On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 15:09 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
> > ehird did, in fact, illegally reveal it to me. (E was simultaneously
> > 1) required to reveal it to the AFO
> > 2) prohibited from revealing it to the AFO
> > 3) prohibited from revealing it to me
> > so any criminal prosecution on #2, and possibly #3 as well, would
> > lead to a judgement of EXCUSED.)
> I don't understand #2, where did that prohibition come from?
According to at least one alleged version of the text posted to a-d,
ehird wasn't allowed to reveal the password to anyone at all, not even
if they were a party, which effectively makes Russian Roulette into
Ducks & Platypuses.
--
ais523
