Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!bu.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!karl_kleinpaste From: karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: more stupidity Message-ID: Date: 4 Nov 90 00:02:09 GMT References: <18687@rpp386.cactus.org> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Organization: OSU Lines: 55 jfh@rpp386.cactus.org writes: The third person to bring up a lawsuit was Karl Kleinpaste (I think) who said he was anxiously awaiting his chance to testify against me in court so that Len could win a large settlement. Y'know, this is getting to be entirely too entertaining. Mr Haugh, get a grip -- I didn't mention the concept of a lawsuit at all. The sentence to which you evidently refer from article is this: | And I hope my chance to testify on Len's behalf | comes through. Now, the contextual problem is that you believe that I was referring to a desire to testify _against_you_, which is not the case. I have no intention whatever of pursuing any kind of action against you. However, the series of events which included your alleged article and its alleged involvement in Len's recent firing have riled me quite a bit. So I expressed my hope that Len would "quick-fr[y] you to a crackly crunch." No threat there of a lawsuit per se. Besides, who am I, to pursue such an action? You have certainly not harmed _me_ in any manner. I cannot threaten you on another's behalf. So my comment regarding testimony on Len's behalf had nothing to do with any such thing as a lawsuit against yourself. Rather, my comment regarding testimony has to do with the fact that I have some information which I have reason to believe will be beneficial to Len in his defense against the charges he faces. I wrote him mail (dated Oct 12 20:01:38 1990, according to my outgoing log) regarding this, offering to be a witness on his behalf when his case comes to trial. He was intending to forward that message to the relevant attorney(s). Now, if I managed to give the impression that I was "anxiously" awaiting a chance to testify against you, well, gee, I'm just _awfully_ darn sorry; one would just hate to think that a person would get the lawsuit willies from something as silly as a Usenet posting. On the other hand, directly above, and as quoted from <18687@rpp386.cactus.org>, you suggest that I am seeking such an opportunity, and that I want you to suffer loss of a large settlement, when in fact the article I wrote did not even mention the words "lawsuit," "settlement," or "libel." These are patently untrue assertions, and in fact, they give me the distinct appearance of being somewhat libelous, since they give the impression that I am a litigiously minded person, "anxious" (your word) to exercise the legal system against a fellow citizen. I would suggest that, given a new-found understanding of the situation such as I have just shown, a retraction is in line. --karl PS- I've stashed away a copy of <18687@rpp386.cactus.org> for...well...let's call it...safekeeping.