| Science Forum Index » Space Forum » AUTISM = "no drive to explore" |
|
Page 3 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Andrew Gray |
 Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 5:49 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2005-06-06, Rand Simberg <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote:
[quote:05cabf38d3]
Do you have a credible cite for that slander?
Isn't it libel? (and which charge are you referring to?
That's unclear, when it occurs on Usenet. I don't think there have
been any rulings on it.
[/quote:05cabf38d3]
Almost certainly libel; the distinction in most jurisdictions is one of
permanence not form, IIRC. (Slander is often thought of in this context
because of the similarity of a Usenet discussion to a verbal
conversation, but a verbal conversation on a radio programme would
likely be classed as libellous not slanderous)
--
-Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew Gray |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2005-06-09, Rand Simberg <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote:
[quote:0d5314637d]On 8 Jun 2005 23:49:53 GMT, in a place far, far away, Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
Almost certainly libel; the distinction in most jurisdictions is one of
permanence not form, IIRC.
Could be, but I'd probably have a more winnable case with a lesser
charge...
[/quote:0d5314637d]
This is where the joy of Usenet comes in. Sue him in a foreign court
with more plaintiff-friendly standards - after all, it's been published
in their jurisdiction, as far as they're concerned... ;-)
--
-Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| L. Merk |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:46 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Paul F. Dietz wrote:
[quote:746563e1c4]Nothing like a stress test to find defect(ive)s.
Paul
[/quote:746563e1c4]
Funny, but mainstream psychiatry says that people like *you* are the
defectives. It's not psychologically normal to lack a strong drive to
explore. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| David Johnston |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:16 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 8 Jun 2005 17:46:20 -0700, "L. Merk" <alr@catlover.com> wrote:
[quote:c29f06579e]
Paul F. Dietz wrote:
Nothing like a stress test to find defect(ive)s.
Paul
Funny, but mainstream psychiatry says that people like *you* are the
defectives. It's not psychologically normal to lack a strong drive to
explore.
[/quote:c29f06579e]
And how much exploring have you done in the last month? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rand Simberg |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 8 Jun 2005 23:49:53 GMT, in a place far, far away, Andrew Gray
<andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
[quote:09c4087f6b]On 2005-06-06, Rand Simberg <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote:
Do you have a credible cite for that slander?
Isn't it libel? (and which charge are you referring to?
That's unclear, when it occurs on Usenet. I don't think there have
been any rulings on it.
Almost certainly libel; the distinction in most jurisdictions is one of
permanence not form, IIRC.
[/quote:09c4087f6b]
Could be, but I'd probably have a more winnable case with a lesser
charge... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Paul F. Dietz |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
L. Merk wrote:
[quote:c9a803f2a0]Funny, but mainstream psychiatry says that people like *you* are the
defectives. It's not psychologically normal to lack a strong drive to
explore.
[/quote:c9a803f2a0]
Which of your multiple definitions are you using here?
Paul |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rand Simberg |
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 9 Jun 2005 00:27:14 GMT, in a place far, far away, Andrew Gray
<andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
[quote:943aa66467]On 2005-06-09, Rand Simberg <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote:
On 8 Jun 2005 23:49:53 GMT, in a place far, far away, Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
Almost certainly libel; the distinction in most jurisdictions is one of
permanence not form, IIRC.
Could be, but I'd probably have a more winnable case with a lesser
charge...
This is where the joy of Usenet comes in. Sue him in a foreign court
with more plaintiff-friendly standards - after all, it's been published
in their jurisdiction, as far as they're concerned... 
[/quote:943aa66467]
But the costs of litigation are higher (being in a foreign land,and
whatnot) and I seriously doubt that he's got deep enough pockets to
make it worthwhile, since there's no evidence that he even has a
job... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
