-
-
Replying to @tnielsenhayden
@tnielsenhayden But... but... we want to know too. Please tell us?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
.
@chaosprime Oh, sorry! Because if you use two different words for one thing, users will assume you're referring to two different things.2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @MrPersimmon
.
@MrPersimmon Ever notice how often the standard formulations in legal language use two or three synonyms?5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tnielsenhayden
@tnielsenhayden@MrPersimmon Hrm. In "cease & desist", cease means stop, desist means don't start up again. Key technical distinction.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
@tnielsenhayden@MrPersimmon If you only ordered someone to cease, they could validly comply by momentarily not doing whatever it is.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
.
@chaosprime@MrPersimmon It wouldn't plead well in court.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tnielsenhayden
@tnielsenhayden@MrPersimmon No? I'd tend to think the person who deviated from convention would automatically be considered the asshole.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
@tnielsenhayden@MrPersimmon Strong sense of "we have a well worn set of rituals for this, wtf is with the going off-script".1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@tnielsenhayden @MrPersimmon I mean, we have to specify severability clauses. No detail is too tiny and stupid for adversarial litigation.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.