You're wrong yet again: If Chipp's intent was NOT to post to the list, as he stated, then there was NO intent to defame, despite your claim of mindreading abilities.
And, I didn't attack you personally, only your posting to flame Chipp, for ostensibly flaming you, for which he apologized. You simply cannot logically argue that it is bad to flame someone publicly, then okay for you to do likewise. Especially after he apologized. Poor form, no matter how you look at it. Judy On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Jerry Saperstein wrote: > > Judy: > > Perhaps you can explain why an apology is required by a person > defending themselves agains defamation? Whatever Chipp's intent was with > regard to whom he sent his posting, there can be no doubt of his intention > to defame. What precisely am I to apologize for? _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
