rdh@sun.uucp (Robert Hartman) (07/18/88)
In article <6272@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> sethg@athena.mit.edu (Seth Gordon) writes: >No, net.perverts, I don't want to see *those* briefs, I mean... > >If MES files this lawsuit, I would appreciate it if he[*], or some >neutral party (e.g., Berkeley's netnews admin) posts a copy of whatever >legal paraphenalia gets filed, so that I (and all other interested >netters) can file friend-of-the-court briefs on it. ... I believe that the difference between MES's claim and that of the lawyer had to do with the fact that the Judge's refusal to address her properly was interfering with the lawyer's practice of her profession. He had no right to do that. If Mark's postings, or reactions to same, were critical to his profession or livelihood, I believe Mark would have a case. But since this forum is not primarily professional, and since Mark often introduces and continues the topics or lines of discussion in which the deprecatory remarks that upset him are made, I don't see much of a case. Mark has a legal right to be called what he likes. On the other hand, others have a right to speak freely. I don't believe that Mark's right outweighs the rights of everyone else to the extent that, in the absence of a clear threat of tangible harm to him or his professional standing, he can enjoin others from calling him what _they_ like. If anyone says: "I will never hire Mark unless I can call him 'her', then I think Mark might have a leg to stand on wrt that person. But if people say: "I don't like what Mark says because she's crazy," I think they are entitled to express their opinion, especially when this is said in response to something that Mark has said. Since Mark himself is in the habit of citing individual posters for approbrium, I doubt very much if he'd find much support for his position in court in any defamation suit brought for remarks made on the net. On the other hand, if Mark insists on suing backbones, even frivolously, then that may induce some or all of them to simply witdraw from the net. But the upshot of that would be that Mark would no longer have this forum in which to discharge his anger and upset. And who is to say that Mark's anger and upset isn't justified? If posting the things he does affords Mark some relief, I should think that the rest of us could be a bit more graceful about how we react to him. -bob.
NUAPPLE@NDSUVM1.BITNET (M. G. Stinnett) (07/19/88)
My name is M. G. Stinnett. Full name: Marion Gordon Stinnett Sex: Male, genetically and preferentially (for those who wonder, I was named for my grandfather, Marion Marshall Stinnett, who usually went by M. M., for reasons of his own.) Now that we've established that for all the net to see, I relate the following: When I graduated high school, Johnson & Johnson kindly sent me a free sample of their O.B. tampons. Presumably, they bought a list and choose all the feminine looking names for this treatment. If I claim permanent damage to my psyche for this incident, does anyone think I have grounds for a, say, $10.57 million lawsuit against good ol' J&J? M. G. Stinnett ...NUAPPLE@NDSUVM1 Opinions are like .... and this is mine alone
gore@eecs.nwu.edu (Jacob Gore) (07/19/88)
/ news.admin / cs3551ad@geinah.unm.edu (David Schnedar) / Jul 17, 1988 / >>--Mark >I use "--Mark" because --Mark does. --Mark seems to be real picky about >how I refer to --Mark, but --Mark hasn't posted --Mark's prefered method >of address lately. (-: It's a trick. He's trying to make you use that obviously diminutive Decrement operator on his name! :-) Jacob