on some items that you raise in this last message. I think I have one more post to get out everything I want to say on the substantive issues.

First, in fact, the reason that I used that as an example was because of your follow up post. The fact that you know that a tape recording was made is really really good. If this issue were ever to come to litigation, you probably would be able to get it entered as evidence (you could compel them to produce it). The hard stuff is when they're writing internal memoranda that you don't know exist so you can't demand it.

Also, I know that it sounds like I'm advocating a lawsuit. And I also know that you know that I'm not. My problem is that when we talk about what laws are in place and what rights exist, we necessarily look at what breaks those laws or violates those rights. Ultimately, if rational discussion breaks down and requests are ignored, the way that we enforce the law or protect our rights is through court action. So we look at what breaks the law (and could result in a lawsuit) to find out if someone is within their rights or not (even though we won't actually sue).

The best remedy is always to work it out privately -- if it can be worked out privately. That's the least expensive in terms of money, time, emotions, heartache, etc.

Peace.

~ ~ ~
All meetings end in separation
All acquisition ends in dispersion
All life ends in death
- The Buddha

|\_/|
='_'=

Every hundred years, all new people