You miss the point here. I never said that non-lawyers are ineligible to talk about those matters. I pointed out that the avatar named "PJ" doesn't provide any background other than the status of "paralegal".
Posted May 9, 2011 11:12 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Yes, you did. Over and over again. What you failed to indicate is why we should care at all, much less why we should consider her employment credentials more significant than the things she's done under the groklaw banner. "Florian does it" is not sufficient evidence.