3 ms·
Ok, I think you're assigning me to a camp in your head that I do not belong to. I'm not the corporation-loving, lawyer-hating, "tort-reforming" droid you're loo
by qzw 12y ago
Ok, I think you're assigning me to a camp in your head that I do not belong to. I'm not the corporation-loving, lawyer-hating, "tort-reforming" droid you're looking for. If you believe in the rule of law, which I do, then lawsuits are inevitable. There have been great lawsuits in history that have ensured freedom, ended injustice, and punished evil. But there have also been lawsuits used to bully, intimidate, and coerce. I assume you've heard of patent trolls? How about the SCO saga? How about the Scopes Monkey Trial? That's why I said I'm "ambivalent"[1] about them.
[1]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ambivalent http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ambivalent
- x0x0 12y agoAll of the above are a vast minority of lawsuits, and I read ambivalence as functionally equivalent to anti-tort. Again, you were ambivalent until your ox got gored.
- quesera 12y agoYou might have withheld your hostility if you had first double-checked the definition of "ambivalent". It does not mean or imply "opposed" or "disdainful" or "disinterested", at all.