Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (78945)	4/26/2000 12:41:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

>>I can "see" all the competing [legal] claims like force fields, and work them out like puzzles.... Getting all emotional about the force fields seems to me like getting all emotional about forces of nature - it's pointless.<< Interesting, Blue. I can see the fascination here. At the same time, I wonder whether the force fields (i.e., the competing claims) are really comparable to forces of nature. The former cannot be changed, but the latter can, or at least the laws on which they are based can be. I suspect there is a real difference between lawyers (or would-be lawyers) and non-lawyers. Lawyers are inclined to say "well, that's the law," or to say "there ain't no such law" -- that is, they accept whatever there is, or isn't, whether they like it or not, because they have to work within the framework of the given. Non-lawyers are more apt to say "There oughtta be a law!" when there isn't one, or, if there is one, to denounce it as unfair and to work for its repeal. Am I on track? Joan