Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cadfan" data-source="post: 4843393" data-attributes="member: 40961">Argh. Law is law.  Not sorcery.  You can't just make stuff up and then sue someone for it and drive them out of business just because you're richer than them. The part of a lawsuit that is the most expensive, and which is most subject to improper tactical use, is discovery.  There are multiple ways to get a lawsuit dismissed prior to discovery, particularly if the lawsuit isn't plausible. There are situations where someone will drop out of a lawsuit or settle because proceeding is too expensive.  These do NOT tend to be situations where the lawsuit was completely fraudulent.  The person who dropped out of the suit might choose to characterize things that way, but they're an interested party.  There is also a tendency to characterize a decision to settle a lawsuit as being motivated by financial concerns rather than actual wrongdoing when admitting wrongdoing would harm you publically.  If you feel that you are being frivolously sued, consult with an attorney.  You will find either that you have remedies available to you, or that the suit is not in fact frivolous. This... verges on the political.  Ok, its overtly political.  But it shouldn't be partisan in any way: I believe strongly that popular civic education is a must in a democratic society.  I simply do not believe that the right to vote can be exercised well by a person who does not understand at least the basics of the government in which his vote is exercised.   Everyone has things about their country that they wish they could change.  But if they do not understand the origins of what they intend to change, of they misattribute fault to the wrong political actors due to a lack of civics knowledge, or if they fail to understand the context in which political decisions or rules arise, they will not be able to use their right to vote to effectively bring about the policy outcomes they desire.   They will use their vote to punish politicians for actions for which they are not responsible, while leaving the actual responsible parties unharmed.  They will bring about unintended consequences as they change matters they don't understand.  And even worse, this is often a spiraling descent into utter failure, as voters fail to understand their own ultimate responsibility for the unintended consequences of previous elections, and flail about in a desperate effort to change something, anything, that will bring about the outcomes they want. A person who doesn't understand even the basics of the functioning of the three branches of government, both in theory and in the actual, practical political reality of how they really work in real life, is like a caveman trying to operate a punchcard computer without a manual.  Buttons will be pushed, lights will blink, things will happen, but they will not correspond to the operator's wishes. Courts are not some magical device to bankrupt people you don't like.  Lawsuits are not pure acts of financial attrition.  To the extent that a fear legal matters can intimidate people into surrendering rights which they did not need to surrender, it is the popular conception of courts as evil black holes into which good people are dragged to their ruin that is most frequently responsible.</blockquote>

Verification