Yustabe said


Also to note, it would seem to me that libel of one's reputation
would be such an egregious act that it would warrant
a claim far in excess of $5,000.


Arny said


Of course there wasn't any libel of the reputation of anything but an
anonymous email address.


This bull**** has already been explained. The rules regarding the
identifiablity of the plaintiff are clear in the civil codes.

Yustabe said


If I were sued for $5,000 in a court 2,000 miles away,
I would probably issue also, though after I would have "at least"
filed a motion to dismiss.

Arny said


OK, so you got money to burn. BTW, it's easy to say what you'd do when
you're not the one that has to do it.

Weren't you the one saying you were going to hire a lawyer to write a thousand
dollar demur and put a lein on my house?

Yustabe said


Arny, you got screwed, but it couldn't have happened to
a nicer guy! Way to go, big guy! Just desserts!

Arny said


I got screwed? In the final analysis I got a keepsake.

No, Arny did not get screwed. I gave him 30 days to retract his libel. It would
have cost him nothing. I told him in no uncertain terms exactly what I was
going to do if he didn't post a retraction. He chose to reafirm his libel
instead of retracting it.This lawsuit was not a blindside cheap shot. Arny
could have easily avoided it at no cost. He didn't get screwed, he screwed
himself.

Arny said


OTOH, *somebody* paid a filing fee to get nothing but a bad reputation on
Usenet, based solely on their own fouled-up behavior.

A bad reputation with whom? You , Lionel and a couple other loosers that matter
as little as the two of you? I am concerned about what normal people who may
sometime in the future check on me think about my reputation. I'm sure that
idea is beyond you.