rick@pcrat.uucp (Rick Richardson) (11/25/89)
In article <52003@looking.on.ca> brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes: >I don't think the non-security of the net would be a great defence. >I can ignore the e-mail, but if X is serious he will then phone or >write a registered letter. If, after all this, I don't claim it's >a forgery (no suit has been served yet) that would be rather odd, would >it not? Hasn't there been a presumption in all this talk that the libeller is going to *LIE* under oath and claim he/she didn't write the article in question. I find it disgusting that every posting on this issue has made the assumption that people are going to be lying in court. The postings themselves aren't disgusting, just that they make the (correct?) assumption that most people these days are liars. Are we really living in a society which can't be trusted to tell the truth? (Rhetorical questions, no followups needed). -Rick -- Rick Richardson | Looking for FAX software for UNIX/386 ?????? mention PC Research,Inc.| WE'RE SHIPPING your uunet!pcrat!rick| Ask about FaxiX - UNIX Facsimile System (tm) FAX # (201) 389-8963 | Or JetRoff - troff postprocessor for the HP {Laser,Desk}Jet