Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!reed!psu-cs!qiclab!leonard
From: leonard@qiclab.pdx.com (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Mark Ethan Smith: For real?
Message-ID: <829@qiclab.pdx.com>
Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.829
Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969
Date-Received: Fri, 9-Oct-87 00:45:04 EDT
References: <378d6016.b8ab@apollo.uucp> <5261@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <2050@kitty.UUCP> <1975@midas.TEK.COM> <2058@kitty.UUCP> <1985@midas.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: leonard@qiclab.UUCP (Leonard Erickson)
Distribution: world
Organization: Qic Laboratories, Portland, Oregon.
Lines: 25

Darci, there is one point in these postings that has caught my attention.

Larry claimed that Mark's posting was slanderous.
Mark claimed that Larry's was libelous.
I believe (I may be wrong, but it'd take too long to track down the posting)
that Mark said something to the effect of "if you think it's slander, sue me"

Unfortunately, as Larry points out, Mark can sue him, but he can't sue Mark!
Why? Because he has got no way to get an address to send the summons to!

Therefore, Mark is _not_ responsible for any postings as he cannot be held
accountable for them! 

(I may have details wrong, but the general picture _is_ clear!)

Before replying note that I have not said _one_word_ as to who is right or
wrong. As far as I can see, the _only_ replies can be of the form "he actually
said this, not that" or "but you _can_/_can_not_ get his address (with details)"
Any other responses would be attempts to evade the issue.

-- 
Leonard Erickson		...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]		...!tektronix!reed!qiclab!leonard
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."