Re: 9i New Features E-book

> Have the courage of your convictions, Don.
> Sue the people you disagree with.

If you truly believe this you will send me your hotel name and dates in Manteo, and I'll take care of it. Also, please send me your home address in Oz. We lost track of you when you moved into the countryside earlier this year. . .

But of course, you won't. You hide for a very good reason; you are scared of legal recourse, admit it. I published my home address and telephone number because I'm right about your deeds and you know it.

By failing to be forthright by providing your contact information, everyone will know the truth about your seedy campaign of malice and defamation.

Why don't you share the REAL truth about what you have done?

"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:<40c37d3c$0$1586$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Don Burleson" <don_at_burleson.cc> wrote in message
> news:998d28f7.0406060739.4c2068bd_at_posting.google.com...
>
> > FYI, this is the standard for Libel and Defamation in the USA:
> >
> > . The statements are false;
> > . The statements "were made maliciously and intentionally with full
> > knowledge of their falsity or in complete and reckless disregard of
> > their truth or falsity, for the purpose of injuring and destroying a
> > personal and professional reputation";
> > . The Defendant "acted with actual malice."
> >
> >
> > Let's say, for example, that someone were to publish the following
> > about you, using their podium as an Oracle "expert" and status as an
> > employee of Oracle Corporation. In additiona to publishing the
> > statements below, assume that they e-mailed the statements to your
> > clients, business associates and employers:
>
> Don:
>
> You have a habit of contacting the employers of people you disagree with. It
> is a tactic designed to intimidate and bully, and achieve a result without
> actually having to go to the cost and inconvenience of proving any of the
> legal points you here so carefully enumerate. And that, Don, is a matter of
> fact.
>
> After I had written to you welcoming the possibility of a libel action, and
> pointing out that you would need to prove malice, you decided to contact
> Oracle USA instead, in a bid to get them to shut me up, quickly and cheaply
> as far as you were concerned, and without the inconvenience of having to
> prove anything. And I know that you have attempted another quick and cheap
> silencing act in like manner with others. Fortunately, on all such occasions
> to date, the employer has seen through your feeble attempts at intimidation,
> and ignored you.
>
> So that phrase you use, "assume that they e-mailed the statements to your
> clients, business associates and employers" is exactly what *you* do, Don.
> And not, incidentally, something I have ever done. But I admire your
> chutzpah in using the word "assume".
>
> Have the courage of your convictions, Don. Sue the people you disagree with.
> Don't sneak around trying to get at their employers. Have the guts to stand
> by the technical merits of what you write and publish, only do it in a court
> of law where we won't have to "assume" anything.
>
> HJR
Received on Sun Jun 06 2004 - 20:40:01 CDT