Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Another case to provide insight into default judgment policy:
[ case law fragment ] As always, there is a big problem with Rjack's quote (going beyond Rjack's laziness in providing no public link). Court of appeals rulings apply to specific facts. Rjack's case law fragments are almost provided by him without trying to match them to the facts at hand. He posts his out-of-context quotes essentially in a vacuum. This is how trolls work. And when his trolling fizzles out, he will repost it under a different subjet heading, hoping his duplication won't be noticed. -- Rahul http://rahul.rahul.net/ _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
