>> There are two main reasons why I'm referring you to a lawyer: >> >> (a) to the extent I know some lawyers' strategies, I am generally >> not at liberty to talk about them, and >> (b) to the extent I am at liberty to talk about the rest, I am >> not confident of my ability to present their methods correctly, >> due to the fact I haven't spent ten years learning all the >> intricacies of contract law >> >> Neither (a) nor (b) interferes with my confidence in the statement, >> "contract lawyers are well-prepared for repudiating electronic documents." > > Does (b) not interfere? You either understand whether a strategy is > valid or not, or you don't. At the very least, if you have any > confidence in a strategy (that you are at liberty to talk about), > you'd be able to give an overview, right? Otherwise, if you are not > confident in your ability to present the strategy correctly, how can > you be confident in your ability to understand and *evaluate* the > strategy as to its correctness and success likelihood?
In fact, how about an analogy? I have an algebra (in the high school sense) exam tomorrow. I have prepared myself by developing the strategy: "answer every question with '2 + 2 = 5'". I am prepared. However, I am badly prepared. If you don't understand algebra, you can't know that. You can't know whether I'm "well-prepared" or badly prepared, only that I am prepared in some way. -- Jerome Baum tel +49-1578-8434336 email jer...@jeromebaum.com web www.jeromebaum.com -- PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
