Re^4: Congrats to Merlyn!

True, but oh for heaven's sake. Why would anyone Search something like this? I happened to see the original node, but the title is hardly so clear and obvious that the node's content would be immediately connected with this joyous event. I'm kind of glad someone else put out a node with appropriate links, so people could educate themselves on the matter.

That said, I, too, would offer my congratulations to merlyn for this vindication, which has been too long in coming.

pax,
NovMonk

Comment on Re^4: Congrats to Merlyn!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Congrats to Merlyn! by Anonymous Monk on Mar 02, 2007 at 16:16 UTC
There's no vindication. This is not a statement on the merits of the case or decisions of the court. It's an expungement precisely because it has been a long time. Randal was still convicted, still suffered the penalties, and the law is still in place.	[reply]
Re^6: Congrats to Merlyn! by eric256 (Parson) on Mar 02, 2007 at 16:43 UTC
Thank heavens I was worried that the Law had wandered off agian. Stay law, stay. Sit law, good little law. ___________ Eric Hodges	[reply]
Re^5: Congrats to Merlyn! by jdporter (Paladin) on Mar 08, 2007 at 22:18 UTC
Why would anyone Search something like this? Is to avoid re-posting an already posted news item not reason enough? I happened to see the original node, but the title is hardly so clear and obvious that the node's content would be immediately connected with this joyous event. So, you saw the node title, and (presumably) its very recent postage date... and didn't think it worthwhile to read the node's content? A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight	[reply]
Re^6: Congrats to Merlyn! by NovMonk (Chaplain) on Mar 08, 2007 at 22:34 UTC
Actually, I did read both. I was just saying that I could understand someone's not connecting that particular title with that particular news. And I can see someone's being excited by the good news for merlyn and posting about it, much as a couple of people might post identical answers to a SoPW within a few minutes of each other. I don't see the harm in posting that particular content more than once. I'm sorry you seem to disagree. In any event, I suppose I was responding more to your tone than anything. If I gave you offence, I apologize. Pax, NovMonk	[reply]