Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxj!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!spar!baba
From: baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: An Apology to Cliff
Message-ID: <117@spar.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 16:51:06 EST
Article-I.D.: spar.117
Posted: Fri Mar  1 16:51:06 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 4-Mar-85 06:25:38 EST
References: <905@ratex.UUCP>
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA
Lines: 34

> Cliff:
> 
>      When Baba said that someone had said that there would be no lawyers, I
> accepted his claim without due thought, and fell for his straw-man (oh the
> shame!); in doing so, I, in essence, repeated his claim.
>      I'm very sorry for contributing to his libelling of you; it was not
> intentional.
> 
>                                         Sorry,
>                                         DKMcK

The quote in question, once again:

> Surprise, since the legal code would be so much easier to understand it 
> would be inconceivable that a lawyer's prowess would enter into the play.
>
> Cliff

We have heard a great deal from Cliff about what he *meant* to say, but
there is a big difference between "entering into play" and "being the
deciding factor".  I can accept the notion that he chose his words
poorly (he would appear to have been in a hurry at the time, to judge
from the punctuation).  Nonetheless, he wrote what he wrote, and I
think that it should be clear that one natural way to parse the
statement is "it would be inconceivable that a lawyer's skills would
be required" i.e. that the society will require no lawyers.
My statements, however pointed, have been made without intentional
misrepresention, and I see no possibility that I have tarnished Cliff's 
sterling reputation.  In short, while I may have ridiculed a statement 
that he erroneously made and/or that I misinterpreted, I have not 
libeled him.  Thus DKMcK's accusation of libel on my part is false, and, 
because it was made in net.news, potentially libellous itself.

					Baba