it or leave it.

        • In the U.S. you cannot decline payment made in cash (if you normally take cash).

          Sure you can, if you haven't delivered the goods. Notice the reference to "all debts"? If a debt doesn't exist, you have every right to demand pork bellies before you hand over the merchandise.

          OTOH, if the restaurant cashier doesn't want to take your bill in cash after your meal, you can tell them to take it or leave it.

          Uh no. There is no legal requirement for an individual or business to accept cash. If they refuse cash payment and you walk out with out paying they can file a theft complaint. Just because a note is legal tender does not mean it must be accepted for payment.

          • I had to go look this up. Apparently the distinction is that they must accept payment in dollars and may not require that you pay in rubles, pesos or pieces of eight but they're free to mandate what form those dollars take, electronic vs. paper for example.
            • Paper/Coin is the only LEGAL tender. Electronic forms are NOT legal tender, they are agreements based on trust with private third parties.
              • I understand what you're saying but that's not the way the courts are currently interpreting it.

                • Do you have a citation on how the courts handle a reasonable attempt to pay in cash? IE bills of reasonable denomination that have not been defaced or altered?

                  Okay, they don't have to accept $100 worth of pennies or $10k worth of $1 bills. What about 5 $20 bills or 100 $100s*?

                  *$100 being the highest denominator in common circulation

              • Just to be clear: Is this your opinion, or do any courts share your view on the matter?

                • Lets look at the terms.

                  Legal tender: when i began my search, i typed in legal tender and the first result was this

                  "legal tender
                  noun
                  coins or banknotes that must be accepted if offered in payment of a debt."

                  The root meaning of the words themselves are Lawful OFFER. It seems to me that its not just my opinion? Care to counter?
          • they can file a complaint, but ouu would win in court. If you refuse cash for a debt, then person who owes you the debt can legally tell you he considers the matter settled. No court is going ot look favorably on you if you dont take cash for a debt.

            • they can file a complaint, but ouu would win in court. If you refuse cash for a debt, then person who owes you the debt can legally tell you he considers the matter settled. No court is going ot look favorably on you if you dont take cash for a debt.

              Except there is no requirement to accept cash and you'd still wind up losing and paying up. For some reason people think "Legal Tender" = "Must Accept" when it does not.

              • 31 USC 5103 [cornell.edu] - Legal Tender and UCC 3-603 [cornell.edu] Tender of payment disagree.

                Keep in mind the difference between a sale and a debt. If you OWE a company money, they must accept cash to settle it. If you're PRE-PAYING, ie giving them payment before the good is provided or service rendered, then they don't have to accept cash to provide the service.

                • Nice try but U3-603 refers to negotiable instruments,which is a written promise to pay an individual a stated amount of money. A bill in a restaurant isn't a negotiable instrument, for example.

                  • Can you explain what happens if a restaurant comes up with a bill, and a reasonable attempt to pay the bill in full is made with cash, which the restaurant refuses? By reasonable, I mean in appropriate denominations with no particular reason to suspect fraud and which pass reasonable anti-fraud validation (so sufficient defacement is unreasonable).

                    I really have a hard time believing the claim that you will be charged with theft in this scenario. Can you cite an example?

                    I'm not trained in law but surely yo

        • ITT: Not-lawyers discuss not-law.

          Now, Im not a lawyer, either, but I am familiar with Treasury.gov's stance, and with at least 1 court case where the court held that you dont have to accept payment in pennies.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by pthisis ( 27352 )
        Whoops, is that legal? In the U.S. you cannot decline payment made in cash (if you normally take cash). But it's also illegal to deface money. My understanding is that it is not illegal to deface money in the US. It's illegal to deface coins or bills with intent to defraud, or to deface bills with the intent of making them unfit for reissue/circulation. There are sites like Where's George that are designed to deface currency for the purpose of tracking it, which is clearly not intended to make it unfit f

    • Can you spot me a Spock? I need a few grams of weed.

  • Spock is an odd choice (Score:4, Funny)

    by damn_registrars ( 1103043 ) <damn.registrars@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:33PM (#49183611) Homepage Journal
    I thought the original portrait on the Canadian $5 bill looks more like a young Palpatine.

  • Remembering Nimoy this way is illogical. (Score:5, Informative)

    by hey! ( 33014 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:37PM (#49183661) Homepage Journal

    His family has requested that donations be made in his memory to one of the following charities

    Everychild Foundation http://everychildfoundation.or... [everychildfoundation.org]
    P.O. Box 1808
    Pacific Palisades, CA 90272

    Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Foundation http://www.copdfoundation.org/ [copdfoundation.org]
    20 F Street NW, Suite 200-A
    Washington, D.C. 20001

    Beit T’Shuvah Treatment Center http://www.beittshuvah.org/tre... [beittshuvah.org]
    8831 Venice Blvd.
    Los Angeles, CA 90034

    Bay-Nimoy Early Childhood Center at Temple Israel of Hollywood http://www.tiohnurseryschool.o... [tiohnurseryschool.org]
    7300 Hollywood Blvd.
    Los Angeles, CA 90046

    Source: http://www.startrek.com/articl... [startrek.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Beit Tâ(TM)Shuvah Treatment Center

      Is that a relative of T'Pol? I guess funding the Vulcan economy is only logical.

    • Spocking 5$ bills has been a thing for a long time now up here in Canada. It's just seeing a spike due to the recent sad news.

      It's not like this is some specific tribute thing.

      • Spocking 5$ bills has been a thing for a long time now up here in Canada

        Man, I have got to start reading the news letter more often.

        Here I've been going around with un-Spocked bills like a n00b.

    • Do these charities accept Spocked $5 bill donations?
    • Everyone send one Spocked Canadian $5 bill to each of those charities.
    • Spocked $5 bills would seem appropriate. It would also alow these charities to see how much of an impact Nimoy has had.

  • Why not run with it? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by istartedi ( 132515 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:37PM (#49183667) Journal

    Why not issue commemorative $5 notes? Commemorative coins are issued in the US, although actors aren't usually on them. There is, AFAIK, no commemorative US or Canadian note like that. Stamps are more liberal in that regard. I'm sure a lot of conservatives would hate it, say it's "undignified", blah, blah... It's Canada so they might even have to get permission from the Queen; but if they don't, then why not innovate? Come on Canada. You're so cool in many other ways. Make it happen.

    • Re:Why not run with it? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by show me altoids ( 1183399 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:45PM (#49183767)
      Well, if Shatner had died instead, you might have a point, since he is actually Canadian. Nimoy was born in Boston.

    • I don't think we've ever had a commemorative bill circulating that wasn't part of an official set (like 1967). Coins, sure, they have a new design all the time, but not bills.

    • Probably because all of the automatic bill-verification stuff would fail if the design is completely different.

      Coins don't have this issue because they can be recognized by size and weight.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by xaxa ( 988988 )

      British paper money currently features (£5-10-20-50) Elizabeth Fry (prison reformer), Charles Darwin, Adam Smith (philosopher) and James Watt and Matthew Boulton (engineers), so there shouldn't be a problem from the queen. But I think people tend to have been dead for a while.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... [wikipedia.org]

    • Because you need standardized bills that change infrequently to minimize hassles with automatic validators. The validation steps for coins don't require imaging their surface.

  • I read this story [bbc.com] on the BBC site yesterday, and the title of the story was 'Spocking' not illegal, Canada Says at the time. It even still appears on Google search with that title. But now the headline has been changed to Bank spokesman says writing on bills "inappropriate".

    Some shiny-shoed people getting a bit upset and influencing the media?

    • Given that I never heard of "Spocking" before these articles, and now that I have heard of it wished I was Canadian and had a ready supply of $5 bills, I wondered if their intent wasn't contrary to the stated purpose.

      I will have to settle on "Bill Murray"ing US $5 bills for now.

      • or go with "daniel day lewis-ing' and you don't have to do anything!

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Minwee ( 522556 )

        If you were Canadian, you would have been seeing Spock on the $5 for years and years. Even the older [cdnpapermoney.com] bills [cdnpapermoney.com] with different portraits were suitable for being "Spocked".

        Not only that, you would know how to fold two $1 bills so that "Banque du Canada - Bank of Canada" changed into a request to do something impolite with a banana.

      • I wanted to do some john belushi'ing of my money, but I wasn't sure if I should use pollen or dark sunglasses.

        (yeah, right; 'why not both?')

    • Some shiny-shoed people getting a bit upset and influencing the media?

      Never trust a man in clean shoes. (Also never trust a man in a wheelchair with dirty shoes.)

    • The new headline does actually convey strictly more information than the old one, since as well as conveying what the bank spokesman is saying, you can deduce from his criticism of "inappropriate" that it is not illegal, otherwise the criticism would be that it was illegal, or at least contain this information.

  • silly reasons not to (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rvr ( 15565 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:49PM (#49183795) Homepage

    I have an old $5 in my wallet, will be fun to do. The enjoyment I get out of doing this is easily worth $5.
    The bank listed "important reasons". I call BS on each one.
    - Reduced lifespan, so what? It is being replaced anyway.
    - It might be rejected in a transaction. Lame, someone else will take it. Its only $5
    - Source of national pride. Really? My guess is half of Canadians have never heard of him or know he was the PM.
    Checked my wallet, there is an old $5, jackpot! I am feeling more Canadian pride in doing this on a Canadian bill then ... putting maple syrup on my bacon.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jklovanc ( 1603149 )

      - Reduced lifespan, so what? It is being replaced anyway.

      Do you replace your car every time you use it? It is going to be replaced anyway, eventually. By reducing lifespan one is increasing the costs of to the government and wasting my taxes.

      It might be rejected in a transaction. Lame, someone else will take it. Its only $5

      If it is my last cash and the machine will not accept it that I would quite perturbed.

      Source of national pride.

      Canadian money has national leaders on it not actors.

  • Negative Spin, Positive Spin (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Al Al Cool J ( 234559 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @04:58PM (#49183887)

    Other articles spin it the other way.
    'Spocking' Laurier on $5 not illegal, says Bank of Canada
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/sp... [www.cbc.ca]

  • Cue Streisand effect.

  • Subject misses the point (Score:3)

    by plcurechax ( 247883 ) on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @07:30PM (#49184943) Homepage

    They are Canadian, the Bank of Canada is (politely) asking people to stop "Spocking" their Canadian five dollar bank notes ("bills").

Slashdot Top Deals

The more they over-think the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the drain.

Close