> The subject of the case is a red herring. Agreed. It matters to Terry, but doesn't explain what's happening now. > Thiel was out for blood, and he used his

> The subject of the case is a red herring. Agreed. It matters to Terry, but doesn't explain what's happening now. > Thiel was out for blood, and he used his money in someone else's case to get it. Correct. The 'Thielite' side I'm on doesn't dissent from this. > It focused on maximizing the damage to Gawker, which isn't what civil court is typically supposed to do. Not so sure about that. I think you may be extending your ideas about civil lawsuits over the edge. I've never heard it said before now that one of a civil court's functions was to maximize the settlement. Presumably civil courts existed without insurance companies being around at some point, so maybe not. I'm open to having my mind changed though, should you find evidence in law of a civil court's function being described in that way.