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.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (16154)	1/16/1998 11:28:00 AM
From: Reginald Middleton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

<I notice that you boldfaced the second, innocuous meaning of conspire, (and followed it with a third, out of context, 'meaning' apparently excerpted from somewhere else) but in your previous posts you have used (derived from context, in a rather silly Rush Limbaugh like way) the first meaning. You have implied that something terrible was going on. And that it was a dark secret.> Why was the second meaning innocuous and the first meaning not? Because it does not support your opinion? They came from the same dictionary! The third meaning appears in the same dictionary right after the second meaning and is just as "in context" as every other definition. You know what happens when we ASS-U-ME, don't you? If you have a beef with the definitions, I suggest you go into the dictionary publishing business. <Your standard has nothing to do with the realities of courtrooms. Do you really think that Judges feel impartial to criminal defendants, for instance? Of course not, .> This is exactly why it is important that MSFT previals against improprieties in procedure and law. People with your midnset support the God syndrome that many in power tend to exhibit. Criminal defendants are innocent in the eyes of the US law until they are proven guilty (not until they get to see a judge), yet you feel that the "realities of the courtroom" belies that judges "think they're slime." This is FAR from impartial, and if judges cannot wholeheartedly accept the precepts of the U.S. Consitution, they should not be on the bench. You, almighty Chaz, could be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and end up as an innocent man in a criminal proceeding. Does that justify the judge in thinking you slime just because you appear before him? God help us if you and the ilk ever come to power. <But in court, the formal procedures and their legal training force them into impartial patterns of behavior.> Yeah right, so since judges went to law school and don a robe, they are no longer human. Have you ever heard the phrase, "strike that comment from the record"? Well it doesn't exist in reality, the human character processes ALL information it gets access to. Human emotions and predined character traits affect decisions, regardless of where you went to school and what color robe you happen to be wearing. <Lessig had nothing to disclose here because his feelings on the matter of Windows are widespread and common, perhaps the majority opinion, even.> So I guess it was common knowledge that he openly conversed, under personal auspices, with the general counsel of the company that instigated these proceedings agianst MSFT? Did you really know that Chaz? Do you truly think it doesn't matter? <But the point is whether he puts his own feelings aside and adheres to the evidence.> The man conspires to sue MSFT and you say he is going to "put(s) his own feelings aside and adhere(s) to the evidence." Wake up Chaz. <And the Judge is there as a double check.> The judge is the one who appointed an ant-MSFT special master. Why didn't he appoint a special master who published writings that support MSFT's stance? It is not as if they don't exist. Would he be a double check in that instance? Why didn't he choose a special master that has historically displayed a totally neutral stance in regards to MSFT's position? Then I would say there would be an adequate set of checks and balances.