Subject:
|
Re: Stick in the mud...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 9 Jun 2000 22:52:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
643 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> Scott A <s.arthur@hw.ac.uk> wrote:
> > There is some common ground between us, the fact that a gift does not
> > "necessarily" imply what I said it could, means that the text is not 100%
> > clear. Do you agree?
>
> Both Lego and LUGnet claim that it does not. This resolves any uncertainty.
> If there were no disclaimer, there might be some question. However, the
> statements of both parties remove that completely.
Lego and LUGNET agree that there is no implied or actual support or
sponsorship. That's pretty clear, right?
Or is Scott claiming that one or both parties are not being truthful? I can't
see much reason for continuing this silliness...
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Stick in the mud...
|
| (...) Both Lego and LUGnet claim that it does not. This resolves any uncertainty. If there were no disclaimer, there might be some question. However, the statements of both parties remove that completely. (24 years ago, 9-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
85 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
