Date: Sat, 19 Feb 1994 07:40:01 +0800
From: Dave Rindos <rindos@perth.dialix.oz.au>
To: mbscher@midway.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: sci.anthropology
Subject: Re: Hardwick Post on Rindos (6/93)

o.edu>
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5 (NOV)

In sci.anthropology you write:

>Derek Milton (arkeo4@uniwa.uwa.edu.au) wrote:
>: If any Australians, especially those residing in Western Australia,
>: might have read the posting by Gil Hardwick back in June 1993 could they
>: please drop me a line.  All that is required is a statement that the
>: post had been read, nothing more.

>    PLease do note what this request pertains to.  The reason, I would
>guess, that Milton is seeking responses noting that the post had been
>read is in the furtherance of a libel or slander suit against Hardwick.
>The reading of the post would be a part of the publication or mere
>stating to another aspect of either suit.

>: Thank you

>No problem.  I have no care about this pending suit; I am only irritated
>that you are not stating up front your purposes and the weight they carry.

The words used were used to allow individuals the opportunity to make a
statement.  However, the statements required at this point must meet the rules
of evidence (there was PLEANTY of internal evidence from the post itself to
lead to a default judgement regarding defamation).

Given that affadvits are required, and not merely an email message, people have
an opportunity to decide for themselves whether they want to participate or
not.  I can see where you might have misunderstood what was written.  But the
major concern was to attempt to avoid a lot of screaming and carrying on. Does
that seem reasonable??   There was NO attempt to hide an agenda.  If it
appeared to be that, I apologise, and I do that in ALL sincerity!

However, I do note that the people who have responded thus far seemed to
understand that some action other than a mere reply was required.

Dave Rindos