From: Carol Anne Braddock <carolann@mm.com>
To: “david d `zoo’ zuhn” <zoo@armadillo.com>
Message Hash: 3936d3f3f04894af162f35f54b6b78ed3838caf92376b704e908bd8dab8a16ae
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9501061158.C13486-0100000@downburst.mm.com>
Reply To: <199501061733.LAA04744@monad.armadillo.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-01-06 17:46:03 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:46:03 PST
From: Carol Anne Braddock <carolann@mm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:46:03 PST
To: "david d `zoo' zuhn" <zoo@armadillo.com>
Subject: Re: All I did was properly crosspost! harrassments another story
In-Reply-To: <199501061733.LAA04744@monad.armadillo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9501061158.C13486-0100000@downburst.mm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, david d `zoo' zuhn wrote:
> Sorry, but I don't flame in public fora. I do so in email only.
>
> The Michigan precedent for email stalking isn't very strong (it also
> included several incidents of physical contact as well), so you threats are
> not really too worrisome. The last time I checked with various folks about
> the Minnesota laws, it's not exactly too clear on email (prosecution in the
> situation in question was declined due to lack of confidence in
> conviction), so again, I'm not very worried.
>
> But it doesn't matter since you've just entered my global kill files.
> Anything you send to me won't be seen at all. Anywhere. Anyhow. News.
> Mail. Etc. Plonk!
>
> And as a personal note, if your concept of 'dealing' involves making legal
> threats at the first possible instance of disagreement, then I think you
> need a new concept of 'dealing'.
>
>
Return to January 1995
Return to “Carol Anne Braddock <carolann@mm.com>”
Unknown thread root