I've made clear that you didn't use the word "sue." You had built in, I have admitted, deniability.
And I think you only threatened, didn't mean to do it. Just meant us to be scared of being sued by a lawyer.
Do you admit that?
So since you say you have answered all this before, I take it as up-to-date confirmation that while you think saying a naughty word is a violation of SI's TOU, CH's behavior to Poet, whom he knew (as did and do you) to have been a victim of treatment that resulted in severe PTSD, was none of the following. Just to update.
Not "harassment,"
Not "invasive of privacy," (eg the references to her divorce, custody arrangements, private communications)
Not "vulgar" (really? Not vulgar?)
and
not "harmful".
And oh yes, you also, to update, think his treatment of her was not "otherwise improper."
I find it so implausible that anyone could take that position that I wondered if you'd rethought. |
