Elliott Hird wrote: > On 2009-06-08, Benjamin Caplan <celestialcognit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Elliott Hird wrote: >>> This case is about HTML mail. >> >> I don't see what you're getting at. I was and am aware that HTML, DIV >> tags, and MIME were all part of the situation; are you seeing some issue >> or implication that affects the appropriateness of my judgement or >> arguments? >> > The HTML version had what rendered as a line break or space between > the words.
Yes, I was aware of that too. What does this have to do with my arguments or judgement? Perhaps it would help if you explained the intended implications of your assertions about the facts of the case. Do you think the judgement should be appealed? If so, by what syllogism do these facts imply the inappropriateness of the judgement? Pavitra
