For some of us, you're not going to get any more outrage then we've
shown.
By outlining the situation and what we see wrong with it and our
belief that the case should be declared invalid as a result:
That is our
"outrage".
It's called a civilized, responsible response to an unpleasant
situation.
Would it gain anything if I started ranting on the street,
highly emotionally, of the situation? Other then to have people look at me
strangely and completely discount anything I'm saying as "I'm a nut" - there is
nothing to be gained. No positive value - only harm - to be gained with such
behavior.
On the other hand, we (the collective we of Groklaw regulars)
have seen where some of the very valid points have been made in Courts of Law
from the plaintiff/defendant to the Supremes - I think I recall a reference to
Groklaw in the Supremes authoring once. Or perhaps I'm mis-remembering and am
thinking of a different site - that's happened also, a reference from the Courts
to very reasoned logic made in other blogs.
The point is:
Reasoned,
calm discussion is generally considered far more seriously then a ranting
diatribe.
Some of us have learned that. So you won't get anything more
emotional from those of us who have learned it.
As a side-note: all the
points you have covered have been quite thoroughly covered in plenty of comments
to this article.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
