Getting tired of posting this, but once again - I'm not disinterested in the cases. I'm disinterested in the daily minutiae of legal maneuvering in the cases. Those who can't tell the difference between those two will continue to fail to understand my point. Won't keep them from responding, though.

No, we don't. But we already all agree on that. Either that, or those who feel otherwise are set in their ways. So most of your post is just more preaching to the choir. Would you say you see any actual insight coming about from this new information? Would it in any way have helped you to read a single post about this order, rather than getting an update once the order has been responded to and the topic has been mostly decided?

That's my main beef. I like to hear updates, but we've just gotten too fine grained. We don't really need to know about every specific motion and order and legal maneuver. Lawyers on both sides in every trial do tons of shit, not expecting a lot of it to work but just trying it out. For people who are really obsessed with legal maneuvering, Ray's blog is a fine source of daily info.

Nope, not bitter, just like to have discussions about something interesting, rather than rehash the same old arguments every time. Most of the slashdot is already sold on the RIAA=evil topic. We don't need what amounts to a blog about it as part of the front page.

Journals are useless for what I'm talking about. I'm looking for the discussions that come about by posting an article where the whole of the slashdot readership will see and comment about it. Journals don't fit the bill.

Yes, I have and I do. Turns out that's not all it takes to front page a story, though. Front paged stories get discussion. Hence, I would like more interesting front page stories in order to have more interesting discussions, rather than more and more anti-RIAA circle-jerks.

It's really not such a difficult concept.

It was very astute of that particular AC to figure out that the entire world is separated into either RIAA shills or those who care passionately about the daily motions and orders and findings of every court case the RIAA is currently involved in. I bow before such a gifted mind. Maybe we should put them in charge of the Precrime division.

You can't even fool yourself.

No.

Didn't you read what I read? There are already plenty of interesting submissions. The problem is in the selection of the submissions. If slashdot wants to make me an editor, I'd be happy to help them out with that.

Do we really need so many status updates on the day-to-day goings-on in all the RIAA trials and scandals. Isn't this why NYCL has a blog? The posting of this minutae is actually making me care less about fighting the RIAA. Considering how much I dislike them, that's a pity.

I don't blame NYCL (and others) for submitting them (hey, most people are pretty narrowly focused on their own hobbies), but surely the editors can find something else in the pile of submissions that would be even slightly more interesting.

I never want to see any footage from a speedo camera.

It's funny you threw in the comment about Asimov, though I'm not sure how to take it. I've always greatly admired Asimov, both as a writer and a human being. I've really liked his ideas and recognize the huge impact he's had on the genre of sf.

But his writing style - meh. Not since being a teenager with limited titles available at the library have I willingly read much of his fiction. In reading comments over the year, I find that I'm not alone and this seems to be a general consensus.

There are some authors who I still read even with bad writing styles, simply for the fantastic ideas. I will never make the mistake of reading another Robert L. Forward title again, though. I never thought I could be so bored and interested at the same time.

That's a terrible way to look at it. I would not suggest it should be standard ethical procedure for prosecutors to try to bend laws as much as possible in the hopes that they could convict people for things not clearly laid out for people to read. Otherwise, ignorance of the law does become a defense because you can never be reasonably expected to know what the law will be bent to include at some later point. We already have far too much of this going on and do not need to make it the suggested practice.

Better example - borrowing based on collateral that a character has, then giving both the money and the collateral to another character.

Ever read Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut?

You should.

I don't think you understand what sexual predator laws actually are.

All well and good, but Lori Drew did not cause the death of Megan Meier. Megan Meier did by hanging herself. Laws above are made for much more direct causes, like reckless driving resulting in plowing into a pedestrian. They're not for and should not be for something so indirect as this. As many people have pointed out, she had a huge fight with her mother right before killing herself. If you're going for indirect contributions to her death, you have to factor that in pretty highly.