Quote:
Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Hint: if you are going to read the broader conversation, you may want to start a page or two before your post, which was itself reacting to another post. You may want to look at what other people said. That's what "broader" means.
|
He quoted my statement and then attacked what I said and attacked me. Do you deny that? Isn't this a lawyers board? Are we not supposed to understand that every discussion is broken down into issues and that we should focus on one issue at a time?
If a lawyer quotes a statement of mine, and then discusses that statement shouldn't I be able to assume that he or she is discussing the issue that is in the quote. If he is referring to another issue, would it be safe to assume that he or she would point out they were discussing other issues?
Why would he argue with me about a point I didn't make? If he had a disagreement with a point someone else made, shouldn't he have quoted their statement and then addressed that issue then?
Is it to much to expect people to be logical on a lawyers board?
