Hero Games (Sue) <75162.372@compuserve.com> asks:
> So she was psyched for season five at a con, then something
> happened a month later that is ambiguous at best and this means
> she was lying about being psyched for seaons 5?

"That's just it, Carl. They're your *conclusions*. Unless I have
evidence to the contrary, I'll take someone's stated facts over what
happened to them over the conclusions of someone who's using second
hand knowledge any day."

A statement is not a fact. If that were true, then my statement
would be a *fact*, and someone else's would be a *fact*. And in that
case, nothing is true anymore.

Let me put this to you for a change, Sue: you keep saying you
want "evidence." Just to be brusque for a second...what the hell do
you mean by "evidence?" What would qualify to you as "evidence?" Be
specific. Be as concrete as you're asking others to be.

The cast, Bruce and Jeff and Stehen and others, have supported
everything I've said here, right down the line. Okay, that's not
enough for you. What is?

You keep asking for "evidence," so you must have some concrete
notion as to what constitutes evidence. Because short of producing
audio tapes of phone conversations (none exist), there IS no such
evidence, and you're asking for things that either do not exist, or
would violate confidenatiality (i.e., notes between Claudia and her
agent).

You keep demanding evidence, Sue. Okay, now I'm asking you: if
my statements, and the statements of those who were in the UK when all
this happened, are not enough...statements from credible witnesses,
myself included, that would stand up as testimony in court but are
apparently not enough for you...then what, realistically, is evidence
that could reasonsably be obtained?

Because I think you're deliberately asking for things that don't
exist, so you can continue to split hairs and make everybody else's
opinion *just* an opinion, while you state *facts*, at least in your
mind.

jms