Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> GNUtian dak is getting desperate.

Your smokescreen attempts would probably appear less ridiculous if you
bothered giving some reason for them, however stupid.

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> > Your views re merits of Wallace's allegations are beside the point
>> > under 12(b)(6) standard.
>> 
>> Tell that to the judges.
>
> Bzzt.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/b81437831e209017
> ("not the merits")

Terekhov quoting Terekhov quoting Terekhov.  The most amusing part in
this series of self-quotes is probably:

    > And Judge Tinder clearly erred.

    > Hopefully Judge Young will do better.

    Judge Young also erred.

You'll be sure to augment this list in future.

> [...]
>> > and (2) that the competitor had a reasonable prospect of recouping
>> > its investment in below cost prices."
>> 
>> Basically, the standard demands proving that the prices must be both
>> below cost as well as profitable.  
>
> Bzzt. GNU logic.

Since you conveniently cut out (1), you apparently realize that you
need to butcher the premise in order to make fun of the conclusion.
So you agree and just don't want to be seen admitting it.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum