Re: OT Humour, The Stella Awards

On Mon, 30 May 2005 10:12:31 GMT, "Bill" <xxx@xxxxx> wrote:

>
>"Bob (this one)" <Bob@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:119kvejedmfuh07@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Bill wrote:
>>> <tonywesley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:1117382763.487694.104680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>>Silas wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The "Stella" awards
>>>>
>>>>It would be nice if you took a look on the net before you posted.
>>>>
>>>>Those six cases are fiction.
>>>>
>>>> See http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp
>>>>
>>> Also, though people like to make fun of it, there was some merit in her
>>> case and 12 ordinary jurors found so. The problem was not that she spilled
>>> coffee on herself but that it was 20 to 30 degrees hotter than it should
>>> have been and thus caused much more damage than it would have had it been
>>> at the around the correct temperature.
>>
>> Oh, bull***. Get your facts straight.
>
>Nothing in your references disputes what I said. (Or point out precisely where
>it does.) That the coffee was served hotter that it should have been. No where
>is the temp. stated. Why do you need to be impolite?
[....]

Bill, Bob can't help being impolite. It's a built in function with
him (obsession). Nevertheless, I think he probably has the facts
right on this one because it is his business to know this stuff.
Neverthe-nevertheless, this whole discussion is more off topic than a
discussion of religion. Too bad the one time I can remember that
Bob's been right about something, it's off topic. ;-)

John
.