| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
I am currently involved in a lawsuit against the City of Burnaby in_______________________________________________
the Supreme Court of British Columbia. On Friday I introduced an
affidavit of an acoustics expert who cited Wikipedia as authority.
The article cited has the advantages of being correct and of being
readily accessible, should the judge wish to consult it (although it
is printed out for him anyway). In this case a basic acoustics text
would be useless; the gap between even a fine legal mind and a
technical text is just too great to bridge in the time allotted to
his deliberations.
I expect a judgment in mid January.
Leigh
On 16-Dec-05 Bernard Cleyet wrote:
I think it's because the trolls haven't attacked it *, and it's self
correcting. e.g. if one thinks it's in error, make the correction and
see what happens.
* yet, I hope this post isn't a mistake.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html
bc, who thanks Sam, again