Bear's damaged professional standing.

[MWilliams]

Bear, I side with you on many issues, but I doubt you will get much of a jury
award (maybe a dollar) for some type of cyber-defamation of charecter. All
the opposition will have to do is bring up your past edebate posts. While
I prefer a little fire on both my food and edebate posts, most people will
say you screwed the pooch of credibility and professionalism a long time ago.
        I ain't no saint, never claimed to be. But you won't win a jury trial.
Better to go for expulsions, repremands and federal laws. If you could somehow
tie all of this to the War on Drugs--say, for example, evil marijuanny smokin'
hackers are destroyin' ya in cyberworld--then you may get the federales involved.
Scott Elliott

>From  Mon Aug  3 19:45:54 1998
Message-Id: <MON.3.AUG.1998.194554.EDT.>
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with
 spool id 10655 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:46:40
 -0400
Received: from imo11.mx.aol.com (imo11.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.1]) by
 list.uvm.edu (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) with ESMTP id TAA88202 for
 <edebate at list.uvm.edu>; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:46:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from MWBRYANT at aol.com by imo11.mx.aol.com (IMOv14_b1.1) id
 NOGFa07118; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:45:54 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 58
Message-ID: <83ab1fde.35c64bb4 at aol.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:45:54 EDT
Reply-To: MWBRYANT at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Michael Bear Bryant <MWBRYANT at AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Bear's damaged professional standing.
Comments: To: mgremillion at SELU.EDU

Dear Swampy,

I don't think either us is laboring under any mistaken impressions regarding
our relative standings in this "professional" (and I definitely use that term
in the loosest possible sense) community. Fortunately, most juries weigh
consideration of deliberate defamation of "charecter" (West Florida, FSU,
right?) much more like they
were asessing kritiks than making policy debate's somewhat artificial
construction of the notion of uniqueness.

The forger sure is a beautiful type of guy. Clearly genetically superior.

As soon as we can compare access site lists w/ the lists of those accessing
the butterfly web page on the same day, at a minimum, we'll know what city the
terminal is located. This isn't THAT difficult. Once I can make local
confirmation, I wont need the legal system to take care of this problem.
Pressing it as a criminal action helps increase the focus on completing the
trace. Federal programs to fight internet kiddie porn have made wonderful
advances in tracking down internet criminals.

Keep your feet dry, Swampster.

Bear

In a message dated 98-08-03 19:31:21 EDT, you write:

<<
 Bear, I side with you on many issues, but I doubt you will get much of a jury
 award (maybe a dollar) for some type of cyber-defamation of charecter. All
 the opposition will have to do is bring up your past edebate posts. While
 I prefer a little fire on both my food and edebate posts, most people will
 say you screwed the pooch of credibility and professionalism a long time ago.
         I ain't no saint, never claimed to be. But you won't win a jury
trial.
 Better to go for expulsions, repremands and federal laws. If you could
somehow
 tie all of this to the War on Drugs--say, for example, evil marijuanny
smokin'
 hackers are destroyin' ya in cyberworld--then you may get the federales
involved.
 Scott Elliott

  >>