Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 18:23:02 03/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2004 at 20:56:08, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 17, 2004 at 20:36:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On March 17, 2004 at 20:24:53, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On March 17, 2004 at 20:12:34, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On March 17, 2004 at 19:57:49, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>So you basically say now that nothing you write in CCC by you should be taken >>>>serious. >>>> >>>>That ends of course all discussions. >>>> >>>>By the way, statements at electronic paper are having the same meaning in court >>>>like statements at real paper. The advantage of a forum is that it is easier to >>>>proof someone said those words and that not someone else posted them. >>> >>>I suspect that it is the opposite. With handwriting, it can be analyzed. >>>Anyone can post from this workstation, and I log in with my password >>>automatically, so anyone can do that too. >> >>So if you go to court you first deny everything you ever said because it could >>be someone else? >> >>Judges and jury's do not like that. > >That is not what I said. I said that it would be harder to prove a usenet post >than a written document had a certain origination. In contradiction, when a third party can proof that you posted this on usenet, and the message number and id number at usenet can proof this, then you have very hard proof from a third party, which is legal proof that you wrote it. When you write a letter in paper and you want to go so far that you deny you wrote the letter, then i must proof that the ink is the ink from your printer instead of that of your neighbour? So if just 1 such denial from you gets refuted you lose the entire courtcase basically. It is the American courtcase series i guess which show a wrong image from the truth. The truth is that there is a lack of judges everywhere on the planet except for some cases in China i guess (as the courtcase is a matter of what the party wants). So if you do effort to waste their time, you will feel it for sure. Denying that here cannot be taken serious. >>>>But I will take your wise words than and follow them regarding your future >>>>postings. >>> >>>Good advice about my postings period. If you expect something of great value or >>>of weighty importance, you should definitely look elsewhere. And I can >>>definitely be a whinging twit from time to time. >>> >>>>Note that i did find some postings back, which refute the words you just said >>>>here, but i am not here to make a hot fire. My point is clear enough i hope. >>> >>>If I have ever said something to hurt you, I sincerely apologize for it. >> >>Well the damage was financially, cheap words cannot make up for it. >> >>>>Certain people like to post about me. If you post without reasons i might do in >>>>future the same chessbase, schroeder, weiner and all chess companies have been >>>>doing so much in the past which means full scale war. >>> >>>I am not sure that I follow you here, but I think confrontation is better to >>>avoid than to cause. >> >>Right i just need 1 reason for a confrontation and i'll take it. that's what i >>said. > >People who look for trouble often end up finding it. A terrible pity, too. >I think taking a softer attitude would cause many people to warm to you who do >not feel that way now.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.