interesting interpretations, page-65

Hi Giddy,

With all due respect mate, I repeat what I have said in my first reply to you, and Jantimot.

And that is that I have read both of your posts with their comments therein, I thought that you wrote a good and relevant post, while Jantimot replied in a very good fashion as well, and that I scored you both with a 1 all draw.

I also said that I have had some differences of opinions with Jantimot in the past and that he/she is not one that will give up easily.

That is all I've said at the time.

Then, when I saw the talks about the MOU's, I thought that I should highlight the real facts about MOU's and what they can entail. And with that, I reiterate what I've said before that an MOU, depending on how it is drafted between the two participants to the MOU itself, is just as valid and legally binding in a Court of Law, as a properly drafted legal contract.
And while some posters liked what I have tried to explain and bring it to the Forum's attention by awarding me with some TU's, someone must not have liked what I had to say by immediately negating them. Most probably because they wouldn't be able to appreciate what an MOU can really mean.
But, that is the joy of posting in the HC Forums, where only the ones that are in favour of listening to conjectures and pipe dreams are allowed to post. Anyone that has a different opinion, is not allowed to do so. Even if it means to simply clarify an issue.

Finally, to me, I still can't fathom what this argument is all about. For, you expressed your valid points and Jantimot expressed his. And most importantly, as no one really knows what the MOU between CDU and OW contains, nor what has been written therein, both of you, and all of us, are only guessing.

Good post nevertheless, Giddy.

Regards