[SGVLUG] Re: [going off-topic] Lightning strikes (was How does [linux trademark] affect user groups)

[David Lawyer]

On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 10:14:48AM -0700, Tom Emerson wrote:
> > David Lawyer wrote:
> > > > > I think the danger of a
> > > > > lawsuit from LMI is less than that of being struck by lightening on
> > > > > the way to a LUG meeting.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 08:22:37PM -0700, Dustin wrote:
> > > Then unless the LMI is threating on average one LUG a week
> > > worldwide, the odds of getting hit by lightning are *far* greater
> > > than that of LMI bothering us.  I kind of doubt they've ever done it
> > > anyway, but anyone want to try to argue they do it that often? :-)
> 

> I'm still trying to determine the difference between "a lawsuit is
> less likely than being struck by lightning" [regardless of whether
> or not "on the way to a meeting"] vs. "chances of being struck by
> lightning are greater than a lawsuit"
> 
> did you guys actually agree on something and I missed it? :)
> 

I think we agreed to my assertion (lawsuit less likely).  But one
disagreement was on quantifying what the probability is of being
struck by lightning, and I attempted to quantify it within perhaps an
order of magnitude (+1000% -90%) of likely error.  Don't know yet if
there is any agreement on this.

Also, there was the question of imprecise use of words by the Rabbi,
but I've also committed such a peccadillo above in my probability
statement.

			David Lawyer