Why isn't Rev more popular?

[Judy Perry]

You're wrong yet again:

If Chipp's intent was NOT to post to the list, as he stated, then there
was NO intent to defame, despite your claim of mindreading abilities.

And, I didn't attack you personally, only your posting to flame Chipp, for
ostensibly flaming you, for which he apologized.

You simply cannot logically argue that it is bad to flame someone
publicly, then okay for you to do likewise. Especially after he
apologized.

Poor form, no matter how you look at it.

Judy

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Jerry Saperstein wrote:

>
> Judy:
>
> 	Perhaps you can explain why an apology is required by a person
> defending themselves agains defamation? Whatever Chipp's intent was with
> regard to whom he sent his posting, there can be no doubt of his intention
> to defame. What precisely am I to apologize for?