Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

So why don't you see that it is silly? | 379 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

So why don't you see that it is silly?

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 12 2012 @ 10:25 AM EDT

So, substituting the correct terms, instead we have:

I think I may safely opine that when the appeals court tells a district court judge that she has misunderstood a case and made "an error," it's not good. "Error." Wow.

Don't you see how silly your corrected version seems? District judges are told they made an error fairly often. Is it even possible to have a successful appeal without the higher court saying the lower court made an error? Making such a big of a deal about the word "error" would just be silly. I think you demonstrated the opposite of what you intended.

BTW, what is it now? PJ knows about it and talked in the comments about it, but still hasn't fixed the article.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

So why don't you see that it is silly? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 12 2012 @ 02:14 PM EDT
- Why? happens all the time in formal code reviews... - Authored by: jesse on Friday, October 12 2012 @ 06:36 PM EDT
- So why don't you see that it is silly? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 12 2012 @ 06:42 PM EDT
So why don't you see that it is silly? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 11:08 AM EDT
- What's there to fix. - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 02:19 PM EDT
  - What's there to fix. - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 02:36 PM EDT
    - The message - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 05:47 PM EDT
So why don't you see that it is silly? - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 02:28 PM EDT
- It's probably too late to matter, but... - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 05:02 PM EDT
- Please don't put thoughts into my head - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 13 2012 @ 10:47 PM EDT

Nice implied ad hominem attack at the end (n/t)

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 12 2012 @ 12:44 PM EDT

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )